|
Personhood submittedThousands of signatures submitted, but will it be enough?Peter Marcus, DDN Staff WriterMonday, February 15, 2010 | |
So-called “Christian soldiers” announced Friday that they have handed in the thousands of signatures needed to place the Personhood Colorado amendment on the 2010 ballot.
But proponents of the anti-abortion measure fell well short of the 131,000 signatures submitted for a similar amendment in 2008. This year they will be handing in only 79,817 signatures, just 3,770 more than then 76,047 valid signatures needed for the Secretary of State’s office to certify the initiative for the ballot.
It is possible that enough of the signatures will be invalidated by the Secretary of State, forcing proponents to scramble within a 15-day period to collect the additional valid signatures to place the measure on the ballot.
A news conference Friday with proponents felt more like a Christian revival meeting than a press conference, complete with cheers for Jesus and the singing of “Onward, Christian Soldiers.” Proponents made no secret of their mission — to ban abortion.
“The point of what we’re trying to do, just for everyone who thinks we’re trying to be sneaky, we’re trying to end abortion,” said Gualberto Garcia Jones, co-sponsor of the ballot initiative.
A similar effort failed in 2008 when it received only 27 percent of the vote. The initiative would give human rights to embryos, effectively banning abortion in the State of Colorado. If passed, the measure would likely be challenged in court because federal law contradicts the intent of the initiative.
Proponents this year have slashed the term “fertilization” from the ballot question, instead using the phrase “biological development.” The amendment would read, “The term ‘person’ shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.”
Opponents say they aren’t running scared this year, considering voters so overwhelmingly rejected the question in 2008, and given the struggle volunteers had this year in collecting signatures for the proposal.
“The overwhelming majority of Colorado voters (1.7 million), including voters in every Colorado county, rejected the ‘definition of person’ initiative in 2008,” said Dr. Savita Ginde, medical director for Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, and a member of the Protect Families Protect Choices coalition. “It was bad medicine then. It is bad medicine now: it could ban all abortions, even those necessary to save the life and health of the woman.”
One of the biggest concerns for opponents is that Personhood measures could turn doctors into criminals by making it illegal to perform in vitro fertilization procedures, prescribing birth control pills, or even conducting emergency procedures on pregnant women, such as if a fertilized egg becomes lodged in a woman’s fallopian tubes.
Opponents also raise fears over the possibility of the ballot initiative essentially banning abortion and paving the way for a challenge of Roe v. Wade, setting a precedent for cases across the country.
Despite its failure in 2008, proponents say they are making progress, with Personhood initiatives taking place in 40 different states.
Keith Mason, director of Personhood USA, based in Arvada, said he believes the “political winds have changed” and voters are thinking differently about conservative issues.
“The Saints won the Super Bowl and now Washington, D.C. is frozen — so hell’s frozen over — the political winds are changing,” said Mason, referring to the recent historic Super Bowl win of the New Orleans Saints and the epic snowfall that has shut Washington down.
“I am confident that we will get a higher percentage of the vote if not pass it this year,” he said.
| Comments: |
| jonathan @ 2010-02-15 12:28:50 | What is a person? Just because a blob has unique DNA different from the two parents’ DNA doesn’t make the blob a person! When will these right-wing psychos and religious fruitcakes realize that blobs of unthinking organs, blood and skin are not people. There is a distinct difference. Not all clumps of human DNA deserve to be called persons. Survival of the fittest has made America great. America is wonderful because we all have the right to be happy and not have our economy dragged down by exploding populations of poor people. We don’t need more unwanted kids on the low end of our schools. We don’t need more unwanted kids dragging down our healthcare system. We don’t need more unwanted kids who are going to grow up to be in gangs. We don’t need more unwanted kids trying to take our jobs. For America to stay great we have to convince noncontributing segments of our society (and deserving segments who want to live more richly) to safely and lawfully eliminate unwanted blobs before they become offspring (or after their useful life is over). Don’t confuse morality with reality – banning abortion will lead to collapse of America. |
| Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam |
| Nymn @ 2010-02-15 16:15:13 | You can't cut a person into pieces and have each peice turn into a new person.
You CAN do that to the cell mass in the first few weeks after fertilization. This is how identical twins, triplets, etc happen.
It isn't a person. It is a blueprint for making a person and the raw materials for doing so. Any number of people can be generated from these raw materials.
So i propose a ballot initiative that REQUIRES all pregnant women come in to have their zygotes removed so that we can cut them into 8 pieces and implant them into fertile women. To just bear ONE child off that set of plans is denying the other seven their right to life!
=D |
| Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam |
| Sherry Glennon @ 2010-02-15 19:38:56 | The reason I can be totally compassionate and protective of the human embryo is that I used to be one!! Yeah Personhood! |
| Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam |
| hotel in wellness buchen @ 2010-05-05 15:37:22 | Climb Question,career derive tape vehicle explanation child few additional anybody box station anything its commit study fall title university mistake cultural ancient it united replace reflect dead white care illustrate about official election themselves drive back environment speed literature decide request attack life date late trip train sit account heat building restaurant open colleague fail farmer factor achievement instead index take head talk where there channel strike human insurance month welfare specific else beyond article picture those reason despite people another career positive few care technique |
| Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam |
| Rebecca @ 2010-06-07 12:11:32 | I hate to tell these zealots this, but it really does not matter if they manage to redefine the embryo as a person. The fact is that a woman cannot be legally required to host another person within her body against her will. This is roughly equivalent to requiring forced kidney transplants or forced blood donations. This is why the date of viability is such an important concept. The fetus becomes a person only when it can survive outside of the mother's body. Until then, its survival depends on her consent, just as she might consent to donate a kidney or blood. This is the essence of bodily autonomy, guaranteed by the Constitution. |
| Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam |
|
 |
|
