Mississippi 'personhood' amendment fails

[Pure]

Vote 55%-45%.

The measure would have outlawed abortions for ANY reason including rape, life of mother, ectopic pregnancy [termination], MAP. etc.

All would be equated to murder of a person, with suitable penalties all around


Its passage had been considered a cakewalk, in view of Southern Baptist support, Governor's slightly lukewarm endorsement, etc. In fact, opposed by drs, the methodist churches, and NAACP.

all over the news, e.g.,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/don-c-reed/mississippi-personhood-amendment_b_1083447.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57321126/mississippis-personhood-amendment-fails-at-polls/

 

[madam_noe]

Logic Win!

Yay! It's good to hear a common-sense victory for once! thanks for the news

 

[RjThoughts]

I am glad! My wife suffered from an eptopic pregnancy - it was miscarried. I cannot believe that there are people in this day and age think women have NO rights to their own bodies!!

 

[Stella_Omega]

A Mississippian of my acquaintance says "Baptists don't vote." They don't do Jury duty, so they don't register to vote, she says.

And even the Catholics were opposed to this bill-- not for humane reasons, but because they felt it was written so badly that it would only strengthen Roe V. Wade once it got to the Supreme Court.

 

[amicus]

Vote 55%-45%.

The measure would have outlawed abortions for ANY reason including rape, life of mother, ectopic pregnancy [termination], MAP. etc.

All would be equated to murder of a person, with suitable penalties all around


Its passage had been considered a cakewalk, in view of Southern Baptist support, Governor's slightly lukewarm endorsement, etc. In fact, opposed by drs, the methodist churches, and NAACP.

all over the news, e

.....

Infection Details
URL: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/don-c-reed...
Process: file://C:\Program Files\Internet Explore...
Infection: jsownloader-gen@bhv [Expl]

Warn your friends to avoid this website

I am certain, Pure, that this was not intentional, but you might replace the Link with one that is not infected and malicious.

The continuing effort to protect human life will continue; the intent and effort are admirable and will one day suceed.

Amicus

 

[Boxlicker101]

This would have even outlawed some forms of contraception, including the morning after pill and some others. It was one of the most misbegotten attempts to control people ever attempted. The fact it even got 45% of the vote is bad news.

 

[HeyItsDani]

The continuing effort to force women to be incubators will continue;

Fixed that for you.

 

[amicus]

Fixed that for you.

~~~

Hey, Lady, ahem, open your legs, be responsible, accept the consequences and the responsibilities.

The newly gained freedom of women present a poor choice of independencce when they can't even control their urges to procreate. Perhaps Clitoral removal, Sharia Law?

Or just Chattel, as it was.

We need to get the bitches under control, somehow; perhaps the Ayrabs are right, no rights for females.

Amicus

 

[Handley_Page]

55 - 45 is hardly "over-whelming"
Are the creators of these things on the same planet as the rest of us ?
Has the skin slipped off their Rice Pudding ?

 

[amicus]

55 - 45 is hardly "over-whelming"
Are the creators of these things on the same planet as the rest of us ?
Has the skin slipped off their Rice Pudding ?

~~~

Handley_Page, the 'Right to Life', in our basic documents, means all life. Medical science has determined that life is created at the instant of conception.

Without that basic right to life defined and protected, we are open to the gas chambers once again for any reason this or any Regime determines.

Without the defense of basic, fundamental values, all other derivative values cease to exist, and Life is the very first and primary value.

Amicus Veritas

 

[HeyItsDani]

Hey, Lady, ahem, open your legs, be responsible, accept the consequences and the responsibilities.

That means a lot coming from someone who doesn't have to worry about getting pregnant.

"Consequences?" That's when you see how people like you really view this. It's not about "life" but rather punishing a woman for having the audacity to be sexual. To you, being pregnant is an appropriate "punishment" for having sex, isn't it?

 

[Stella_Omega]

That means a lot coming from someone who doesn't have to worry about getting pregnant.

Ah, you've met Amicus.

Amicus believes he is John Galt despite ample evidence to the contrary.

He has nothing of use to say, which of course never stops him from saying it.

he makes a fabulous model for characters though. His peculiarities of thought and speech are rich in comedic elements, and if you need a senile, selfish, old fool as a foil for your more intelligent or caring characters-- Amicus is your go-to source. Just check out his posting history, you'll find plenty of examples of fuckwittery for your purpose.

 

[HeyItsDani]

Ah, you've met Amicus.

Amicus believes he is John Galt despite ample evidence to the contrary.

He has nothing of use to say, which of course never stops him from saying it.

he makes a fabulous model for characters though. His peculiarities of thought and speech are rich in comedic elements, and if you need a senile, selfish, old fool as a foil for your more intelligent or caring characters-- Amicus is your go-to source. Just check out his posting history, you'll find plenty of examples of fuckwittery for your purpose.

Well, your description is dead on from just what I've seen in the past few minutes. Thanks for the head's up.

 

[Handley_Page]

~~~

Handley_Page, the 'Right to Life', in our basic documents, means all life. Medical science has determined that life is created at the instant of conception.

Without that basic right to life defined and protected, we are open to the gas chambers once again for any reason this or any Regime determines.

Without the defence of basic, fundamental values, all other derivative values cease to exist, and Life is the very first and primary value.

Amicus Veritas

Sorry Ami, but I do not agree at all.
Take, for a moment, an Ectopic pregnancy which, as far as I know it a pregnancy developing outside the womb and reputed to be potentially fatal to both Mother & foetus.
Given that begetting a child is not exactly rocket-science and that I married the potential Mother, I think I'd rather have her alive and well; not cold, under the ground.
Then again, if my daughter was raped and was discovered to be pregnant by the Rapist, I'd rather not give air to the heir of the rapist, thanks.
I'm minded to support the idea that a woman can choose. Right or wrong, it's her body, not mine, or yours, or the Pastors, or the Lawyers. . .

There are times when a blanket rule on something just does not work; I feel that this is one of them.

 

[Boxlicker101]

55 - 45 is hardly "over-whelming"
Are the creators of these things on the same planet as the rest of us ?
Has the skin slipped off their Rice Pudding ?

That is really something to be concerned over. If this had been a referendum on abortions and the proposal to outlaw them had been defeated 55 - 45, that would be something to rejoice over. It would show the majority have their heads on straight. But this law would have gone far beyond abortion and even outlawed some methods of birth control and required women to die from bad pregnancies. That would have been unthinkable to most people, but 45% of the voters in MS thought it was the way to go.

 

[Stella_Omega]

That is really something to be concerned over. If this had been a referendum on abortions and the proposal to outlaw them had been defeated 55 - 45, that would be something to rejoice over. It would show the majority have their heads on straight. But this law would have gone far beyond abortion and even outlawed some methods of birth control and required women to die from bad pregnancies. That would have been unthinkable to most people, but 45% of the voters in MS thought it was the way to go.

The referendum architects have the same thing ready to go in a whole bunch of other states as well-- they though it had the best chance of passing in MS. Like, they though it was a shoo-in.

We beat them, though. YOu may or may not know of the intensive canvassing the pro choice and other movements did to defeat it -- I put in five hours of phone time, personally, from Ca,like many many other people. There is a ton of money behind this shit, too. Democracy is in danger of being sold to the deepest pockets.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

No. Folks is waking up to the reality that minorities get most of the abortions, and theys rethinking they opposition to it. IT BE MADNESS BUT THEY IS METHOD TO IT!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

~~~

Handley_Page, the 'Right to Life', in our basic documents, means all life. Medical science has determined that life is created at the instant of conception.

Without that basic right to life defined and protected, we are open to the gas chambers once again for any reason this or any Regime determines.

Without the defense of basic, fundamental values, all other derivative values cease to exist, and Life is the very first and primary value.

Amicus Veritas

I see no evidence that anyone values life beyond making a buck from it. If you wanna stop abortions increase AFDC payments: Planned Parenthood will close its doors in a week.

 

[HeyItsDani]

I see no evidence that anyone values life beyond making a buck from it. If you wanna stop abortions increase AFDC payments: Planned Parenthood will close its doors in a week.

You apparently also don't "see any evidence" of what PP really does. Planned Parenthood has done more to prevent abortions than all of the other organizations in this country combined. PP is the single largest provider of birth control and family planning services in the country. The more money you take away from them, the higher the abortion rates are going to go up, at least in the short run.

 

[willyeddy2001]

personhood

Another point is that if we don't stop this kind of silliness the self righteous people will keep right on pushing the limits. Pretty soon it'll be illegal for a guy to masturbate because they'll say he killed fertile baby producing sperm, therefore killing babies.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

I'm not going to be popular for this...

but I'm going to say it anyway.

Life is beautiful, but a lot of the time, the conditions are not right for life to thrive.

There are the obvious cases, like ectopic pregnancies and rape and cases where the mother and fetus are at risk, but there are also socio-economic factors as well.

If there is a young woman living in a third-generation welfare home who gets pregnant because she is uneducated, should she have the right to get rid of a cluster of cells that has the potential to make her life a living hell? Should a baby be allowed to exist if it will just be abused or neglected?

Sex leads to pregnancy. Everyone has sex, but not everyone is ready for a child.

I don't believe that babies are alive for the first two weeks. They are a cluster of cells that an ruin lives. A disease that should be wiped out if the host cannot support it.

 

[annanova]

I'll probably kick myself for this later, but...

If life begins at the moment of conception, how are we supposed to know just when that moment is? It isn't as if some mystical light goes on to let women know that one special sperm has successfully fertilized the egg.

Further muddying the waters, even if said conception takes place, the odds are high that the now fertilized egg will not successfully implant. What then? If a woman gets her period even though she was having sex during her fertile three days, will she be considered guilty of ending a life? And what of the man? He was part of creating that life as well.

Of course, that's a ridiculous notion. It's right there next to willyeddy's notion of going after masturbating men. Which, thanks for the laugh.

Still, ectopic/tubal pregnancies and miscarriages happen all the time. The idea that a law, based on when life is presumed to start, might not make allowances for naturally occuring misfortunes is an insult.

The problem is that this measure was based on a slippery slope. Or is it a strawman? I've been out of debate for far too long.

 

[PennLady]

Anna, what you say is exactly what a lot of opposition people -- which included doctors and even some clergy -- pointed out. There was talk, I think, of investigating "suspicious" miscarriages and things like that.

Before I got pregnant with my second, I had a "chemical" pregnancy -- from what I understand, I guess an egg was fertilized but failed to implant, but the rest of my body didn't get the message. I tested pregnant and had some symptoms. but when I went to the doctor, there was nothing, and I ended up having to get a D&C to get rid of the lining and etc. No one's fault, nothing like that -- but would I have been investigated?

There has to be some middle ground here, but no one wants to admit that.

I think another big problem is that it would risk the life of the mother for the life of the fetus. I think everything should be done to save both, of course, but I'd say in most cases they'd have to opt to save the mother.

We have to stop trying to legislate these very personal issues, where often there is no good or satisfactory answer, only the best under the circumstances.

 

[Stella_Omega]

would I have been investigated?

Yes, as the measure was written you would have been investigated on suspicion of murder.

After all the difficulty and sorrow you had just gone through. You would have been questioned, and documented, fingerprinted-- and you know quite well that if anyone had a grudge of any sort against you, you could find yourself behind bars.

The problem is that this measure was based on a slippery slope. Or is it a strawman? I've been out of debate for far too long.

The problem is that this and all other anti choice measures subjugate women as chattel. "Pro life" is anti women at its roots.

You can damn well believe that if men were in danger of getting pregnant, there would be no question about abortion rights.

meanwhile the same measure is being introduced in many other states. Put in some time, folks, if you feel this is bad. Here's a start, a petition you can sign. All that is required for evil to triumph is that good people stand by and do nothing.
[B]http://emilyslist.org/action/kg/elmississippi/[/B]

 

[LettersFromTatyana]

I think another big problem is that it would risk the life of the mother for the life of the fetus. I think everything should be done to save both, of course, but I'd say in most cases they'd have to opt to save the mother.

This is one that gets me. You'd think that everyone would agree to save the life of the mother, but . . .

I have a friend whose wife comes from a very religious family. A few years ago, she got pregnant. They didn't know it at first; they'd been trying for so long and her cycles were so uneven that they'd stopped taking tests, mainly for psychological reasons.

One day she started bleeding. They thought it was her period, but then she started bleeding a lot. They rushed to the hospital, and sure enough, she had an ectopic pregnancy. However, when a pregnancy is that early, ultrasounds can't really tell when a pregnancy is viable. Even though everyone knows an ectopic pregnancy isn't viable, since the fetus may have still been "alive" at that point, the doctors technically performed an abortion on her. And from what I've since learned, it was an emergency; as soon as they saw it was ectopic and the amount of blood she was losing, she was rushed to the O.R.

They are still paying the medical bills for this since their insurance doesn't cover abortions. Note that under the personhood law, this procedure would have been illegal, and she most likely would have died.

When his wife was still in the hospital, they called her family; it was right before Christmas, I believe, and they wouldn't be able to make it up for the holidays. After hearing what had happened, the family refused to talk to their daughter for a year.

When they finally did agree to speak to her at a family event, both her parents and brothers said her abortion was a sin, and that she should have left things to God. When my friend pushed them on this, told them that they were saying their daughter should have died along with the baby--because let's face it, an ectopic pregnancy is not going to survive--they said that yes, she should have died with the baby rather than have an abortion.

I repeat: they told their daughter and son-in-law that she should have died rather than abort a baby that would never make it.

There are no words. My friend can't speak to his in-laws anymore without wanting to punch them, and his wife, who went into a depression after her miscarriage/abortion/whatever went even deeper at her family's rejection.

There are people who have rational arguments about abortion, who are able to approach a complex topic with reason and compassion, who reject laws that could cause more harm than good. And then there crazy people like this woman's family. I'm happy that there are more of the former than the latter in Mississippi.