October 30, 2008

In Colorado, Voters Will Decide Whether Human Embryos Are People Under State's Constitution


In the battleground state of Colorado on November 4, along with casting a vote for Barack Obama or John McCain, voters will be considering whether or not to make Colorado the first state to give constitutional rights to human embryos.

The proposed Amendment 48 would change Colorado's Constitution to define the term "person" as "any human being from the moment of fertilization." That means fertilized eggs and fetuses would have all the rights of individuals under Colorado law, down to the right to due process.

Supporters say it protects the value of life and clarifies "personhood" in light of scientific findings on how humans develop in the womb. They also argue that it won't automatically overturn access to contraception, abortion, or medical research involving embryos, since courts still will have to interpret laws on a case-by-case basis.

But opponents say the amendment could have wide-ranging consequences. The amendment could allow abortion, and even contraception, to be interpreted as murder, without exception for victims of rape or incest. In vitro fertilization could be banned, since the eggs used in the process would be protected; so could stem cell research. Meanwhile, more than 20,000 references to "persons" exist in state statutes, regulations, and city ordinances, meaning that the ban could have unintended effects, one reason the Colorado Bar Association has opposed it.

"It is a blatant attempt to interfere into personal, private, family health decisions," says Fofi Mendez, campaign manager for Vote NO on 48.

The views of Mendez and other opponents of the ban, including self-described "pro-life" Gov. Bill Ritter, seem to have struck a chord with Coloradans. Even though supporters originally gathered more than 130,000 signatures to get the measure on the ballot, support seems to have tumbled. A recent Rocky Mountain News/CBS4 News poll showed that more than two thirds of Colorado voters oppose the bill, compared with 27 percent in favor. That's despite another poll showing that 44 percent of voters in the state say life begins at conception.

Even if the measure fails, though, some say it points to a rising politicization of contraception. Mississippi, Georgia, Michigan, Oregon, and Montana have attempted to get similar measures passed, Mendez says.

Contraception also has become an issue in nine races in this election, according to Cristina Page of the advocacy site BirthControlWatch.org, including congressional campaigns in New Jersey, Ohio, New Hampshire, Washington, Virginia, and Colorado as well as a gubernatorial race in Washington.

"This is a trend we're going to see--birth control becoming a campaign issue--grow," says Page.

Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.


2007-2008 State-Level Personhood (and other selected) Legislation
- Including State-Level Personhood Bills and Constitutional Amendments
- AL, CO, GA, MT, SC, VA
Updated February 14, 2008

To see that the Colorado state constitution is amended to include pre-born from the moment of fertilization as having their "personhood" clearly established, so that they may enjoy equal protection under the law.
The term "Person" or "Persons" shall include any human from the time of fertilization.

"Personhood Song" - Artist: Tony Funderbunk (4:06 - audio link)
"Give an unborn baby personhood..."


From the very text of the Roe v. Wade decision - if "personhood" for the fetus is established (with no "exceptions") then the legal argument for abortion "collapses":

Right to Life Act of SC - news conference and "Jesus Christ is Lord of the Gates" pro-life rally - Jan. 17, 2006

In the very text of the Roe v. Wade US supreme Court decision it states, “[Texas] argue[s] that the fetus is a “person” within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment… If this suggestion of personhood is established, the [pro-abortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment.” In other words, there never would have been legalized abortion under Roe v. Wade. But tragically, Texas had an “exception” which undermined their entire “personhood” argument. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote: “[ Footnote 54 ] When Texas urges that a fetus is entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection as a person, it faces a dilemma. Neither in Texas nor in any other State are all abortions prohibited. Despite broad proscription, an exception always exists… But if the fetus is a person who is not to be deprived of life without due process of law, and if the mother's condition is the sole determinant, does not the Texas exception appear to be out of line with the Amendment's command? ...”

Roe v. Wade

The Right to Life Act of SC, in statutorily vesting legal “personhood” at fertilization for ALL human beings, satisifies the Roe formula published 35 years ago. The issue of legal “Personhood” for ALL human beings, without exception, is a key to unlocking the 35 year old Roe v. Wade abortion enigma.


"The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God." Psalm 9:17, KJB

"But judgment shall return unto righteousness: and all the upright in heart shall follow it." Psalm 94:15, KJB

No King but King Jesus! (Yeshua Messiah)
Declarations and Evidences of Christian Faith in America’s Colonial Charters, State Constitutions, and other Historical Documents during over 375 Years of American History: 1606 to 1982

"... I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Matthew 16:18 Yeshua Messiah

Hallelu-Yah !

Steve Lefemine, pro-life missionary
dir., Columbia Christians for Life
PO Box 50358
Columbia, SC
(803) 794-6273
October 30, 2008

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...