Posted on 08/02/2007 5:02:38 PM PDT by wagglebee
Denver, CO (LifeNews.com) -- A three member title board representing the Secretary of State has approved the final language for a possible statewide constitutional amendment in Colorado that could go before voters in 2008. The amendment would define a human being and the beginning of life as starting at fertilization.
That would result in full legal protection for unborn children from that point forward and the effect of banning all abortions in the state.
The board on Wednesday held a second hearing on the language because of an appeal from abortion advocates.
It rejected objections that the amendment does not cover a single subject as required by state law but affects three sections of the state constitution.
Pro-abortion groups also labeled the language confusing and misleading.
Cathryn Hazouri, the director of the Colorado chapter of the ACLU, said the fact that advocates of the amendment and members of the board referred to an unborn child as a fetus was an indication the wording is deceptive.
"We are not talking about a fetus. It is a fertilized egg," the Denver Post reported her telling the board. "If you gentlemen don't know the difference, how do you expect the average Colorado voter to understand?"
Deputy Secretary of State William Hobbs said the board doesn't decide if an amendment is legitimate but only if the language is legal and good enough to go before voters.
Dan Domenico, of the attorney general's office and a member of the board, also said the panel did not "have the authority to reject a measure because we can't predict all its effects ... or because voters might not consider all the implications."
Colorado for Equal Rights, a group backed by a pro-life teenager and pro-life attorney Mark Meuser is behind the amendment, which defines "the term 'person' to include any human being from the moment of fertilization as 'person' is used in those provisions of the Colorado Constitution relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice and due process of law."
Meuser’s group now has to collect 76,000 signatures over the next six months to get it on the ballot.
Abortion advocates promise to wage an intense war against the ballot proposal if it appears before state voters.
"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 told the newspaper.
Pro-Life Ping
Ping!
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Colorado pro-life BTTT!
Well, well..... look what may be on the ballot next year.
bttt
Here’s a good one!
I may be calling into Sirus 159 tonight regarding the bill that passed in the House.
.
Great move by Colorado. Any Coloradan freepers who can tell whether this is probable to succeed in a referendum?
Makes me wish I lived in Colorado so I could add my signature to the 76,000 needed.
Thanks for the ping.
We may have some fun in 2008.
I would have worded it as “baby” not fetus or egg or anything else.
After reading information written by a Pro-Life attorney stating that this truly must be handled at the National level or it would be unconstitutional, I am not certain that this is the right move. I believe that over the last 34 years that have been over 300 attempted amendments at the National level. I am wondering if the efforts, stewardship of time, efforts and funds would perhaps be better spent getting into the election of ‘genuinely’ Pro-Life candidates to make the moves at the National level that are necessary for the “personhood” issue. MHO.
WOW! someone is finally awake there! Has there EVER been any question that the Pro-Life movement was out to do just that?!
To add to the issue, there was money funneled in from a big CA man who is a part of the gay agenda move. The aim there was to confuse the voters so that they were unsure....if someone is unsure they either won't vote or vote NO. The NO vote played into the hands of the pro-choice side. "Clouding" the issue was intentional by the pro-choice side. Colorado better be prepared for the same thing to happen in their battle....and make sure their message is loud and clear from ALL point of Pro-Life move. If this doesn't happen, it will be a repeat of the SD vote in 2006. In other words, the Pro-Life organizations in the state better ALL get their ducks in a row, stand together, and make their stand clear. The split in the movement in SD, along with the "clouding of the issue" by the other side lost the vote.
If this is coming as a 'personhood' amendment, there is no issue of the rape and incest concern. Therefore, it should not split the movement. It is a separate issue from the amendment they are seeking to put out there.
perhaps you hit the heart of the issue...the “dead souled voting public”. I understand how you feel, but there has to be HOPE! Prayers going up for revival, re-awakening, a healing from the spiritual leprosy that exists! In Christ there is HOPE! God is faithful. HE promises to hear the prayers of His children. MANY are praying, and many more are added each day. It WILL end!! We need to “Walk by faith and not by sight”
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.