Posted on 09/23/2009 4:29:22 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
Sacramento, CA – Wednesday, September 23, 2009 – California Civil Rights Foundation submits language to Attorney General for historic Human Rights Amendment.
The California Civil Rights Foundation, founded by Walter Hoye, is set to begin its campaign to recognize the rights of every human in the State of California. The new campaign which will be known as the California Human Rights Campaign, will affirm the rights of all humans in the State.
WHAT: A press conference announcing the submission of the California Human Rights Amendment, a proposed 2010 California ballot initiative, to the Attorney General.
WHEN: Monday, September 28 2009, 11:00 AM.
WHERE: The Office of the Attorney General, 1300 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
“The California Civil Rights Foundation recognizes the inherent human rights, dignity and worth of all human beings from the beginning of their biological development,” stated Hoye, founder of the California Civil Rights Foundation. “If passed, this historic legislation would make California the first state in the Union to acknowledge full human rights for every human being. We believe all human beings should be protected by love and by law.”
The California Civil Rights Foundation, was founded by Walter B. Hoye II. For more information or press inquiries, please contact Walter B. Hoye II at: 510.225.4056.
Personhood USA is a grassroots Christian organization founded to establish personhood efforts across America to create protection for every child by love and by law. Personhood USA is committed to assisting and supporting Personhood Legislation and Constitutional Amendments and building local pro-life organizations through raising awareness of the personhood of the pre-born.
What is the point?
Personhood ping...
Will humans get more water to grow food?
Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Whoa - what about the whales???
I know it’s late in the game, but why did we switch from Natural Rights to Human Rights? Was it to take God out of the equation? Or is “human” some sort of leftist code word?
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SEC. 7. (a) A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws...
Separate issue.
I agree with Jeff Head. They should just turn the water on.
These liberal-oriented groups will be not only the undoing of California, they will wreck havoc in/on the US.
Our guys are reclaiming the language. I think it’s very smart in this case.
Make the other side fight against the guarantee of human rights for all.
Brilliant.
Who, the ones who have dehumanized the child?
A real civil rights organization by a real civil rights activist. How refreshing.
There are too many organizations who falsely name their organizations under the “civil rights” banner (particularly the racial agitators and the radical homosexual activists).
I have no idea how that name/label got into the link at the top. There is no website by that name. I entered AIPNews.com.
‘What is the point?’
to get funding?
Is this to give effective citizenship to every illegal?
I went back and read the whole thing before posting this time. It is a pro-life group seeking rights for the unborn.
Walter Hoye is a hero, and the personhood movement represents the rebirth of the pro-life movement.
People forget that in the Roe vs. Wade decision even its author, Judge Blackmun, admitted that OF COURSE the child is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment if they are A PERSON.
Of course our party, AIP, has a fully personhood platform. But so does the Republican Party. It has since Reagan and allies defeated the position of Gerald R. Ford (pro-choice for states) and put it there, finally, in 1984.
And so, this is a critical fight that all of us can do battle together in.
That is, if one believes that the child is a person, and that the clear provisions of the Constitution of the United States, and the constitutions of the several states, matter.
Do you have a text of the initiative?
Yes, indeed it is. Led by the smartest and boldest and most active pro-lifers in California.
Yes, it is right here:
Article 1, Section 7
(c)“The term “person” applies to all living human beings from the beginning of their biological development — regardless of the means by which they were procreated, method of reproduction, age, race, sex, gender, physical well-being, function, or condition of physical or mental dependency and/or disability.
No, it most certainly is not.
The point of conception might be hard to pinpoint and the initiative may be struck down on the ground of “void for vagueness”
The word “conception” is now being avoided by our side for one simple reason: there are many in the medical community who are changing the meaning of the word. What they now mean when they say conception is actually what an honest speaker would call “implantation.”
By doing this they open the door to gruesome experimentation and exploitation of the child at any point from its inception on, as long as it hasn’t been implanted in a womb.
The language chosen was developed by folks with a whole lot of experience in the language of this fight, including the legal end of it.
Here’s some good explanation from a story about the Colorado effort:
http://www.coloradorighttolife.org/node/211
CRTL’s Press Release:
Colorado Secretary of State’s Title Board Unanimously Approves
Proposed 2010 Personhood Amendment Language
For Immediate Release
August 5, 2009
Denver, Colorado - The offices of the Colorado Attorney General, The Secretary of State, and Legislative Legal Services voted 3-0 that the proposed 2010 Personhood Amendment meets the required single subject rule and also voted 3-0 that the language is not misleading.
Personhood Colorado director Gualberto Garcia Jones J.D. and Colorado Right To Life vice president Leslie Hanks explained the technical difference between the 2008 Personhood Amendment and this year’s. “Our decision to use the words ‘the beginning of biological development of a human being’ as opposed to ‘the moment of fertilization’ allows us to protect all human beings, even those originating from asexual forms of reproduction,” said Leslie Hanks.
Several changes were suggested by members of the Title Board to the draft submitted by Legislative Legal Services; these changes were welcomed by the proponents. “The language suggested by the Title board reinforced our most fundamental civic principle,” noted Gualberto Garcia Jones. “While the state has no authority to grant inalienable rights, it has the obligation to protect them, and we believe the 2010 Personhood Amendment language accomplishes that ,” said Garcia Jones.
The Title as designated and fixed by the board now reads, “An amendment to the Colorado Constitution applying the term “person” as used in those provisions of the Colorado Constitution relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice, and due process of law, to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.”
In 2007, the Colorado State Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision upholding a similar ruling by the Title Board. Proposed changes in the language prompted a discussion and concern that the language could be interpreted as allowing the inclusion of apes as “persons” just as other nations are currently considering. The proponents were pleased to accept language that excludes that possibility.
“Today the Attorney General’s office, The Secretary of State’s office and Office of Legislative Legal Services made it clear that the language of the 2010 Personhood Amendment satisfied their statutory requirements,” said Garcia Jones, “we are pleased that the amendment will extend the protections of our constitution to all human beings.”
The proponents of the 2010 Personhood Amendment are looking forward to an unprecedented grass roots campaign to collect the necessary signatures to put the 2010 Personhood Amendment on the ballot.
If it gets to the ballot, with the A.G. Jerry Brown getting to choose whatever name he wants the initiative to be called on the ballot, I’m sure he will entitle it something like “Abolish Civil Rights in California Amendment” or somesuch in order to influence voters to vote against it.
I guess we’ll have to see.
“HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN SEEKS PERSONHOOD AMENDMENT TO CA CONSTITUTION”
That has as much chance of survival as a fart in a hurricane.
It survived in CO last year. We got fifty thousand more signatures than were required to place it on the ballot.
And it’s not like we have all our eggs in one basket. Similar efforts are either underway or being prepared for in many states.
“In 1965, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology redefined conception, saying, “Conception is the implantation of a fertilized ovum.” Previously, however, conception was universally defined in the scientific community as the fertilization of an ovum. The consequent redefinition of contraception has allowed the morning after pill to be labeled an “emergency contraceptive,” despite its potential to eliminate a fertilized ovum, a human being in its earliest stages of development.”
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=3484142
Gosh. I didn’t realize they did it that long ago. I thought it was more recent than that for some reason.
Thanks for the education!
A way for a turd party to raise money..
I’m sure that all the Republicans involved will be surprised to hear that. After all, this effort is exactly in line with the Reagan pro-life platform of their party.
Sorry I don’t believe you.. Too me there are more pressing issues that we are dealing such as Human Life Amendment which has no chance in hell to pass.
Are babes in the womb persons, Kevin?
Doubtful the birth control pill marketing campaign could have
ever succeeded without this wholesale manipulation of the English
language!
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master - that’s all.”
Through the Looking Glass.
I fully support this movement and pray for their success.
“It survived in CO last year.”
And of course there are no political or cultural differences between Colorado and California?
There are still millions of God-fearing, patriotic, conservative Americans in the great State of California. Don’t underestimate them.
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.