Shortly after a year since its founding, Personhood USA is working with 32 states on constitutional "personhood" amendments which declare that human life begins at inception and, regardless of its health or means of creation (i.e, rape or incest), this form of human life has full legal rights at inception. In other words, zygotes — or fertilized eggs — are considered to be human beings having due process rights that are separate from those of pregnant women.
These measures obviously seek to overturn Roe v. Wade but may create legal problems for women.
Most of the personhood efforts are ballot initiatives that would amend state constitutions, although states such as Hawaii are introducing the personhood laws as legislative measures.
Personhood's goal is to have personhood initiatives in all 50 states by the 2010 elections. According to its press release,
"Our goal has been to serve Jesus Christ and offer support to grassroots pro-lifers," stated Cal Zastrow, co-founder of Personhood USA. "Personhood USA exists to support, encourage, and assist Personhood movements across the country. We are excited to keep this fight against the dehumanization and murder of preborn children moving forward."
These pre-initiative measures are not without challenge. In Nevada, the ACLU, Planned Parenthood and others have filed a lawsuit challenging the initiative because it does not explain to voters what the initiative will do:
According to the petition, persons or human beings "include everyone possessing a human genome specific for an individual member of the human specifies, from the beginning of his or her biological development, without discrimination as to age, health, reproduction method, function, physical or mental dependency or cognitive ability."
This image, taken from Wikipedia, shows a newborn baby that has anencephaly.
The language suggests that seriously disabled fetuses with little likelihood of survival, such as those with anencephaly, must be carried to term.
According to the Nevada Review Journal, ACLU attorney Maggie McLetchie said, 'Under the petition, fetuses could sue and be sued. What they are proposing is so radical and would clog up the courts.' She said the petition could even ban birth control pills and emergency contraception.
An opinion published in Montana's Great Falls Tribune is critical of CI-102, a personhood amendment that would change the state's constitution. Travis McAdam writes about Former Rep. Rick Jore, now a board member of the Montana Pro-Life Coalition:
On the floor of the Montana House in 2007, Jore said measures like CI-102 would be used to launch criminal investigations of women who experienced miscarriages.
Check out the UNEXPLAINABLE STORE - Lots of freebies, bonuses and more. -
The link opens in a new window so you can satisfy your curiosity and return to this page!
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Women born after Roe v. Wade passed have absolutely no idea how the Personhood laws, if passed, would restrict their lives and their choices. Prior to Roe v. Wade passing, I spent three days in a hospital bed in labor and bleeding with a dead five-month fetus in my womb. The doctor knew the baby had died but could not prove it scientifically to the satisfaction of the abortion laws. I was told that if the labor stopped, I would be sent home with the dead baby inside me and would have to wait until I went into labor again to go back to the hospital. A simple D & C surgical procedure would have solved the problem, but was prohibited. Women's lives will be impacted beyond their belief if the Personhood people are allowed to succeed.
Thanks for sharing what happened to you! It sounds like you are lucky to be alive. Your awful experience illustrates exactly why we are carrying stories about these "personhood" developments.
The proponents say that they are somehow doing Jesus Christ's work. In our opinion, these amendments, if passed, will accomplish just the opposite of Christlike behavior because of what will happen to women and, God forbid, little girls who might be impregnated due to rape or incest. Many people that are for them are, I'm sure, well intentioned, but they need to look at the bigger picture.
The quote from the representative in Montana saying that these laws could launch criminal cases against women who had miscarriages, if true, is alarming at best.
Thanks for sharing!