Court clears way for egg rights showdown

cnredd · #1 (**permalink**) 11-18-2007, 05:19 AM

Quote:

DENVER - The Colorado Supreme Court cleared the way Tuesday for an anti-abortion group to collect signatures for a ballot measure that would define a fertilized egg as a person.

The court approved the language of the proposal, rejecting a challenge from abortion-rights supporters who argued it was misleading and dealt with more than one subject in violation of the state constitution.

If approved by voters, the measure would give fertilized eggs the state constitutional protections of inalienable rights, justice and due process.

"Proponents of this initiative have publicly stated that the goal is to make all abortion illegal — but nothing in the language of the initiative or its title even mentions abortion," Kathryn Wittneben of NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado said in a statement. "If that's not misleading, I don't know what is."

Wittneben and others said the measure would have would hamper in-vitro fertilization and stem cell research and would effectively ban birth control.

Proponents of the measure disagree.

"It doesn't outlaw abortion, it doesn't regulate birth control," said Kristi Burton, 20, of Colorado for Equal Rights. "It's just a constitutional principle. We're laying a foundation that every life deserves protection.

Burton said the initiative would simply define a human.

I guess Colorado is gonna define it for themselves since we can't get a consensus from scientists for the last 30 years...

foundit66 · #2 (**permalink**) 11-20-2007, 11:34 AM

"It doesn't outlaw abortion, it doesn't regulate birth control," said Kristi Burton, 20, of Colorado for Equal Rights. "It's just a constitutional principle. We're laying a foundation that every life deserves protection.

Does anybody think this is in any way truthful?
Why can't she just be honest and admit it is a stepping stone for outlawing abortion, and has clear interests on the subject of "birth control"?

I suspect the honesty is not there because she should know that the vast majority approve of some form of legalized abortion.

Unless they are able to fool a significant number of the people who support some form of legalized abortion, this thing will fail miserably.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

I guess Colorado is gonna define it for themselves since we can't get a consensus from scientists for the last 30 years...

Scientists making legal classifications?

What's next? Religious leaders trying to tell scientists they are wrong on scientific principles?

KnightOfSappho · #3 (**permalink**) 11-20-2007, 07:29 PM

I see ALL SORTS of problems with this...

For example...

If a woman has an ectopic pregnancy and needs emergency surgery to save her life, will it be delayed by 'due process?'

If a fertilized egg is not currently implanted in a womb (in-vitro clinics) will the parents be REQUIRED to provide 'child support' to the clinic to keep them alive indefinitely? Does the state assume the legal responsibility to keep them alive if the parents die?

Will the police be required to investigate all miscarriages as 'potential murder cases?'

If any of these eggs are 'adopted' by a single parent, will the bio parents be required to pay child support?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/abortion/555-court-clears-way-egg-rights-showdown.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date
Political Wrinkles	This thread	Refback	11-19-2007 04:46 PM

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
crazyflamingos, tristanrobin

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to KnightOfSappho For This Useful Post:
crazyflamingos, foundit66