[edsheppa]

I would love to see the abortion debate shifted to the 14th Amendment

Not trying to pick a fight, but an originalist would say this initiative would not *necessarily* bring that into play. According to that legal philosophy, whatever the framers of that amendment meant by "person" is binding in its interpretation. And if they had a specific conception of personhood that did not include the unborn, this initiative wouldn't prevent abortion on 14th Amendment grounds.

On the other hand, they might have had a more "living" interpretation of personhood, leaving it to the people of each time to decide. I doubt that though.

My point is that, even if the initiaitive passes, it's not a slam dunk even by conservative legal philosophies.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I dunno. Doesn't the govt. recognize the personhood, not only of all races, sexes, colors and creeds (despite the originalist Founding Fathers not granting equal rights to women, slaves, etc.)? And doesn't the government recognize corporations, ships at sea, and other entities as legal persons?

I've never understood the legal implications of all that.