Personhood Amendments

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
if it was a person, it would be entitled to representation according to the U S Constitution, every 10 years there is a national census for the counting of every person in the country.
From this national census, the U S Congress is reapportioned and the number of Congressional Districts per state are set.
A state may gain or lose seats in congress based on the total number of persons in their state.
 
Christian Science Monitor, Feb. 16
Oklahoma could become the first state to give individual rights to an embryo from the moment of conception. The state Senate, with a Republican majority, voted 34-8 Wednesday to approve a so-called personhood bill, which some say is an attempt to outlaw or restrict abortion rights. The legislation now moves to the state House, which is also controlled by Republicans. Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, a Republican, has not publicly said whether she will sign the bill, but last year she signed into law a series of bills aimed at restricting the reproductive health choices of women. As written, the new bill defines an unborn child as having “the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents” from the “moment of conception until birth at every stage of biological development.”

Personhood USA, an antiabortion organization in Arvada, CO, has been leading state efforts to get a personhood bill made into law. Last year it was behind a similar referendum in Mississippi that eventually failed. In almost every other state, it has launched petition drives for personhood amendments. These efforts are part of a wider strategy to get the US Supreme Court to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion...In 2011, more than 1,100 such pieces of legislation were introduced in the 50 states–-a 17% increase from the 950 introduced the previous year. Of this proposed legislation, 135 laws were enacted in 36 states, a 52% increase from 89 in 2010.

Oklahoma state Sen. Brian Crain (R), who sponsored the current bill, said its passage is not about blocking access to contraception or preventing stem-cell research, and he added that it is not designed to ban abortion. “The unborn have no voice of their own,” Senator Crain told the Tulsa World Thursday. Ms. Nash sees it differently. This legislation, she says, is a “backdoor approach to banning abortion, contraception, and some forms of infertility treatment,” based on the language surrounding the issue in other states. “To say that it isn’t about those things is a little odd,” she adds. The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice and the Oklahoma State Medical Association are both in opposition to the legislation, saying that defining a fertilized egg or an embryo as a person will jeopardize the doctor-patient relationship, because doctors fearing potential prosecution will discontinue performing in vitro fertilization procedures.
Click to expand...
 
Oklahoma state Sen. Brian Crain (R), who sponsored the current bill, said its passage is not about blocking access to contraception or preventing stem-cell research, and he added that it is not designed to ban abortion.
Click to expand...

See, he says that, but then...

“The unborn have no voice of their own,” Senator Crain told the Tulsa World Thursday.
Click to expand...

Generally when that statement comes up, anti-abortion action of some sort is usually right around the corner.

By the way, that would be a "no DUH" statement, wouldn't it? Being unborn, by its very definition, does kind of makes it awfully hard for you to, you know, have a voice. Or make it hard for you to do anything other than continue to form into a being.
 
Aren't you glad the government does not have a say over what I do with my uterus?

Or do I not understand what a libertarian is?
 
the iron horse said:
Aren't you glad your mom did not abort you?
Click to expand...


I'm glad my mother had access to safe birth control so she and my father could be married for 7 years and wait until they were emotionally and financially prepared to have children.
 
So you aren't a libertarian then.

It's fine -- just be honest about it.

I mean, you seem to think gay people are sinners and not entitled to full personhood status So it's not like you have much of a track record to defend.
 
Irvine511 said:
So you aren't a libertarian then.

It's fine -- just be honest about it.

I mean, you seem to think gay people are sinners and not entitled to full personhood status So it's not like you have much of a track record to defend.
Click to expand...




Why don't you be honest?

Please post a statement by me about anything I have said
about gay people?
 
You've said, several times, that you think being gay is a sin, and threw the line "the world only sins forward" at me when my signature was "the world only spins forward" which is from Angels in America.

My point is not to make this about gay people. My point is that you are libertarian when it comes to your likes -- smoking, drinking, fatty food -- but not when it comes to things you dislike.

Being a libertarian involves tolerating even things you don't morally approve of. You are perfectly free to think gay people are sinners. Many libertarians likely do. But real libertarians realize that their prejudices alone are not grounds to deny people rights, including the right of a woman to choose when she does and does not have a child. As a libertarian, it's perfectly valid to hold the position that abortion kills an innocent life. But a libertarian would admit that this is an opinion, and this would never presume to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her womb.
 
I remember taking a political quiz online once that labeled me a "left-leaning libertarian". Take from that what you will.

the iron horse said:
Aren't you glad your mom did not abort you?
Click to expand...

Nah, I'm totally unhappy here on Earth.

Of course I'm glad my mom had me (though, if she HAD aborted me, I wouldn't have known she was doing so 'cause I wouldn't have had the capacity to understand such things and would be dying, therefore rendering my thoughts on the issue pretty much moot, but, whatever). And if I ever find myself pregnant, it'd have to take some significant health issue of some kind for me to consider the idea of abortion, I think. I don't see myself ever going down that path unless I absolutely, positively HAVE to. I'm doing everything in my power to keep from getting pregnant until I'm good and ready to have a child so I don't have to make such hard choices. I happen to know someone who's been through that, and I don't want that experience for myself.

But I also know that this is not everyone's scenario. Not everyone has family and friends who they can turn to when they find themselves in such a state. Not everyone's pregnancies go off without problems. Not everyone gets pregnant willingly. Not everyone is ready to have a child. Not everyone should have a child, quite frankly-there are some women who are horrid excuses for parents and it shudders me to think of them raising kids.

And so on. Therefore, I think it's perfectly acceptable to let every woman be able to make the choice that is best for them regarding their bodies. Their health. Their futures, and the potential futures of their children. The idea that one solution fits every girl's problems in this situation is flat out false.

You can disagree with the woman's choice all you want. You are entitled to your own opinion on the issue. But you are not her. And it is not your decision to make.
 
Moonlit_Angel said:
But you are not her. And it is not your decision to make.
Click to expand...

This seems to be largely forgotten in the debate. Because who would know better in terms of a woman having an abortion? The pregnant woman, knowing all about her own health, life, financial, social situation etc? Or a conservative male law maker/politician/supporter whom she's never even met?
 
Exactly.

As I've said before, that's what's so frustrating. It's men making decisions about something they will never experience firsthand, situations they will never find themselves in, involving women that, like you said, they most likely don't know.

It's a very personal thing, and it's not a decision that is made lightly. I don't know how much clearer I can make that point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MrsSpringsteen
Gilead States Of America
Replies
16
Views
874
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
O
Better late than never “they” say…
Replies
1
Views
277
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
dont_turn_around
Hello everyone!
Replies
1
Views
125
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
DEA seized more than 379 million doses of deadly fentanyl in 2022
Replies
7
Views
1K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
H
Setlist Issue
Replies
3
Views
487
lazarus
lazarus

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom