When San Francisco Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi was asked if an unborn baby is a human being at 20 weeks gestation, she said that the mother is the one who matters and anyway that's not a question for politicians to answer. In response, San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone denounced House Minority Leader Pelosi's refusal to verbalize the “scientific fact that human life begins at conception,” and he further stated that “no Catholic can dissent in good conscience” from the Church teaching on abortion.
For background, read Archbishop Cordileone Rebuts Pelosi's Government-run Church and also read Rep. Nancy Pelosi is a Fraud, Catholic Leaders Say as well as Pope Francis Says Wayward Politicians Can't Take Communion (e.g.: Biden, Pelosi, Kerry, et. al.)
And read Pelosi Thanks God for Nuns' Support for Abortion Bill
Not surprisingly, the liberal media ignore Pope Francis when he speaks on the sanctity of life.
In addition, read Liberals Embrace Science Lies, Reject Science Truth
-- From "Pelosi On Abortion: The Mother Comes First" by Rachel Stoltzfoos, Reporter, Daily Caller 1/22/15
“I don’t think it’s up to politicians to do that,” Pelosi said in a briefing Thursday.
“You know it’s really interesting that you would come to these meetings to talk about [abortion],” she told the reporter. “The fact is what we have said. The life and the health of a mother is what is preeminent when a decision is made about a woman’s reproductive health.”
“It isn’t an ideological fight,” she added. “It’s a personal health issue. This is up to women — their conscience, their god their doctor, their health, their fate, survival.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "SF Archbishop on Pelosi: No Catholic Can Dissent from Church Teaching on Abortion" by Lauretta Brown, CNSNews.com 1/26/15
At her Jan. 22 briefing Pelosi said she had "great standing" to speak on the issue of abortion, noting that she was a "Catholic and a mom of five" and asserting that it was "true" she knew "more about having babies than the pope."
CNSNews.com asked Archbishop Cordileone about Pelosi’s comments on human life, particularly in light her self-description “as a Catholic and a mom of five."
"It is a scientific fact that human life begins at conception," the archbishop said in a written statement to CNSNews.com. "This has been established in medical science for over 100 years. Catholic moral teaching acknowledges this scientific fact, and has always affirmed the grave moral evil of taking an innocent human life.
“This has been the consistent teaching of the Church from the very beginning, a teaching already discernible in the natural moral law, and so a teaching from which no Catholic can dissent in good conscience,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pelosi asked twice if unborn baby at 20 weeks is ‘human’: refuses to respond" by John Jalsevac, LifeSiteNews.com 1/23/15
The question, and follow-up, were asked by a reporter with CNSNews in reference to the ongoing debate about a bill in Congress that would ban abortion after 20 weeks, except in cases of rape, incest, and a threat to the life of the mother. . . . One recent poll found that 84% of Americans support the bill.
CNSNews.com: "Is an unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy a human being?"
Pelosi: "You know what, what we're talking about on the floor of the House is something that says politicians should determine what effects the health of a woman, her life, her health, and the rest. I don't think it's up to politicians to do that. And that's why we are very overwhelmingly opposing what is going on on the floor of the House."
Later…
CNSNews.com: "My question is pretty simple. On the abortion issue, I understand your position on the legislation, but even the legislation aside, when it comes to the matter of whether or not an unborn child is a human being at 20 weeks gestation, what is your personal take on it. If it is not a human being, then what do you believe it is?
Pelosi: “You know it is really interesting that you would come to these meetings to talk about it. The fact is is what we have said: The life and the health of the mother is what is preeminent in when a decision is made about a woman’s reproductive health. It isn't an ideological fight, it is a personal health issue."
To read the entire Pelosi transcript above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 1/27/15: Congressman Xavier Becerra (D-Calif. and chairman of House Democratic Caucus) won't answer if unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy is human being. (video)
Also read President Obama Touts Abortion, While Americans March Against It
And read As Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back as well as 75% of Abortion Clinics Closed: Jan. 2015 vs. 1991
Showing posts with label conception. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conception. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Saturday, March 01, 2014
Lead Abortionist Asks, Who Cares When Life Begins?
Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said in a TV interview, concerning the oft-debated abortion issue of when life begins, "I don't know that it's really relevant." She went on to say that her kids' lives began at the time of delivery.
Did you know that Planned Parenthood Kills a Baby Every 94 Seconds? And do you know how they get a steady stream of customers?
Keep in mind that Taxpayers Provide 46% of Planned Parenthood's $Billion$ and yet Planned Parenthood's Goal is to Defraud Taxpayers
-- From "Planned Parenthood president: Start of life not ‘really relevant’ to abortion discussions" by Douglas Ernst, The Washington Times 2/28/14
“It is not something that I feel is really part of this conversation,” Cecile Richards said while appearing on Fusion’s “America with Jorge Ramos” on Thursday, Twitchy reported.
Mrs. Richards went on to say that she didn’t think Planned Parenthood should have to answer a question that “will be debated through the centuries.”
Mr. Ramos, a journalist, was persistent, asking her “Why would it be so controversial for you to say when you believe life starts?”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Life Begins at Delivery, Planned Parenthood President Says" by Napp Nazworth, Christian Post Reporter 2/28/14
Richards at first dodged the question several times . . .
Richards then answered that the question is not part of the conversation about whether abortion should be legal. Every woman needs to make their own decision and Planned Parenthood wants them to have "all their options for health care."
"For me, I'm the mother of three children. For me, life began when I delivered them. They've been probably the most important thing in my life ever since. But that was my own personal decision."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Planned Parenthood Prez Cecile Richards: When life begins not ‘really relevant’ to abortion" by Ben Johnson, LifeSiteNews.com 2/28/14
Richards' refusal to answer the question echoes Barack Obama's 2008 reply to Rick Warren stating that determining the moment when life begins is “above my pay grade.” However, biologists and embryologists say the fact that life begins at conception is settled science.
“At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun,” according to the 1976 Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. The 1993 book Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects says fertilization “represents the beginning of a human being.” Numerous other textbooks reveal the same conclusion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Cecile Richards: When life begins isn’t relevant to the conversation" by Cassy Fiano, Live Action News 2/28/14
. . . And why would the science of embryology, pregnancy, and reproduction be irrelevant to the conversation? Of course it’s irrelevant for Richards, whose livelihood relies on women believing that life can begin at conception, or at 12 weeks, or 20 weeks, at birth, or whenever you feel like it does.
If science were to definitively say that life begins at conception (which it does), and Richards were to admit that, then she’s admitting that her business is one of snuffing out a life for pay. It makes her a glorified hit man in heels. The problem is that the science of embryology and reproduction has answered that question — life begins at conception — and the question is not over whether or not the baby is alive, but whether killing this life is acceptable.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
From "Life Begins at Fertilization" posted at Princeton.edu
"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]
"Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."
[Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]
"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."
[O'Rahilly, Ronan and M?ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]
"The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]
"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]
"I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."
[Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]
To read more scientific references, CLICK HERE.
Some Republicans, such as Newt Gingrich not sure when life begins, but according to one governor, The Democrats' Life Mission is to Kill the Unborn
Just days after taking office, President Obama Chose Death for the Unborn
In addition, read President Obama Asks God to Bless Planned Parenthood and also read Abortion Rate Declines, Democrats Want More Access as well as Bishops Warn Voting for Pro-abortion Democrats is 'Grave Sin'
Did you know that Planned Parenthood Kills a Baby Every 94 Seconds? And do you know how they get a steady stream of customers?
Keep in mind that Taxpayers Provide 46% of Planned Parenthood's $Billion$ and yet Planned Parenthood's Goal is to Defraud Taxpayers
-- From "Planned Parenthood president: Start of life not ‘really relevant’ to abortion discussions" by Douglas Ernst, The Washington Times 2/28/14
“It is not something that I feel is really part of this conversation,” Cecile Richards said while appearing on Fusion’s “America with Jorge Ramos” on Thursday, Twitchy reported.
Mrs. Richards went on to say that she didn’t think Planned Parenthood should have to answer a question that “will be debated through the centuries.”
Mr. Ramos, a journalist, was persistent, asking her “Why would it be so controversial for you to say when you believe life starts?”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Life Begins at Delivery, Planned Parenthood President Says" by Napp Nazworth, Christian Post Reporter 2/28/14
Richards at first dodged the question several times . . .
Richards then answered that the question is not part of the conversation about whether abortion should be legal. Every woman needs to make their own decision and Planned Parenthood wants them to have "all their options for health care."
"For me, I'm the mother of three children. For me, life began when I delivered them. They've been probably the most important thing in my life ever since. But that was my own personal decision."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Planned Parenthood Prez Cecile Richards: When life begins not ‘really relevant’ to abortion" by Ben Johnson, LifeSiteNews.com 2/28/14
Richards' refusal to answer the question echoes Barack Obama's 2008 reply to Rick Warren stating that determining the moment when life begins is “above my pay grade.” However, biologists and embryologists say the fact that life begins at conception is settled science.
“At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun,” according to the 1976 Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. The 1993 book Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects says fertilization “represents the beginning of a human being.” Numerous other textbooks reveal the same conclusion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Cecile Richards: When life begins isn’t relevant to the conversation" by Cassy Fiano, Live Action News 2/28/14
. . . And why would the science of embryology, pregnancy, and reproduction be irrelevant to the conversation? Of course it’s irrelevant for Richards, whose livelihood relies on women believing that life can begin at conception, or at 12 weeks, or 20 weeks, at birth, or whenever you feel like it does.
If science were to definitively say that life begins at conception (which it does), and Richards were to admit that, then she’s admitting that her business is one of snuffing out a life for pay. It makes her a glorified hit man in heels. The problem is that the science of embryology and reproduction has answered that question — life begins at conception — and the question is not over whether or not the baby is alive, but whether killing this life is acceptable.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
From "Life Begins at Fertilization" posted at Princeton.edu
"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]
"Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."
[Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]
"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."
[O'Rahilly, Ronan and M?ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]
"The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]
"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]
"I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."
[Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]
To read more scientific references, CLICK HERE.
Some Republicans, such as Newt Gingrich not sure when life begins, but according to one governor, The Democrats' Life Mission is to Kill the Unborn
Just days after taking office, President Obama Chose Death for the Unborn
In addition, read President Obama Asks God to Bless Planned Parenthood and also read Abortion Rate Declines, Democrats Want More Access as well as Bishops Warn Voting for Pro-abortion Democrats is 'Grave Sin'
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
N. Dakota Pro-life Laws Slammed by Media, Doctors
The North Dakota Medical Association is denouncing legislation just passed and currently being debated that limit abortion after six weeks gestation ("heartbeat bill") and that defines life at conception ("personhood"). Doctors say they must have a right to decide issues of life in consultation with their patients irrespective of government lawmaking.
Doctors think they're above the law?! It's contagious (they caught it from activist judges).
For background, read Arkansas 12-week Abortion Law Most Restrictive in U.S. and also read Pro-lifers Prevail: More Abortion Restriction Laws
So far, Personhood Legislation is Battling Uphill in Courts
UPDATE 3/27/13: Gov. signs bills, prepares for legal attack from abortionists
-- From "ND Senate approves 'heartbeat' abortion ban" by James Macpherson, Associated Press 3/18/13
The North Dakota Senate on Friday approved banning abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, sending what would be the most stringent abortion restrictions in the U.S. to the state's Republican governor [Jack Dalrymple, who is pro-life,] for his signature.
It's one of several anti-abortion measures the state Legislature has weighed this session. The vote came with almost no debate in the Senate and after the same chamber approved another measure that would make North Dakota the first to ban abortions based on genetic defects such as Down syndrome.
That measure would also ban abortion based on gender selection. The Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion laws throughout the country, says Pennsylvania, Arizona and Oklahoma already have such laws.
Some supporters of the so-called fetal heartbeat measure have said they hope to send a message that North Dakota is anti-abortion and aims to challenge the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which legalized abortion up until a fetus is considered viable, usually at 22 to 24 weeks.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "North Dakota looks at more abortion restrictions" by Dave Kolpack, Associated Press 3/18/13
The "personhood" measures would ban abortions by defining human life as beginning with conception. It's drawing opposition from some doctors who say it could cause problems for infertile couples seeking to use in vitro fertilization to conceive, but supporters insist that's addressed in the legislation.
Dr. Stephanie Dahl, a Fargo infertility specialist, said Monday that the personhood measures could ban in vitro fertilization and force doctors to leave the state rather than face health care restrictions or possible criminal penalties. In vitro fertilization, or IVF, involves mixing egg and sperm in a laboratory dish and transferring resulting embryos into the womb.
One of the key players in the anti-abortion campaign, state Sen. Margaret Sitte, a Republican from Bismarck, said she was "floored" by the assertions about limitations on in vitro fertilization. She said the proposals allow exceptions for the "screening, collecting, preparing, transferring, or cryopreserving a human being created through in vitro fertilization for the purpose of being transferred to a human uterus." Sitte said that clause was crafted with Dahl's help.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Anti-abortion attorney says ND bill won’t survive legal challenge" by Wendy Reuer, Forum News Service 3/18/13
Paul Linton, a Chicago-based attorney who has assisted other states with anti-abortion measures and served as general counsel to Americans United for Life . . . did not give an estimation of what litigation would cost, [but] if defeated, the state would pay not only its counsel, the attorney general, but the courts could also force the state to pay for attorney fees of those challenging the bill.
House Bill 1456 prohibits an abortion if a detectable heartbeat is found. . . . Another bill that passed, House Bill 1305, would ban abortions for gender selection or fetal anomalies.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "North Dakota has funds to fight over abortion" by The Associated Press 3/19/13
As oil-rich North Dakota moves toward outlawing most abortions, it's in a better position than most states for what could be a long and costly court battle over its restrictions.
Abortion-rights activists have promised a legal battle if the measures become law.
North Dakota has a budget surplus nearing $2 billion, thanks to new-found oil wealth.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read IVF: 'Creating' Life & Aborting Life in addition, read Lab Creates Human Life with 3 Biological Parents
Doctors think they're above the law?! It's contagious (they caught it from activist judges).
For background, read Arkansas 12-week Abortion Law Most Restrictive in U.S. and also read Pro-lifers Prevail: More Abortion Restriction Laws
So far, Personhood Legislation is Battling Uphill in Courts
UPDATE 3/27/13: Gov. signs bills, prepares for legal attack from abortionists
-- From "ND Senate approves 'heartbeat' abortion ban" by James Macpherson, Associated Press 3/18/13
The North Dakota Senate on Friday approved banning abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, sending what would be the most stringent abortion restrictions in the U.S. to the state's Republican governor [Jack Dalrymple, who is pro-life,] for his signature.
It's one of several anti-abortion measures the state Legislature has weighed this session. The vote came with almost no debate in the Senate and after the same chamber approved another measure that would make North Dakota the first to ban abortions based on genetic defects such as Down syndrome.
That measure would also ban abortion based on gender selection. The Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion laws throughout the country, says Pennsylvania, Arizona and Oklahoma already have such laws.
Some supporters of the so-called fetal heartbeat measure have said they hope to send a message that North Dakota is anti-abortion and aims to challenge the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which legalized abortion up until a fetus is considered viable, usually at 22 to 24 weeks.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "North Dakota looks at more abortion restrictions" by Dave Kolpack, Associated Press 3/18/13
The "personhood" measures would ban abortions by defining human life as beginning with conception. It's drawing opposition from some doctors who say it could cause problems for infertile couples seeking to use in vitro fertilization to conceive, but supporters insist that's addressed in the legislation.
Dr. Stephanie Dahl, a Fargo infertility specialist, said Monday that the personhood measures could ban in vitro fertilization and force doctors to leave the state rather than face health care restrictions or possible criminal penalties. In vitro fertilization, or IVF, involves mixing egg and sperm in a laboratory dish and transferring resulting embryos into the womb.
One of the key players in the anti-abortion campaign, state Sen. Margaret Sitte, a Republican from Bismarck, said she was "floored" by the assertions about limitations on in vitro fertilization. She said the proposals allow exceptions for the "screening, collecting, preparing, transferring, or cryopreserving a human being created through in vitro fertilization for the purpose of being transferred to a human uterus." Sitte said that clause was crafted with Dahl's help.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Anti-abortion attorney says ND bill won’t survive legal challenge" by Wendy Reuer, Forum News Service 3/18/13
Paul Linton, a Chicago-based attorney who has assisted other states with anti-abortion measures and served as general counsel to Americans United for Life . . . did not give an estimation of what litigation would cost, [but] if defeated, the state would pay not only its counsel, the attorney general, but the courts could also force the state to pay for attorney fees of those challenging the bill.
House Bill 1456 prohibits an abortion if a detectable heartbeat is found. . . . Another bill that passed, House Bill 1305, would ban abortions for gender selection or fetal anomalies.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "North Dakota has funds to fight over abortion" by The Associated Press 3/19/13
As oil-rich North Dakota moves toward outlawing most abortions, it's in a better position than most states for what could be a long and costly court battle over its restrictions.
Abortion-rights activists have promised a legal battle if the measures become law.
North Dakota has a budget surplus nearing $2 billion, thanks to new-found oil wealth.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read IVF: 'Creating' Life & Aborting Life in addition, read Lab Creates Human Life with 3 Biological Parents
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
U.S. Supreme Court: OK Voters Silenced by Abortion
The Oklahoma attorney general had approved a "personhood amendment" to be placed on the ballot to allow citizens to define “a person” as “any human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being to natural death,” but in April, the Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down the ballot measure saying that it would violate the U.S. Supreme Court favoring abortion. Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal to allow Oklahomans a voice in the matter.
Unelected judges prevail, again.
For background, read Oklahoma GOP & Supreme Court Defeat Personhood and also read Abortionists Fear Personhood Movement Gaining Steam as well as Mississippi Failed to Negate Roe v. Wade via Personhood
-- From "U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear Oklahoma Personhood Initiative case" posted at KOCO-TV5 (Oklahoma City) 10/29/12
[The case] Personhood Oklahoma v. Barber questioned whether the Oklahoma Supreme Court had the authority to stop the initiative from going to a vote.
Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt approved the ballot title and summary. Personhood Oklahoma was attempting to gather signatures in order to place the issue before the voters. The American Civil Liberties Union along with the Center for Reproductive Rights and other organizations filed a lawsuit disputing the constitutionality of the proposed amendment.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court then ruled that the initiative violated the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "US Supreme Court rejects Okla. personhood appeal" by Ken Miller, Associated Press 10/30/12
A personhood bill passed in the state Senate during this year's legislative session but was not heard by the House.
Personhood Oklahoma co-founder Dan Skerbitz said the group will not give up.
"In Oklahoma, the people were denied their right to petition and their right to vote," Skerbitz said. "The people of Oklahoma will not rest until our voices are heard, and our women and children are protected from abortion."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Supreme Courts Declines to Review ‘Personhood’ Ballot Measure" posted at JD Journal 10/30/12
While the Center for Reproductive Rights, the ACLU and local abortion rights groups had sued in March to block the proposed initiative, and got a ruling in their favor, Personhood Oklahoma challenged the state court’s decision and appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The appellants had argued that the decision of Oklahoma Supreme Court to block the initiative from being put to ballot deprived supporters of the measure of their rights to free speech and of their rights to participate in the democratic process.
However, the U.S. Supreme Court, refused to hear the case without adding any comment.
[Although], similar initiatives have been placed on ballot in Colorado and Mississippi, though in both states, such amendment measures have been defeated.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "U.S. Supreme Court declines Oklahoma Personhood case" by John-Henry Westen, LifeSiteNews.com 10/29/12
Commenting on the case, Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, said, “The Court’s decision not to take up the Oklahoma Personhood initiative has no precedential value. The issue is not about the merits of personhood but about whether a state court can interfere with the rights of citizens to gather signatures to amend their constitutions.”
“On the issue,” Staver added, “the Oklahoma Supreme Court decision is wrong.”
Staver concluded, “The time has come for government to acknowledge what science has long recognized – that human life begins from the moment of conception or fertilization and should be protected in law from its earliest beginnings.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Non-Romney GOP Push Personhood, End of Abortion
Unelected judges prevail, again.
For background, read Oklahoma GOP & Supreme Court Defeat Personhood and also read Abortionists Fear Personhood Movement Gaining Steam as well as Mississippi Failed to Negate Roe v. Wade via Personhood
-- From "U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear Oklahoma Personhood Initiative case" posted at KOCO-TV5 (Oklahoma City) 10/29/12
[The case] Personhood Oklahoma v. Barber questioned whether the Oklahoma Supreme Court had the authority to stop the initiative from going to a vote.
Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt approved the ballot title and summary. Personhood Oklahoma was attempting to gather signatures in order to place the issue before the voters. The American Civil Liberties Union along with the Center for Reproductive Rights and other organizations filed a lawsuit disputing the constitutionality of the proposed amendment.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court then ruled that the initiative violated the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "US Supreme Court rejects Okla. personhood appeal" by Ken Miller, Associated Press 10/30/12
A personhood bill passed in the state Senate during this year's legislative session but was not heard by the House.
Personhood Oklahoma co-founder Dan Skerbitz said the group will not give up.
"In Oklahoma, the people were denied their right to petition and their right to vote," Skerbitz said. "The people of Oklahoma will not rest until our voices are heard, and our women and children are protected from abortion."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Supreme Courts Declines to Review ‘Personhood’ Ballot Measure" posted at JD Journal 10/30/12
While the Center for Reproductive Rights, the ACLU and local abortion rights groups had sued in March to block the proposed initiative, and got a ruling in their favor, Personhood Oklahoma challenged the state court’s decision and appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The appellants had argued that the decision of Oklahoma Supreme Court to block the initiative from being put to ballot deprived supporters of the measure of their rights to free speech and of their rights to participate in the democratic process.
However, the U.S. Supreme Court, refused to hear the case without adding any comment.
[Although], similar initiatives have been placed on ballot in Colorado and Mississippi, though in both states, such amendment measures have been defeated.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "U.S. Supreme Court declines Oklahoma Personhood case" by John-Henry Westen, LifeSiteNews.com 10/29/12
Commenting on the case, Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, said, “The Court’s decision not to take up the Oklahoma Personhood initiative has no precedential value. The issue is not about the merits of personhood but about whether a state court can interfere with the rights of citizens to gather signatures to amend their constitutions.”
“On the issue,” Staver added, “the Oklahoma Supreme Court decision is wrong.”
Staver concluded, “The time has come for government to acknowledge what science has long recognized – that human life begins from the moment of conception or fertilization and should be protected in law from its earliest beginnings.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Non-Romney GOP Push Personhood, End of Abortion
Monday, December 05, 2011
At Conception? Gingrich Equivocates on Human Life
On Friday, presidential candidate Newt Gingrich explained at length his opinion that human life does NOT begin until implantation (i.e. the zygote/blastocyst attaching to the uterine wall). On Saturday his campaign realized that his diatribe conflicted with the dominant pro-life position (human life begins at fertilization, PRIOR to implantation), and immediately released a brief statement that Gingrich believes that life begins at conception. Such a statement leaves much "wiggle room" for his lengthy Friday statements because conception is often equated to the point of implantation.For background, read GOP Candidates: NO on Pro-life Pledge and also read 'Gay Marriage' a 'Temporary Aberration:' Newt Gingrich as well as Iowa Christian Presidential Forum Riles Media
-- From "Bachmann says Gingrich's stance on abortion is 'troubling'" by Jim Morrill McClatchy, Newspapers, 12/2/11
At a book signing in Rock Hill on Friday, GOP presidential candidate Michele Bachmann criticized rival Newt Gingrich over his comments about the beginning of life.
Gingrich told ABC News on Friday that he believes life begins at “successful implantation,” not fertilization.
In a statement, [Michele Bachmann] said, “This, along with his inconsistent record on life, is just one more indication that Newt is not dedicated to protecting the lives of the unborn and doesn’t share the most basic of conservative principles.”
In January, the Minnesota Republican representative co-sponsored the “Life at Conception Act.” It would define life from the moment of fertilization.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Gingrich Restates Pro-Life Views, Says Life Begins at Conception" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 12/5/11
In a new statement the Gingrich campaign sent to LifeNews.com over the weekend, the former House Speaker says repeatedly that he believes life begins at conception, that he is pro-life and that he would implement a pro-life agenda immediately after being sown in as president if he becomes the GOP nominee and defeats pro-abortion President Barack Obama.
“As I have stated many times throughout the course of my public life, I believe that human life begins at conception,” Gingrich said in the statement. “I believe that every unborn life is precious, no matter how conceived. I also believe that we should work for the day when there will be no abortions for any reason, and that every unborn child will be welcomed into life and protected by law.”
As LifeNews previously reported, Gingrich told ABC News in an interview that human life begins at implantation rather than conception, which science has established as the starting point for human life.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Newt Gingrich: Life Begins At Implantation, Not Fertilization" Laura Bassett, Huffington Post 12/2/11
"I think the question of being implanted is a very big question," Gingrich said. "My friends who have ideological positions that sound good don't then follow through the logic of 'So how many additional potential lives are they talking about? What are they going to do as a practical matter to make this real?'"
He said that "when a woman has a fertilized egg and that's been successfully implanted, that now you're dealing with life." Otherwise, Gingrich noted, "you're going to open up an extraordinary range of very difficult questions."
Conception, by definition, involves "fertilization or implantation or both," so Gingrich's comments over Thanksgiving don't necessarily conflict with the position he stated Friday. But the national movement led by Personhood USA takes the position that a zygote should be given full legal rights at the moment of fertilization.
"If Newt Gingrich believes that life begins at implantation, he is scientifically incorrect," Jennifer Mason, a spokeswoman for Personhood USA, told HuffPost on Friday. "Any human embryology textbook confirms that life begins at the moment of fertilization. From that moment, there is a living, growing, developing human being."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Christian Liberty at Risk with a President Romney?
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Colorado Personhood on the Ballot in 2012, Again
Denver-based Personhood USA has submitted new language for another attempt, in 2012, whereby voters may amend the Colorado constitution to define life from the moment of fertilization, after defeats of similar measures in 2008 and 2010.
For background, read Abortionists Fear Personhood Movement Gaining Steam and also read Vote to Ban All Abortion: Nevada Personhood as well as Mississippi Failed to Negate Roe v. Wade via Personhood
UPDATE 8/30/12: Personhood leaders challenge secretary of state rejection of petition drive
-- From "Personhood USA again pushes for right-to-life amendment to Colorado Constitution" by Electa Draper, The Denver Post 11/22/11
If the secretary of state approves the language, proponents will need to collect about 79,000 valid voter signatures to get on the ballot again.
The 2012 Personhood Amendment would add a new section to the state constitution to "affirm basic human dignity" and guarantee that the right to life "applies equally to all innocent persons" and "the intentional killing of any innocent person is prohibited."
The 2012 language states that only birth control, in-vitro fertilization and assisted reproduction "that kill a person" shall be affected by this amendment.
Spontaneous miscarriages and medical treatment for life-threatening physical conditions intended to preserve life would not be affected by the amendment, the much-longer 2012 measure reads.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Personhood backers hope third time's the charm" by Eli Stokols, Political Reporter KDVR-TV31 (Denver) 11/21/11
The revised amendment would add language to the Colorado Constitution guaranteeing the right to life "applies equally to all innocent persons" and that "the intentional killing of any innocent person is prohibited."
Personhood's reemergence during a major presidential election year could also be a boon for Democrats as they look to adopt Sen. Michael Bennet's successful 2010 strategy -- targeting moderate, suburban women voters -- in an effort to help Obama win this most crucial swing state.
On Monday, Colorado Democratic Party Chairman Rick Palacio wasted little time issuing a press release highlighting the stance of the likeliest GOP presidential nominee, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who expressed support for the measure when it was on the ballot this year in Mississippi.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Personhood measure heading back to ballot" by Ernest Luning, The Colorado Statesman 11/23/11
On Monday, Arvada-based Personhood USA unveiled a measure that’s been substantially rewritten from ballot initiatives Colorado voters shot down by wide margins in the last two general elections.
The measure, dubbed Amendment 48 on the 2008 state ballot, received 585,561 “yes” votes against 1,605,978 “no” votes, going down 73-27 percent. Two years later, when it appeared on the ballot as Amendment 62, the personhood question got 509,062 “yes” votes and 1,218,490 “no” votes in the lower-turnout election, or roughly 71-29 percent.
The proposal’s sponsors said the more detailed language might prevent opponents from fielding “lies and scare tactics” against the measure and keep the debate focused on the more fundamental question about when life begins.
Colorado GOP Chairman Ryan Call declined to predict whether the state party would back the measure, noting that an endorsement would have to make it through a multi-step resolution process. He acknowledged, however, that the issue could split Republicans.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Colorado Personhood Amendment Back, Failed Twice Before" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 11/21/11
During the 2008 and 2010 amendments, major pro-life groups including Focus on the Family, the state’s Catholic bishops, Colorado Citizens for Life, National Right to Life, Americans United for Life, Eagle Forum, and others either took a neutral position on the amendment or supported it but did not expend significant time or resources fighting for it because of the potential negative legal ramifications. Some pro-life groups indicated Colorado taxpayers could be stuck with the legal bills for Planned Parenthood if the abortion business wins a legal challenge against it.
The same groups will likely be expected to stay on the sidelines again as the focus on the greater pro-life goal of ending abortions by defeating pro-abortion President Barack Obama and installing a pro-life president in the White House who could change the makeup of the Supreme Court enough to allow for legal protection for unborn children.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
For background, read Abortionists Fear Personhood Movement Gaining Steam and also read Vote to Ban All Abortion: Nevada Personhood as well as Mississippi Failed to Negate Roe v. Wade via Personhood
UPDATE 8/30/12: Personhood leaders challenge secretary of state rejection of petition drive
-- From "Personhood USA again pushes for right-to-life amendment to Colorado Constitution" by Electa Draper, The Denver Post 11/22/11
If the secretary of state approves the language, proponents will need to collect about 79,000 valid voter signatures to get on the ballot again.
The 2012 Personhood Amendment would add a new section to the state constitution to "affirm basic human dignity" and guarantee that the right to life "applies equally to all innocent persons" and "the intentional killing of any innocent person is prohibited."
The 2012 language states that only birth control, in-vitro fertilization and assisted reproduction "that kill a person" shall be affected by this amendment.
Spontaneous miscarriages and medical treatment for life-threatening physical conditions intended to preserve life would not be affected by the amendment, the much-longer 2012 measure reads.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Personhood backers hope third time's the charm" by Eli Stokols, Political Reporter KDVR-TV31 (Denver) 11/21/11
The revised amendment would add language to the Colorado Constitution guaranteeing the right to life "applies equally to all innocent persons" and that "the intentional killing of any innocent person is prohibited."
Personhood's reemergence during a major presidential election year could also be a boon for Democrats as they look to adopt Sen. Michael Bennet's successful 2010 strategy -- targeting moderate, suburban women voters -- in an effort to help Obama win this most crucial swing state.
On Monday, Colorado Democratic Party Chairman Rick Palacio wasted little time issuing a press release highlighting the stance of the likeliest GOP presidential nominee, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who expressed support for the measure when it was on the ballot this year in Mississippi.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Personhood measure heading back to ballot" by Ernest Luning, The Colorado Statesman 11/23/11
On Monday, Arvada-based Personhood USA unveiled a measure that’s been substantially rewritten from ballot initiatives Colorado voters shot down by wide margins in the last two general elections.
The measure, dubbed Amendment 48 on the 2008 state ballot, received 585,561 “yes” votes against 1,605,978 “no” votes, going down 73-27 percent. Two years later, when it appeared on the ballot as Amendment 62, the personhood question got 509,062 “yes” votes and 1,218,490 “no” votes in the lower-turnout election, or roughly 71-29 percent.
The proposal’s sponsors said the more detailed language might prevent opponents from fielding “lies and scare tactics” against the measure and keep the debate focused on the more fundamental question about when life begins.
Colorado GOP Chairman Ryan Call declined to predict whether the state party would back the measure, noting that an endorsement would have to make it through a multi-step resolution process. He acknowledged, however, that the issue could split Republicans.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Colorado Personhood Amendment Back, Failed Twice Before" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 11/21/11
During the 2008 and 2010 amendments, major pro-life groups including Focus on the Family, the state’s Catholic bishops, Colorado Citizens for Life, National Right to Life, Americans United for Life, Eagle Forum, and others either took a neutral position on the amendment or supported it but did not expend significant time or resources fighting for it because of the potential negative legal ramifications. Some pro-life groups indicated Colorado taxpayers could be stuck with the legal bills for Planned Parenthood if the abortion business wins a legal challenge against it.
The same groups will likely be expected to stay on the sidelines again as the focus on the greater pro-life goal of ending abortions by defeating pro-abortion President Barack Obama and installing a pro-life president in the White House who could change the makeup of the Supreme Court enough to allow for legal protection for unborn children.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Vote to Ban All Abortion: Nevada Personhood
The Nevada Prolife Coalition has taken steps to petition the state government to allow voters to define unborn human life as persons with a constitutional right to life, prohibiting "the intentional taking of a prenatal person's life," thus making all abortion illegal.
For background, read Mississippi Cleared to Negate Roe v. Wade: Personhood and also read Life to Personhood Means Death to Roe v. Wade as well as Unborn Are People Too
-- From "Group wants to put abortion issue on Nevada ballot" by The Associated Press 9/22/11
To get the question on a statewide ballot, the group must gather more than 72,000 valid signatures from the state's three congressional districts.
A coalition of abortion rights groups is opposing the anti-abortion effort.
A similar effort last year to ban abortions in Nevada failed after a district judge ruled the petition language was too vague.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Anti-abortion group files initiative petition seeking to outlaw abortions in Nevada" By Anjeanette Damon, Las Vegas Sun 9/22/11
The petition is similar to a failed 2010 petition pushed by the Personhood USA group, which is pursuing anti-abortion laws across the country. That petition was rejected by Carson District Court Judge James Russell, who found the language too vague to be clear to voters.
It’s unclear whether the Nevada Prolife Coalition petition is connected to Personhood USA. The man who filed the petition, Chet Gallagher, is a well-known anti-abortion advocate who was involved with the Personhood effort in Montana last year.
The group, however, is not yet properly registered with the Nevada Secretary of State’s office to adovcate for or against an initiative petition, said deputy secretary of state Scott Giles. To begin collecting signatures the group would first have to file the necessary paperwork.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Personhood USA Releases New Video Documenting Infamous Roe vs. Wade Court Case" posted at PRWeb 9/15/11
Personhood USA has released a new video documenting the infamous Roe vs. Wade court case that legalized abortion in the United States. Relevant to today’s battle for human life, the video illustrates the need to recognize unborn children as people.
The video includes actual audio from the court case in which Justice Potter Stewart states, “And the basic Constitutional question, initially, is whether or not an unborn fetus is a person, isn’t it? That’s critical to this case.”
“In 1973, the courts may have had some question as to whether or not an unborn child is a person, but that is certainly not the case today,” explained Gualberto Garcia Jones, J.D. of Personhood USA. “Ultrasound technology, along with the many advances in science and medicine, have shown us with certainty that the unborn child is a human being. And, of course, all human beings are people.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Abortion Unconstitutional via Roe v. Wade: Personhood
For background, read Mississippi Cleared to Negate Roe v. Wade: Personhood and also read Life to Personhood Means Death to Roe v. Wade as well as Unborn Are People Too
-- From "Group wants to put abortion issue on Nevada ballot" by The Associated Press 9/22/11
To get the question on a statewide ballot, the group must gather more than 72,000 valid signatures from the state's three congressional districts.
A coalition of abortion rights groups is opposing the anti-abortion effort.
A similar effort last year to ban abortions in Nevada failed after a district judge ruled the petition language was too vague.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Anti-abortion group files initiative petition seeking to outlaw abortions in Nevada" By Anjeanette Damon, Las Vegas Sun 9/22/11
The petition is similar to a failed 2010 petition pushed by the Personhood USA group, which is pursuing anti-abortion laws across the country. That petition was rejected by Carson District Court Judge James Russell, who found the language too vague to be clear to voters.
It’s unclear whether the Nevada Prolife Coalition petition is connected to Personhood USA. The man who filed the petition, Chet Gallagher, is a well-known anti-abortion advocate who was involved with the Personhood effort in Montana last year.
The group, however, is not yet properly registered with the Nevada Secretary of State’s office to adovcate for or against an initiative petition, said deputy secretary of state Scott Giles. To begin collecting signatures the group would first have to file the necessary paperwork.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Personhood USA Releases New Video Documenting Infamous Roe vs. Wade Court Case" posted at PRWeb 9/15/11
Personhood USA has released a new video documenting the infamous Roe vs. Wade court case that legalized abortion in the United States. Relevant to today’s battle for human life, the video illustrates the need to recognize unborn children as people.
The video includes actual audio from the court case in which Justice Potter Stewart states, “And the basic Constitutional question, initially, is whether or not an unborn fetus is a person, isn’t it? That’s critical to this case.”
“In 1973, the courts may have had some question as to whether or not an unborn child is a person, but that is certainly not the case today,” explained Gualberto Garcia Jones, J.D. of Personhood USA. “Ultrasound technology, along with the many advances in science and medicine, have shown us with certainty that the unborn child is a human being. And, of course, all human beings are people.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Abortion Unconstitutional via Roe v. Wade: Personhood
Friday, September 09, 2011
Miss. Cleared to Negate Roe v. Wade: Personhood
The Mississippi Supreme Court dismissed the challenge by Planned Parenthood and the ACLU against the voters of the state who petitioned for a November 2011 ballot referendum to decide if the unborn are persons. If, as expected, the voters affirm this definition, and the state constitution is so amended, abortion will be unconstitutional in the state per the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade of 1973.
For background, read Abortion Unconstitutional via Roe v. Wade: Personhood and also read Abortionists Fear Personhood Movement Gaining Steam as well as Pro-life States Press Personhood, Abortionists Sue
UPDATE 11/9/11: Personhood loses in Mississippi, but moving forward in six other states
UPDATE 11/9/11: President Obama thrilled for victory against the unborn
UPDATE 9/12/11: Passage of amendment virtual certainty
UPDATE 10/27/11: NBC's Chris Matthews says personhood would deprive women of 'free will'
-- From "Miss. court upholds election on ballot initiatives" by Jack Elliott, Jr., The Associated Press 9/8/11
An amendment that seeks to define life as beginning at conception . . . can appear on the Nov. 8 general election ballot, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.
A majority of the nine justices reinforced a 2000 ruling that said they cannot rule on the constitutionality of measures until voters or legislators have had a chance to pass them. The court dismissed challenges filed by opponents.
While abortion has been central in the debate about personhood, those in the lawsuit have clashed over whether it oversteps the boundaries for proposed state constitutional amendments.
Groups that support abortion rights — Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the state and national chapters of the American Civil Liberties Union — helped sue.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Initiatives OK'd for Nov. election" by Elizabeth Crisp, Jackson Clarion Ledger 9/8/11
. . . opponents are expected to continue their legal challenges if the measures pass in November.
Personhood USA President Keith Mason of Arvada, Colo., who appeared at a news conference in Clinton on Thursday afternoon, claimed victory.
"There have been nationwide attempts to silence the personhood message, so we are very pleased that a high court has ruled against the ACLU and Planned Parenthood yet again. The nation is watching Amendment 26, and it is time now to move forward and pass this crucial prolife amendment to defend human life," he said.
Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann has said he expects . . . personhood . . . to pass.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Mississippi High Court Dismisses Challenge to ‘Personhood’ Initiative" by Joseph Perkins, Christian Post Contributor 9/9/11
“We seek to become the first state in the nation to grant civil rights to the unborn,” said Brad Hewitt, Executive Director of the “Yes on 26” campaign. If approved by Mississippi voters in November, and ultimately upheld by the courts, the proposed amendment to the state constitution will bestow upon the unborn the same right to life as the newborn.
Measure 26, the Personhood Amendment, was challenged by the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and the Center for Reproductive Rights. The three groups claimed that the measure was an improper attempt by its sponsors to modify the federal Bill of Rights.
The justices simply declared, "Just as this Court cannot prohibit legislators from offering proposals in the House or Senate, this Court cannot impede voters from submitting proposals through the voter initiative process."
Mississippi is just the latest battleground in the quest by the pro-life movement to establish the “personhood” of the unborn in the states. Personhood USA, a Christian ministry based in Arvada, Colo., says that the ultimate object is undo Roe v. Wade.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
For background, read Abortion Unconstitutional via Roe v. Wade: Personhood and also read Abortionists Fear Personhood Movement Gaining Steam as well as Pro-life States Press Personhood, Abortionists Sue
UPDATE 11/9/11: Personhood loses in Mississippi, but moving forward in six other states
UPDATE 11/9/11: President Obama thrilled for victory against the unborn
UPDATE 9/12/11: Passage of amendment virtual certainty
UPDATE 10/27/11: NBC's Chris Matthews says personhood would deprive women of 'free will'
-- From "Miss. court upholds election on ballot initiatives" by Jack Elliott, Jr., The Associated Press 9/8/11
An amendment that seeks to define life as beginning at conception . . . can appear on the Nov. 8 general election ballot, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.
A majority of the nine justices reinforced a 2000 ruling that said they cannot rule on the constitutionality of measures until voters or legislators have had a chance to pass them. The court dismissed challenges filed by opponents.
While abortion has been central in the debate about personhood, those in the lawsuit have clashed over whether it oversteps the boundaries for proposed state constitutional amendments.
Groups that support abortion rights — Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the state and national chapters of the American Civil Liberties Union — helped sue.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Initiatives OK'd for Nov. election" by Elizabeth Crisp, Jackson Clarion Ledger 9/8/11
. . . opponents are expected to continue their legal challenges if the measures pass in November.
Personhood USA President Keith Mason of Arvada, Colo., who appeared at a news conference in Clinton on Thursday afternoon, claimed victory.
"There have been nationwide attempts to silence the personhood message, so we are very pleased that a high court has ruled against the ACLU and Planned Parenthood yet again. The nation is watching Amendment 26, and it is time now to move forward and pass this crucial prolife amendment to defend human life," he said.
Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann has said he expects . . . personhood . . . to pass.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Mississippi High Court Dismisses Challenge to ‘Personhood’ Initiative" by Joseph Perkins, Christian Post Contributor 9/9/11
“We seek to become the first state in the nation to grant civil rights to the unborn,” said Brad Hewitt, Executive Director of the “Yes on 26” campaign. If approved by Mississippi voters in November, and ultimately upheld by the courts, the proposed amendment to the state constitution will bestow upon the unborn the same right to life as the newborn.
Measure 26, the Personhood Amendment, was challenged by the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and the Center for Reproductive Rights. The three groups claimed that the measure was an improper attempt by its sponsors to modify the federal Bill of Rights.
The justices simply declared, "Just as this Court cannot prohibit legislators from offering proposals in the House or Senate, this Court cannot impede voters from submitting proposals through the voter initiative process."
Mississippi is just the latest battleground in the quest by the pro-life movement to establish the “personhood” of the unborn in the states. Personhood USA, a Christian ministry based in Arvada, Colo., says that the ultimate object is undo Roe v. Wade.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Abortion Unconstitutional via Roe v. Wade: Personhood
According to Roe v. Wade, abortion could not be permitted if an unborn fetus was proven to be a “person” as legally defined by the 14th amendment.
For background, read Personhood Amendment Pushed in Mississippi and also read Abortionists Fear Personhood Movement Gaining Steam as well as Pro-life States Press Personhood, Abortionists Sue
UPDATE 8/11/11: Just what did Roe v. Wade do in 1973?
-- From "'Personhood amendment' approved for signatures in Montana" by Marnee Banks, KRTV-3 (Great Falls, MT) 8/5/11
CI-108 would define a person to include all human beings at every stage of development including fertilization or conception.
The Montana Pro Life Coalition attempted to pass a similar measure in the 2010 election and failed.
Groups including Montana Right to Life, Montana Catholic Conference, and the Family Foundation all opposed the "personhood amendment" last election cycle saying this was not the way to make abortion illegal.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Montana ‘Personhood’ amendment approved for petition drive" by Virginia Chamlee, Florida Independent 8/8/11
Personhood Florida is currently trying to place a similar measure on the Sunshine State’s 2012 ballot. Pro-life lawmakers are wary of throwing their support behind the bill — preferring, instead, to stay on the fringes of the abortion issue and support initiatives like mandatory ultrasound and parental notification bills.
Though Personhood initiatives have been viewed as radical, even among conservatives, the movement has gained traction in the past year. In Mississippi, a Personhood Amendment has received a slew of high-profile endorsements, including Mississippi Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant and American Family Association founder Don Wildmon. The Mississippi Personhood Amendment will be voted on this November.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Mississippi Initiative To Outsmart Roe v. Wade, Prohibit Abortion" by Amelia Rufer, U.S. Election News 8/7/11
SECTION 33. Person defined. As used in this Article III of the state constitution, "The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof."
The measure would formally add unborn fetuses to the list of civil right-bearers, thereby making abortion illegal in the state of Mississippi. Implications are wide-spread and controversial for the upcoming proposal. Obamacare would not be able to fund abortions in this particular state, a widely-disputed issue in-and-of itself. Research of embryo stem cells would be halted. Contraceptions that prevent the egg from accepting sperm would be just as easily obtainable, as would in vitrofertilization (IVF). Designating abortion as “murder” will no longer be restricted to a moral preference, but will instead hold legal weight. A challenge to Roe v. Wade (1973), the initiative is expected to reach the supreme court if passed.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion Made Illegal: Mississippi’s Personhood Initiative" by K. Douglas Lee, posted at BigGovernment.com 8/5/11
If Mississippians vote Yes on Amendment 26, all human beings would be ensured equal rights in our state and protection under law, regardless of their size, location or developmental stage. Calling abortion “murder” will no longer be merely a moral judgment, but an established legal determination. In other words, abortion will be illegal.
. . . As a bonus, human cloning, embryo stem cell research, and other forms of medical cannibalism would be effectively stopped, necessarily focusing the attention of medical researchers on approaches that have been proven to actually work (like adult stem cells) and do not require the killing of an innocent person. This initiative also stops Obamacare from funding abortions in the state of Mississippi with your tax dollars; after all, anyone performing an abortion will be arrested.
[Also] . . . all forms of contraception that merely inhibit the egg from hooking up with a sperm will still be legal and easily obtainable, and in vitro fertilization (IVF) will still be legal and as obtainable as it is now.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Pro-life Legislation Floods America
For background, read Personhood Amendment Pushed in Mississippi and also read Abortionists Fear Personhood Movement Gaining Steam as well as Pro-life States Press Personhood, Abortionists Sue
UPDATE 8/11/11: Just what did Roe v. Wade do in 1973?
-- From "'Personhood amendment' approved for signatures in Montana" by Marnee Banks, KRTV-3 (Great Falls, MT) 8/5/11
CI-108 would define a person to include all human beings at every stage of development including fertilization or conception.
The Montana Pro Life Coalition attempted to pass a similar measure in the 2010 election and failed.
Groups including Montana Right to Life, Montana Catholic Conference, and the Family Foundation all opposed the "personhood amendment" last election cycle saying this was not the way to make abortion illegal.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Montana ‘Personhood’ amendment approved for petition drive" by Virginia Chamlee, Florida Independent 8/8/11
Personhood Florida is currently trying to place a similar measure on the Sunshine State’s 2012 ballot. Pro-life lawmakers are wary of throwing their support behind the bill — preferring, instead, to stay on the fringes of the abortion issue and support initiatives like mandatory ultrasound and parental notification bills.
Though Personhood initiatives have been viewed as radical, even among conservatives, the movement has gained traction in the past year. In Mississippi, a Personhood Amendment has received a slew of high-profile endorsements, including Mississippi Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant and American Family Association founder Don Wildmon. The Mississippi Personhood Amendment will be voted on this November.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Mississippi Initiative To Outsmart Roe v. Wade, Prohibit Abortion" by Amelia Rufer, U.S. Election News 8/7/11
SECTION 33. Person defined. As used in this Article III of the state constitution, "The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof."
The measure would formally add unborn fetuses to the list of civil right-bearers, thereby making abortion illegal in the state of Mississippi. Implications are wide-spread and controversial for the upcoming proposal. Obamacare would not be able to fund abortions in this particular state, a widely-disputed issue in-and-of itself. Research of embryo stem cells would be halted. Contraceptions that prevent the egg from accepting sperm would be just as easily obtainable, as would in vitrofertilization (IVF). Designating abortion as “murder” will no longer be restricted to a moral preference, but will instead hold legal weight. A challenge to Roe v. Wade (1973), the initiative is expected to reach the supreme court if passed.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion Made Illegal: Mississippi’s Personhood Initiative" by K. Douglas Lee, posted at BigGovernment.com 8/5/11
If Mississippians vote Yes on Amendment 26, all human beings would be ensured equal rights in our state and protection under law, regardless of their size, location or developmental stage. Calling abortion “murder” will no longer be merely a moral judgment, but an established legal determination. In other words, abortion will be illegal.
. . . As a bonus, human cloning, embryo stem cell research, and other forms of medical cannibalism would be effectively stopped, necessarily focusing the attention of medical researchers on approaches that have been proven to actually work (like adult stem cells) and do not require the killing of an innocent person. This initiative also stops Obamacare from funding abortions in the state of Mississippi with your tax dollars; after all, anyone performing an abortion will be arrested.
[Also] . . . all forms of contraception that merely inhibit the egg from hooking up with a sperm will still be legal and easily obtainable, and in vitro fertilization (IVF) will still be legal and as obtainable as it is now.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Pro-life Legislation Floods America
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Abortionists Fear Personhood Movement Gaining Steam
The pro-abortion and mainstream media crowd have been crying about the wave of abortion restriction laws enacted in most states since the November 2010 elections, but their worst nightmare is PERSONHOOD.
For background, read Pro-life States Press Personhood, Abortionists Sue and also read Personhood Means Death to Roe v. Wade
-- From "Abortion Foes Push To Redefine Personhood" by Julie Rovner, NPR 6/1/11
The question being raised in legal terms is: When does someone become a person?
[Keith Mason, President of Personhood USA, says] "It's fertilization; it's when the sperm meets the egg."
[Dan Grossman, an obstetrician/gynecologist at the University of California, San Francisco, says this] could threaten the use of a long list of commonly used contraceptives, including some birth control pills and the intrauterine device.
That's because some of those methods not only may act to prevent fertilization but, if fertilization does occur, may prevent that fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's uterus.
But does that equal an abortion? Grossman doesn't think so and says most of his colleagues don't, either. "It's certainly not a view that's held by the medical profession or that's based on medical evidence, and it's certainly not consistent with what American women and couples want and use to plan their families," he says.
ACLU attorney Kolbi-Molinas says that banning forms of birth control along with abortion is exactly what the personhood backers have in mind.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Personhood USA urges abortion foes to ‘not settle for the protection of just some’" by Virginia Chamlee, Florida Independent 6/7/11
“This is the key question as we examine where we have been in the last 40 years and where we are collectively headed,” said Keith Mason, co-founder of Personhood USA, according to the release. “The video not only helps answer this question, but we also hope it inspires lifelong pro-lifers and activates a new generation to rally in defense of the lives of every human being.”
The group, whose motto is “protecting the pre-born by love and by law,” has unveiled initiatives across the country, in an attempt to undo Roe v. Wade. Personhood supporters argue that the key to outlawing abortion is to redefine what constitutes a “person,” which they argue begins at the moment of fertilization.
Mississippi residents will vote on a personhood amendment to their state constitution in November. Similar amendments were defeated in Colorado in both 2008 and 2010. A personhood initiative is also being attempted in Florida, and while it has yet to receive the signatures required to make it on the 2012 ballot, the head of the Florida affiliate has said he remains undettered.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Louisiana ‘Personhood’ bill sidetracked because legislators fear losing Medicaid dollars" by Ashley Lopez, Florida Independent 6/10/11
This week, Louisiana’s legislature sidetracked a bill that would basically outlaw all abortions in the state. The bill would criminalize all abortions and define them as “feticide.” Louisiana is joining Mississippi in seeking “personhood” rights for fetuses. These proposed laws are aimed at banning abortions for all cases, including rape and incest.
The bill was stalled because it would repeal language that allows the state to fund abortions “whenever the abortion is being sought to terminate a pregnancy resulting from an alleged act of rape … from an alleged act of incest and all of the requirements … [or] to save the life of the mother.”
Federal law under the Hyde Amendment requires that states allow women to seek abortions for such cases, as well as allow the state to cover them. Because Louisiana’s law does not provide that allowance, the state could forfeit billions in federal Medicaid dollars.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Anti-abortion efforts in states hit obstacle of own making" by Kathy Finn, Reuters 6/11/11
The Hyde Amendment . . . which has been attached to U.S. spending bills since 1976, was changed in 1977 to allow exceptions for pregnancies that result from rape or incest.
In a strange twist of fate, the Hyde Amendment -- whose purpose was to deny federal funding for abortions -- has become a stumbling block in efforts to stop abortions altogether, said Keith Mason, founder and president of the anti-abortion group Personhood USA.
In Alabama, a bill that would have redefined the word "person" in the state's legal code failed to reach a final vote on the last day of the state's legislative session. The bill stipulated that human life begins at the moment a woman's egg is fertilized and its primary aim was to ban abortion.
Personhood USA's Mason said every state vote on abortion has the potential to enlarge the anti-abortion movement. "We see we have the ability to change the opinions of the electorate by bringing it up again and again," he said. "This debate is not going away."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
For background, read Pro-life States Press Personhood, Abortionists Sue and also read Personhood Means Death to Roe v. Wade
-- From "Abortion Foes Push To Redefine Personhood" by Julie Rovner, NPR 6/1/11
The question being raised in legal terms is: When does someone become a person?
[Keith Mason, President of Personhood USA, says] "It's fertilization; it's when the sperm meets the egg."
[Dan Grossman, an obstetrician/gynecologist at the University of California, San Francisco, says this] could threaten the use of a long list of commonly used contraceptives, including some birth control pills and the intrauterine device.
That's because some of those methods not only may act to prevent fertilization but, if fertilization does occur, may prevent that fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's uterus.
But does that equal an abortion? Grossman doesn't think so and says most of his colleagues don't, either. "It's certainly not a view that's held by the medical profession or that's based on medical evidence, and it's certainly not consistent with what American women and couples want and use to plan their families," he says.
ACLU attorney Kolbi-Molinas says that banning forms of birth control along with abortion is exactly what the personhood backers have in mind.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Personhood USA urges abortion foes to ‘not settle for the protection of just some’" by Virginia Chamlee, Florida Independent 6/7/11
“This is the key question as we examine where we have been in the last 40 years and where we are collectively headed,” said Keith Mason, co-founder of Personhood USA, according to the release. “The video not only helps answer this question, but we also hope it inspires lifelong pro-lifers and activates a new generation to rally in defense of the lives of every human being.”
The group, whose motto is “protecting the pre-born by love and by law,” has unveiled initiatives across the country, in an attempt to undo Roe v. Wade. Personhood supporters argue that the key to outlawing abortion is to redefine what constitutes a “person,” which they argue begins at the moment of fertilization.
Mississippi residents will vote on a personhood amendment to their state constitution in November. Similar amendments were defeated in Colorado in both 2008 and 2010. A personhood initiative is also being attempted in Florida, and while it has yet to receive the signatures required to make it on the 2012 ballot, the head of the Florida affiliate has said he remains undettered.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Louisiana ‘Personhood’ bill sidetracked because legislators fear losing Medicaid dollars" by Ashley Lopez, Florida Independent 6/10/11
This week, Louisiana’s legislature sidetracked a bill that would basically outlaw all abortions in the state. The bill would criminalize all abortions and define them as “feticide.” Louisiana is joining Mississippi in seeking “personhood” rights for fetuses. These proposed laws are aimed at banning abortions for all cases, including rape and incest.
The bill was stalled because it would repeal language that allows the state to fund abortions “whenever the abortion is being sought to terminate a pregnancy resulting from an alleged act of rape … from an alleged act of incest and all of the requirements … [or] to save the life of the mother.”
Federal law under the Hyde Amendment requires that states allow women to seek abortions for such cases, as well as allow the state to cover them. Because Louisiana’s law does not provide that allowance, the state could forfeit billions in federal Medicaid dollars.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Anti-abortion efforts in states hit obstacle of own making" by Kathy Finn, Reuters 6/11/11
The Hyde Amendment . . . which has been attached to U.S. spending bills since 1976, was changed in 1977 to allow exceptions for pregnancies that result from rape or incest.
In a strange twist of fate, the Hyde Amendment -- whose purpose was to deny federal funding for abortions -- has become a stumbling block in efforts to stop abortions altogether, said Keith Mason, founder and president of the anti-abortion group Personhood USA.
In Alabama, a bill that would have redefined the word "person" in the state's legal code failed to reach a final vote on the last day of the state's legislative session. The bill stipulated that human life begins at the moment a woman's egg is fertilized and its primary aim was to ban abortion.
Personhood USA's Mason said every state vote on abortion has the potential to enlarge the anti-abortion movement. "We see we have the ability to change the opinions of the electorate by bringing it up again and again," he said. "This debate is not going away."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Friday, April 22, 2011
Pro-life States Press Personhood, Abortionists Sue
Personhood bills are seen as a direct attack on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that made abortion a right under the U.S. Constitution. Roe implied that if unborn babies were legal “persons,” they would have a right to life under the 14th Amendment, pro-life groups say.
For background, read Unborn Are People Too and also read Personhood Amendment Pushed in Mississippi
-- From "Drive grows for states to recognize ‘personhood’" by Cheryl Wetzstein, The Washington Times 4/21/11
Mississippi voters are likely to be the first in the nation to add to their state constitution “personhood” language that declares unborn children to be persons, effectively outlawing abortion and setting up a potential Supreme Court showdown — if they get a chance to vote on it in November.
The Alabama Legislature is considering two personhood bills this month, and at least seven other state legislatures introduced similar bills this year, said Keith Mason, a Christian minister who launched Personhood USA in 2008 with fellow evangelist Cal Zastrow.
“Sanctity of life” handles emerging issues like “destructive stem-cell research,” human cloning and creation of human-animal chimeras, said Daniel Becker, president of Georgia Right to Life and author of “Personhood: A Pragmatic Guide to Prolife Victory in the 21st Century and the Return to First Principles in Politics.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 6/6/11: Mississippi Supreme Court hears arguments on personhood amendment
From "Legal challenge to Mississippi ‘Personhood’ amendment maybe headed to state Supreme Court" by Ashley Lopez, The Florida Independent 4/22/11
According to a press release from Personhood USA issued today, the ACLU and Planned Parenthood have appealed to the state Supreme Court in their challenge to Mississippi’s controversial Personhood Amendment.
Mississippi’s Personhood Amendment 26 states that the “term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.” The amendment could result in making all abortions across the board illegal in the state of Mississippi. Such legislation is seen by members of the anti-abortion movement as walking “right through” a door that Roe v. Wade leaves open.
The Personhood movement has seen some legislative victories in various other states. State legislatures in North Dakota and Iowa have passed bills. According to a Personhood USA press release, representatives in Montana, Texas and Oklahoma have introduced similar legislation. Mississippi remains somewhat unique by seeking fetal “personhood” through a state constitutional amendment — a method that is seen as less likely to provide results.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Planned Parenthood Ignores Fetal Pain; Goes After Personhood Amendments" by Keith Mason, Personhood USA, posted at Christian Newswire 4/21/11
In July of 2010, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU filed suit to disallow Mississippi voters from voting on the Mississippi Personhood Amendment. In October, the lawsuit was rejected. The Court decision read "Initiative Measure No. 26 has received more than the required amount of signatures to be placed on the ballot and the Constitution recognizes the right of citizens to amend their Constitution."
Now Planned Parenthood and the ACLU have appealed to the State Supreme Court, a decision made especially conspicuous by Planned Parenthood's recent refusal to challenge various "Fetal Pain" bills. According to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, one abortion in 2010 would have been prevented by the Fetal Pain bill. By contrast, Mississippi's Personhood Amendment 26 would make all abortion illegal by recognizing the personhood rights, first and foremost the constitutional right to life of all children, born and preborn.
This is not the first time that the ACLU and Planned Parenthood have tried to stop Personhood USA -- numerous lawsuits have been filed, albeit largely unsuccessfully, in an attempt to stop Personhood USA and its state affiliates.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "New bills in Alabama would grant personhood at the ‘moment of fertilization’" By Sofia Resnick, The American Independent 4/4/11
These proposed laws do not address abortion or the legal implications therein, but [attorney Ben DuPré of the Foundation for Moral Law] told The American Independent that if the personhood bills pass, then Alabama lawmakers will have to address “whatever flows from that.”
DuPré . . . also noted that Alabama’s constitution defines corporations as persons, but not unborn babies.
Asked how the this type of state constitutional amendment would stand up against U.S. law, which grants the legal right to an abortion, DuPré said that within the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, there is a particular passage that opens up the case for personhood:
The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a person within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. . . . If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 156-57 (1973).
“Roe v. Wade leaves a door open and the Personhood amendment walks right through that,” DuPré said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Pro-life Legislation Floods America as well as Life to Personhood Means Death to Roe v. Wade
For background, read Unborn Are People Too and also read Personhood Amendment Pushed in Mississippi
-- From "Drive grows for states to recognize ‘personhood’" by Cheryl Wetzstein, The Washington Times 4/21/11
Mississippi voters are likely to be the first in the nation to add to their state constitution “personhood” language that declares unborn children to be persons, effectively outlawing abortion and setting up a potential Supreme Court showdown — if they get a chance to vote on it in November.
The Alabama Legislature is considering two personhood bills this month, and at least seven other state legislatures introduced similar bills this year, said Keith Mason, a Christian minister who launched Personhood USA in 2008 with fellow evangelist Cal Zastrow.
“Sanctity of life” handles emerging issues like “destructive stem-cell research,” human cloning and creation of human-animal chimeras, said Daniel Becker, president of Georgia Right to Life and author of “Personhood: A Pragmatic Guide to Prolife Victory in the 21st Century and the Return to First Principles in Politics.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 6/6/11: Mississippi Supreme Court hears arguments on personhood amendment
From "Legal challenge to Mississippi ‘Personhood’ amendment maybe headed to state Supreme Court" by Ashley Lopez, The Florida Independent 4/22/11
According to a press release from Personhood USA issued today, the ACLU and Planned Parenthood have appealed to the state Supreme Court in their challenge to Mississippi’s controversial Personhood Amendment.
Mississippi’s Personhood Amendment 26 states that the “term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.” The amendment could result in making all abortions across the board illegal in the state of Mississippi. Such legislation is seen by members of the anti-abortion movement as walking “right through” a door that Roe v. Wade leaves open.
The Personhood movement has seen some legislative victories in various other states. State legislatures in North Dakota and Iowa have passed bills. According to a Personhood USA press release, representatives in Montana, Texas and Oklahoma have introduced similar legislation. Mississippi remains somewhat unique by seeking fetal “personhood” through a state constitutional amendment — a method that is seen as less likely to provide results.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Planned Parenthood Ignores Fetal Pain; Goes After Personhood Amendments" by Keith Mason, Personhood USA, posted at Christian Newswire 4/21/11
In July of 2010, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU filed suit to disallow Mississippi voters from voting on the Mississippi Personhood Amendment. In October, the lawsuit was rejected. The Court decision read "Initiative Measure No. 26 has received more than the required amount of signatures to be placed on the ballot and the Constitution recognizes the right of citizens to amend their Constitution."
Now Planned Parenthood and the ACLU have appealed to the State Supreme Court, a decision made especially conspicuous by Planned Parenthood's recent refusal to challenge various "Fetal Pain" bills. According to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, one abortion in 2010 would have been prevented by the Fetal Pain bill. By contrast, Mississippi's Personhood Amendment 26 would make all abortion illegal by recognizing the personhood rights, first and foremost the constitutional right to life of all children, born and preborn.
This is not the first time that the ACLU and Planned Parenthood have tried to stop Personhood USA -- numerous lawsuits have been filed, albeit largely unsuccessfully, in an attempt to stop Personhood USA and its state affiliates.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "New bills in Alabama would grant personhood at the ‘moment of fertilization’" By Sofia Resnick, The American Independent 4/4/11
These proposed laws do not address abortion or the legal implications therein, but [attorney Ben DuPré of the Foundation for Moral Law] told The American Independent that if the personhood bills pass, then Alabama lawmakers will have to address “whatever flows from that.”
DuPré . . . also noted that Alabama’s constitution defines corporations as persons, but not unborn babies.
Asked how the this type of state constitutional amendment would stand up against U.S. law, which grants the legal right to an abortion, DuPré said that within the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, there is a particular passage that opens up the case for personhood:
The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a person within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. . . . If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 156-57 (1973).
“Roe v. Wade leaves a door open and the Personhood amendment walks right through that,” DuPré said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Pro-life Legislation Floods America as well as Life to Personhood Means Death to Roe v. Wade
Monday, January 24, 2011
Christians Flood D.C. to Oppose Abortion
On the 38th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, nearly half a million Americans gathered at the Mall in Washington D.C. for the annual March for Life showing support for unborn human life, while the mainstream media, understating the crowd, either ignored the event altogether, or focused on the handful of pro-abortion protesters.
Read also, Obama Celebrates Roe v. Wade Anniversary
UPDATE 1/27/11 - CBS News video "GOP Pushes for New Abortion Limits:"
From "March Marks 38th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade" by Tom Sherwood, NBC TV-4 Washington, D.C. 1/24/11
Tens of thousands of people braved the cold and took to the streets of downtown D.C. Monday for the annual March for Life . . . [which] condemns the 1973 Supreme Court that set off an on-going battle in American politics.
More than three dozen lawmakers addressed the crowd during the two-hour rally before the march. Buoyed by Republican gains in the November elections, the lawmakers called for the landmark ruling to be overturned, the Associated Press reported. They said they would work to restrict tax dollars for abortions.
Small groups of anti-protesters said the country should remain pro-choice.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Activists at March for Life Rally Demand Tougher Abortion Laws, Overturn of Roe v. Wade" by Huma Khan and Amy Bingham, ABC News 1/24/11
"We are here because Roe v. Wade is bad law. We are here because we believe it was wrongly decided," said Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss. "We believe Roe v. Wade has led to a three-and-a-half decades-long holocaust in the United States of America, and it amounts to a stain on our national conscience, and it's time for it to end."
Wicker, who for years has attempted to pass his "Life at Conception Act," today announced that he will reintroduce the bill in the Senate Tuesday. The legislation would establish that human life begins at conception and calls for legal protection for fetuses.
"It's time for the 14th Amendment protection to be afforded to the unborn," he said.
The rally comes as the new Republican Majority House has made abortion one of its top priorities and reopened the controversial debate. Last week, Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, introduced legislation [HR 3] that would ban federal funding for abortion, calling it one of the House's "top legislative priorities."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Thousands of abortion opponents rally in march on Mall" by Michelle Boorstein and Ben Pershing, Washington Post Staff Writers 1/24/11
Some signs and buttons were evergreen: "De-fund Planned Parenthood," "I was adopted not aborted" and "I regret my abortion." Others mentioned President Obama, whom the movement hopes will be challenged by recently elected conservatives. "Stop the Obama abortion agenda," a common sign said.
. . . House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said the new Republicans in Congress are the "biggest and the most pro-life freshman class in memory."
Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.) also introduced a measure that supporters say would ensure that the health-care reform bill passed last year doesn't allow funding for abortion coverage. . . . In his comments to the crowd Monday, Smith called Obama "the abortion president."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Hundreds of thousands assemble against abortion in DC" by Benjamin Mann, Catholic News Agency 1/24/11
For the first time ever, the morning rally events that preceded the March for Life took place at two locations – the Verizon Center and D.C. Armory – to accommodate larger-than-usual crowds. Growing youth participation, possibly assisted by online social media, has nearly quadrupled the size of the march during the past decade.
In the afternoon, the demonstrators assembled on the Washington Mall before proceeding to the steps of the Supreme Court. Although the city of Washington, D.C. does not provide estimates of the crowd size at the yearly event, organizers predicted that up to 400,000 people would participate in this year's march.
The evening before the event, thousands gathered in the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception for the opening Mass of the National Prayer Vigil for Life. Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo, Archbishop of Galveston-Houston, Texas and chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, celebrated the Mass for a capacity crowd at the nation's largest Catholic church.
“Americans love life as much as we love freedom,” [House Speaker John Boehner] said, indicating that public policy should never seek to balance the freedom of one individual against the vulnerable life of another, but must always respect both. In an authentic vision of freedom, he said, these “founding principles” – individual liberty, and the right to life – are inseparably “intertwined, and form the basis of our national character.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Last year's March for Life (January 2010):
Read also, Obama Celebrates Roe v. Wade Anniversary
UPDATE 1/27/11 - CBS News video "GOP Pushes for New Abortion Limits:"
From "March Marks 38th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade" by Tom Sherwood, NBC TV-4 Washington, D.C. 1/24/11
Tens of thousands of people braved the cold and took to the streets of downtown D.C. Monday for the annual March for Life . . . [which] condemns the 1973 Supreme Court that set off an on-going battle in American politics.
More than three dozen lawmakers addressed the crowd during the two-hour rally before the march. Buoyed by Republican gains in the November elections, the lawmakers called for the landmark ruling to be overturned, the Associated Press reported. They said they would work to restrict tax dollars for abortions.
Small groups of anti-protesters said the country should remain pro-choice.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Activists at March for Life Rally Demand Tougher Abortion Laws, Overturn of Roe v. Wade" by Huma Khan and Amy Bingham, ABC News 1/24/11
"We are here because Roe v. Wade is bad law. We are here because we believe it was wrongly decided," said Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss. "We believe Roe v. Wade has led to a three-and-a-half decades-long holocaust in the United States of America, and it amounts to a stain on our national conscience, and it's time for it to end."
Wicker, who for years has attempted to pass his "Life at Conception Act," today announced that he will reintroduce the bill in the Senate Tuesday. The legislation would establish that human life begins at conception and calls for legal protection for fetuses.
"It's time for the 14th Amendment protection to be afforded to the unborn," he said.
The rally comes as the new Republican Majority House has made abortion one of its top priorities and reopened the controversial debate. Last week, Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, introduced legislation [HR 3] that would ban federal funding for abortion, calling it one of the House's "top legislative priorities."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Thousands of abortion opponents rally in march on Mall" by Michelle Boorstein and Ben Pershing, Washington Post Staff Writers 1/24/11
Some signs and buttons were evergreen: "De-fund Planned Parenthood," "I was adopted not aborted" and "I regret my abortion." Others mentioned President Obama, whom the movement hopes will be challenged by recently elected conservatives. "Stop the Obama abortion agenda," a common sign said.
. . . House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said the new Republicans in Congress are the "biggest and the most pro-life freshman class in memory."
Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.) also introduced a measure that supporters say would ensure that the health-care reform bill passed last year doesn't allow funding for abortion coverage. . . . In his comments to the crowd Monday, Smith called Obama "the abortion president."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Hundreds of thousands assemble against abortion in DC" by Benjamin Mann, Catholic News Agency 1/24/11
For the first time ever, the morning rally events that preceded the March for Life took place at two locations – the Verizon Center and D.C. Armory – to accommodate larger-than-usual crowds. Growing youth participation, possibly assisted by online social media, has nearly quadrupled the size of the march during the past decade.
In the afternoon, the demonstrators assembled on the Washington Mall before proceeding to the steps of the Supreme Court. Although the city of Washington, D.C. does not provide estimates of the crowd size at the yearly event, organizers predicted that up to 400,000 people would participate in this year's march.
The evening before the event, thousands gathered in the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception for the opening Mass of the National Prayer Vigil for Life. Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo, Archbishop of Galveston-Houston, Texas and chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, celebrated the Mass for a capacity crowd at the nation's largest Catholic church.
“Americans love life as much as we love freedom,” [House Speaker John Boehner] said, indicating that public policy should never seek to balance the freedom of one individual against the vulnerable life of another, but must always respect both. In an authentic vision of freedom, he said, these “founding principles” – individual liberty, and the right to life – are inseparably “intertwined, and form the basis of our national character.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Last year's March for Life (January 2010):
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
IVF: Women Living & Procreating Without Men
Americans have a unique opportunity to observe the demise of the family unit in Europe. For example, in the U.K., where laws favoring fatherhood have been discarded, we see that given the choice, many women prefer motherhood without men.
UPDATE 9/28/15 - Virgin Births: IVF Eliminating Fatherhood
-- From "The soaring rate of 'no-father' families: Lesbian couples and single women rush for IVF" by Jenny Hope, U.K. Daily Mail 12/20/10
There has been a doubling of lesbian couples undergoing fertility treatment, while three times as many women are taking the plunge into single parenthood.
The legal changes affecting such families came in the 2008 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, which allowed birth certificates to record two mothers or two fathers.
The same Act scrapped the requirement for fertility doctors to consider a child’s need for a male role model before giving IVF treatment.
When the law was changed many Christian groups and campaigners for traditional family values warned it would further undermine the role of fathers.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below for previous articles:
The Feminist's Dream: A Civilization Without Men
Men Without Sperm: Empowering Women
UK: Women Win Right to Children Without Fathers
Gay Procreation: Successful Offspring from Two Males
Marriage Obsolete: American Poll
Marriage Trend: Confined within Church
'Intact Family' Nearly Extinct among Blacks
Homosexuality and Contracting for Children
Designer Babies with Three Biological Parents
Pennsylvania Court Finds Three Adults Can Have Parental Rights
Lesbians' Common Sperm Donor Limits Gene Pool
UPDATE 9/28/15 - Virgin Births: IVF Eliminating Fatherhood
-- From "The soaring rate of 'no-father' families: Lesbian couples and single women rush for IVF" by Jenny Hope, U.K. Daily Mail 12/20/10
There has been a doubling of lesbian couples undergoing fertility treatment, while three times as many women are taking the plunge into single parenthood.
The legal changes affecting such families came in the 2008 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, which allowed birth certificates to record two mothers or two fathers.
The same Act scrapped the requirement for fertility doctors to consider a child’s need for a male role model before giving IVF treatment.
When the law was changed many Christian groups and campaigners for traditional family values warned it would further undermine the role of fathers.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below for previous articles:
The Feminist's Dream: A Civilization Without Men
Men Without Sperm: Empowering Women
UK: Women Win Right to Children Without Fathers
Gay Procreation: Successful Offspring from Two Males
Marriage Obsolete: American Poll
Marriage Trend: Confined within Church
'Intact Family' Nearly Extinct among Blacks
Homosexuality and Contracting for Children
Designer Babies with Three Biological Parents
Pennsylvania Court Finds Three Adults Can Have Parental Rights
Lesbians' Common Sperm Donor Limits Gene Pool
Monday, October 04, 2010
Scientists Judge Unborn, Kill Unwanted
In vitro fertilization specialists have learned how to enable unnatural human conception, and now will judge the usefulness and/or viability of each life, and systematically kill the unworthy, as they choose.
One scientist said, "If you watch the videos, this is how life begins."
-- From "Human embryos' odds of survival can be predicted" by Erin Allday, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer, 10/4/10
Stanford researchers who studied and photographed human embryos for the first five days after fertilization say they have found a way to accurately predict which embryos will reach an important developmental milestone - and may be the most likely to lead to healthy pregnancies.
. . . The Stanford researchers were able to determine with 93 percent accuracy which newly fertilized eggs would become blastocysts, and which would stop growing and die before they reached that stage.
That could eliminate the need to implant two or more embryos at once to increase the chance of a single birth. And it could allow specialists to implant sooner after fertilization, which most doctors believe leads to fewer complications and better chances of a pregnancy.
But they noted that the Stanford study only predicted whether the embryos would become healthy blastocysts. Whether it can predict healthy pregnancies remains to be seen.
The embryos in the study were created at an in vitro fertilization program in Illinois that is now closed; the patients gave consent for their embryos to be used in research.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Watch the time-lapse video; which of the unborn will be washed down the sink?
One scientist said, "If you watch the videos, this is how life begins."
-- From "Human embryos' odds of survival can be predicted" by Erin Allday, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer, 10/4/10
Stanford researchers who studied and photographed human embryos for the first five days after fertilization say they have found a way to accurately predict which embryos will reach an important developmental milestone - and may be the most likely to lead to healthy pregnancies.
. . . The Stanford researchers were able to determine with 93 percent accuracy which newly fertilized eggs would become blastocysts, and which would stop growing and die before they reached that stage.
That could eliminate the need to implant two or more embryos at once to increase the chance of a single birth. And it could allow specialists to implant sooner after fertilization, which most doctors believe leads to fewer complications and better chances of a pregnancy.
But they noted that the Stanford study only predicted whether the embryos would become healthy blastocysts. Whether it can predict healthy pregnancies remains to be seen.
The embryos in the study were created at an in vitro fertilization program in Illinois that is now closed; the patients gave consent for their embryos to be used in research.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Watch the time-lapse video; which of the unborn will be washed down the sink?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
