Posted on 07/25/2007 8:21:45 PM PDT by Coleus
Abortion-rights groups have until next week to appeal the language of a proposed ballot measure that would define a fertilized egg, either inside or outside the womb, as a person. The secretary of state's three-person title board on Wednesday crafted language for a constitutional amendment that would ban abortions. It would define humans as existing from the moment of fertilization and extend the Colorado Constitution's inalienable rights, equality of justice and due process of law to them.
Arguments by reproduction rights attorney Kara Veitch that the measure's language be rejected—on the grounds it wasn't a single-subject measure because it applies to three different sections of the constitution—were dismissed.
Despite it affecting Article II, sections 3, 6 and 25, the board, which includes Deputy Secretary of State William Hobbs, cited a common thread of basic human rights.
Kristine Burton, 19, is working with Colorado for Equal Rights to get the measure on the ballot.
"Every life needs to be protected," said Burton, of El Paso County. "A fetus is a separate person from the mother."
The group would need more than 76,000 signatures to get the measure on the ballot.
In a statement, Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains said it opposes defining "an egg as a person."
"The proponents of this initiative have been clear. Their intent is to destroy the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision which legalized abortion," Planned Parenthood president Vicki Cowart said.
Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Lizzy Annison said it will work with the legal and medical community to identify all the consequences of the proposed amendment, which Annison said could extend far beyond access to abortion.
.
Roe v. Wade said that Congress has the power to define the fetus as a “person” within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. And it said that, if Congress did so, the “appellant’s case collapses.”
So what did the pro-life movement do? Did they go for such a declaration by Congress, which would require a simple majority?
No—they wasted 20 years on a Human Life Amendment—and now have no real strategy at all—although chipping away at Roe with the Birth-Canal-Brain-Suctioning Ban is better than nothing.
Would they would like to call it ‘human’, or, just ‘humans’?
I mean, who’d know if one of those fertilized eggs might split into two or more individuals, a-la twins, triplets, etc? It could mean the difference between manslaughter and genocide!
:^)
Well, so much for that "choice" thingy the abortion lovers believe in.
How do you come to that conclusion?
Unless you mean someone beats the snot out of their wife or girlfriend for getting pregnant,(or any other reason) and causes her to miss-carry. In that case it SHOULD be manslaughter at the very least, or murder if causing a miscarriage was the intension of the beating.
Well, so much for that "choice" thingy the abortion lovers believe in.
Also notice how liberals play on words. A fertilized egg now just became a non-fertilized regular egg.
Spontaneous abortions are also known as miscarriages. Perhaps he meant that.
Manslaughter defined:
Unlawful killing without intent to kill. It can be voluntary (such as a deadly fist fight) or involuntary (such as an accident caused by a speeding car).
http://www.ncpress.com/LegalFiles/glossary.html
There is a rather obvious difference in a natural occurrence and a purposed killing. But that was a nice try at the argument of the absurd. BTW, embryo is an age you went through to reach your current age.
Manslaughter is not a “purposed killing”.
Please reread the definition. The argument is not absurd.
There is no “egg” after fertilization! The embryo begins at least at syngamy, when the chromosomes line up and begin to divide - The best textbook I have says when the spindle fibers appear, we have an embryo.
In your mind, is manslaughter a natural occurrence?
After 40 years of regulating child killing, the time is ripe
for PERSONHOOD NOW!
This is great. Duncan Hunter has the Personhood at Conception Act which would do this across the country. Planned Parenthood plays with the language in this essay. They claim that an “egg” is not a person. True. An egg isn’t a person. Once that egg becomes fertilized with sperm, then there is a person.
I do wonder how this would affect abortaficient forms of birth control. Obviously abortion would become illegal throughout Colorado, but what about birth control that can act by causing an abortion?
Someone might want to encourage Duncan Hunter to change
it to Personhood at Fertilization Act.
Years ago the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology
re-defined conception to be at implantation.
This fraudulent abuse of language allows pro-aborts
to claim OC and Plan B don’t cause abortions.
Lies from the pit!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.