Posted on 08/06/2024 3:53:49 PM PDT by Morgana
A ballot initiative to expand abortion in Arizona will not use the phrase “unborn human being” after a judge rejected the language put forth by Republican lawmakers, deeming it too partisan and emotional. The case is now headed to the state Supreme Court.
Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Christopher Whitten asked that the initiative, which seeks to expand abortion access from 15 weeks to 24 weeks, use more “neutral” language. Children born as young as 21 weeks have survived.
Earlier this year, Arizonans for Access — a coalition of pro-abortion groups, including the ACLU of Arizona and Planned Parenthood of Arizona — announced that they had gathered enough signatures to put a pro-abortion measure on the ballot in November. If passed, the initiative would create a “fundamental right” in the state constitution to intentionally kill preborn children up to so-called viability, an arbitrary pregnancy marker since children are surviving at increasingly premature ages and are completely viable when left in the natural habitat of the womb.
Abortion would also be permitted for the remainder of pregnancy up to 40 weeks under exceptions for “the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual,” which is so broad that it allows abortion for virtually any reason.
Opponents of the measure have argued that the ‘mental health’ exception could make it easy to kill a preborn child at any point in pregnancy based on how the mother is feeling, including if she is suffering from emotional stress, financial stress, or familial stress. This broad exception existed under Roe v. Wade‘s partner decision, Doe v. Bolton.
Republican lawmakers in Arizona issued the proposed language that included the phrase “unborn human being,” which quickly led to a lawsuit from the abortion coalition. It claimed the word “fetus” should be used instead, and that “unborn human being” is too politically charged.
“Arizona voters have a right to clear, accurate and impartial information from the state before they are asked to vote on ballot initiatives,” the pro-abortion group said in a statement. “The decision of the Arizona Legislative Council fails to abide by that responsibility by rejecting the request to use the neutral, medical term ‘fetus’ in place of ‘unborn human being’ in the 2024 General Election Publicity Pamphlet.”
The judge agreed, ruling that the phrase is “packed with emotion and partisan meaning” — because it rightly identifies the humanity of the child in the womb — and that it needs to be rewritten with more “neutral” language.
The term fetus may be more neutral, but it also is simply a description for a specific stage of development within a human being’s life — the same as embryo, newborn, toddler, adolescent, or adult. Therefore, saying a fetus is a human being is not a partisan or emotional statement, but a fact, if the entity in the fetal stage is of the human species.
A new, distinct organism comes into being at fertilization. In that one moment, the preborn baby already has his or her individual, unique DNA, with genetic traits like sex, race, hair color, eye color, and more already determined, distinct from his or her mother and father. The child’s heart also begins beating just 22 days (about three weeks) after fertilization. Far from a meaningless electrical impulse, the heart — though not yet four-chambered — is already pumping blood throughout the baby’s body. By 11 weeks, preborn babies are exploring their environments; they can stretch, somersault, roll, and respond to touch. These are human beings, even if it is ‘politically incorrect’ to say so.
Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma, a co-chair of the legislative council, said the group is appealing the judge’s decision to the state Supreme Court.
State Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick has since recused himself from the case, stating that his wife is on the legislative panel advocating for the use of the phrase “unborn human being.” He will be replaced by retired Justice John Pelander on the case, which has been expedited to ensure it is resolved before the August 29 pamphlet printing deadline.
Right. Ask when is the moment they become a human being.
One Dem reply a while ago was “when the mother says so.”
Virginia former Governer Ralph Northam:
“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam said. “The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.””
Sooooooo creepy and evil.
"Arizona judge strikes ‘unborn human being’ from abortion ballot language"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
(Pro-abortion?) judge is wrongly trying to legislate from the bench imo.
Also, let's not allow the anti-Trump media try to fade our memories of what we witnessed on July 13.
Down the Memory Hole: Google Hides Autocomplete Suggestions Related to Trump Assassination Attempt (7.28.24)
These Godless Judges will be the end of our representative republic.
Fetus is not a neutral term simply because it is medical. It sounds like fetid and fecal, something displeasing. It is used as a term of derision. “Cletus the fetus.” “Yeet-us that fetus.”
Instead of the law specifying “pregnant individuals” should it speak of “gravidae?” The medical term for pregnant woman is gravida. Is that the only proper term to use?
Why not use the language of the Nazi’s, that is, call the fetus a “useless eater”. Dehumanize the child any way possible for these evil, selfish cowards. The Lord is the final judge....they won’t know what hit them having approved the legal killing of the most innocent human being, an unborn child. An eternal curse on them.
Call it a baby then.
And striking the language isn’t partisan?
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We need to make that mean something again.
Abortion will cost us Nebraska and AZ. This is our last chance and l fear the women are about to finish us off
Yes,. Those words, they bother us. Dismiss them.
Abortion will cost us Nebraska and AZ. This is our last chance and l fear the women are about to finish us off
Maybe it’s an “unborn Sasquatch?”
We have sone stinking rotten judges. It sounds like this one qualifies
I’ve had conversations with liberals online who’ve assured me that nobody has an abortion after the baby is viable. I inform them about Doe v Bolton, and now I see the AZ legislation also allows for late-term abortion, even tho there’s absolutely no maternal condition that is relieved by performing a partial birth abortion instead of just delivering the child.
It is frustrating in this and other law-related news stories that there is no link to the decision or even a citation of the law used to justify the decision.
WTF are you talking about? The presidency or just the abortion issue?
Honestly I don’t know why these women simply just fall down some stairs. Jeez, its free to boot.
Oh, they don’t want to get hurt while murdering their baby,....ahhh
Only the left gets to censor our terms. Funny not the other way around.
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.