Monday, September 15, 2008


Please weigh in on this so called Quandary!

'Personhood' poses quandary

Anti-abortion groups split over Amendment 48

By David Montero - Rocky Mountain News

Monday, September 15, 2008

Supporters of the "Personhood Amendment" on the Nov. 4 ballot argue its strength rests in its simplicity - a mere 43 words in one sentence.

, calling it poorly worded and predicting it would open a Pandora's Box of legal questions that could clog up the legislative process and courtrooms for years.

Amendment 48 might be one of the most controversial items on Colorado's lengthy ballot.

In short, it would amend the state constitution to define personhood as beginning at the moment of conception - when a human egg is fertilized. That fertilized egg - or person, as advocates say - would enjoy all the protections of the state constitution, including inalienable rights, equality of justice and due process, supporters say.

While those who predictably support abortion rights line up against the measure, it has fractured the usually rock-solid line of those who oppose abortion. Among them are Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput and Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer. Also not supporting it is National Right to Life.

Their reasoning closely hews to Schaffer's logic.

"He believes it would ultimately set the pro-life cause back because it would not meet judicial tests and would be struck down," said Schaffer's campaign manager Dick Wadhams.

And the Catholic bishops of Colorado said in a statement that while they "admire the goals" of Amendment 48 "it does not provide a realistic opportunity for ending or even reducing abortions in Colorado."

Encouraging a yes vote

However, the political arm of Focus on the Family has chosen to encourage people to vote for it.

More . . .


Diana Hsieh said...

Are you willing to punish a woman with the death penalty or life in prison for aborting a non-viable ectopic pregnancy? To ban the birth control pill and IUD? To ban in vitro fertilization?

If you're not, then you shouldn't vote for Amendment 48. Those would be the real-life consequences granting fertilized eggs full legal rights. To kill or harm a fertilized egg would be a criminal offense under Colorado law, regardless of the circumstances.

The fact is that Amendment 48 is deeply, profoundly anti-life. For the details, read "Amendment 48 Is Anti-Life: Why It Matters That a Fertilized Egg Is Not a Person," an issue paper by Ari Armstrong and myself. It's available for download at:

You have no right to force your religious views on the rest of the people of Colorado -- just as Muslims have no right to force Christians to pray to Allah five times per day.

Diana Hsieh
Founder, Coalition for Secular Government

Marcisea Daniels said...

Life is not a religious view. Human DNA is not a religious view. The difference between haploid and diploid is not a religious view.

Priests were not the first people to take pictures of a child in the womb. Bishops were not the first people to map the human genome. No Pope discovered how to detect fetal heartbeats.

A born baby is a person, as he was 8 minutes before birth, 8 hours, 8 days, and 8 and change months (given that many babies are not born 9 mos to the day).

Your rhetoric cannot deny personhood. What is the difference between a zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, newborn, infant, baby, toddler, child, pre-teen, teen, young adult, adult, middle-aged person, senior person?


As for the terrorist threat of throwing all women to the death penalty, that is a foolish assertion. How could a state, having just defined all persons as having the right to live, turn and kill born persons?

What also leads you to believe that CO would be so trigger happy, seeing as only one person has been executed since the mid-70s.

You know that far more have perished from abortion since then. I think CO will feel relief when there is no more bloodshed of any kind.