From The Rocky Mountain News: "It's known as the 'Definition of a Person' in Colorado, the 'Ultimate Human Life Amendment' in Mississippi, the 'Paramount Right to Life Amendment' in Georgia and the 'Personhood Amendment' in Michigan. In each case, the measure would change the state constitution to define a fertilized egg as a person entitled to constitutional protections of inalienable rights, justice and due process. And in every case, it's part of a no-compromise anti-abortion strategy that has created a deep divide between those state groups that want a direct attack on Roe v. Wade and those that prefer National Right to Life's incremental approach. But abortion-rights supporters and opponents agree that Colorado's 'personhood' amendment would outlaw abortion and potentially have much broader effects."
More from the article:
The measure represents a hard-line strategy by abortion opponents to overturn Roe v. Wade by zeroing in on what they consider a loophole in the landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established abortion rights. "The (state of Texas and others) argue that the fetus is a 'person' within the language and meaning of the 14th Amendment," Justice Harry Blackmun wrote for the majority. "If this suggestion of personhood is established, (Roe's) case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the (14th) Amendment." The hope by anti-abortion groups is that such an amendment would be challenged up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which would uphold it, thereby affirming the "personhood" of the fertilized egg and effectively undoing Roe. But the strategy has created a rift between state groups and National Right to Life, which prefers to be more subtle. "National Right to Life is more in favor of the incremental approach, and they don't want people like us and people in the states to even do human life amendments," said Brian Rooney, an attorney with the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Mich., which gives free legal help to groups pushing "personhood" measures. "They believe it's not the right time. But we believe it's never the wrong time to do the right thing. The incremental approach has not stopped one abortion from happening."
To abortion-rights activists, approach is irrelevant, Panetta said. "It doesn't matter whether they take on Roe in its entirety or chip away at the rights," she said. "Both attempts deny women the right to choose and access to safe medical care." An amendment similar to Colorado's is still alive in Georgia and Mississippi, but it died in the Montana legislature, failed to get enough signatures in Michigan and was tossed out in Oregon, where Thomas More attorneys have filed a lawsuit. In recent years, Colorado voters haven't been supportive of measures that limit abortion access. In 2006, backers of a proposal to ban late-term abortions failed to turn in signatures to place the measure on the November ballot. About 60 percent of voters in 2000 rejected Amendment 25, a measure to delay abortions 24 hours while women perused information on medical risks and other options. If Colorado voters were to pass a "personhood" amendment, they would be doing something that Justice Blackmun himself refused to do: pinpoint the moment life begins. "When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus," he wrote in Roe, "the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer."
Category: Denver November 2008 Election
8:08:05 AM 
|
|
