Roundup: Trying Too Hard on Amendment 62


It seems impossible, but Amendment 62, Colorado’s attempt to establish “personhood” on fertilized eggs, is getting even more rhetorically crazy as we head into the final week of election. 

In a moment that surprised even me, the No on 62 advocates put forth an argument that may have gone one step too far, saying that the resulting bans could force a woman with ovarian cancer to have to seek treatment illegally.  Via the Durango Herald:

Imagine this scenario. Anne, a young mother of three small children, recently noted low abdominal discomfort and bloating. She is horrified to learn that she may have ovarian cancer – but even more horrified to learn that the necessary surgery cannot be performed in Colorado.

If Amendment 62 passes, it would make removing a diseased ovary illegal. Worse, a doctor who performs such a lifesaving surgery would be punished for murder.

Here is what the proposed Amendment 62 says: “Person defined. As used in sections 3, 6, and 25 of Article II of the state constitution, the term ‘person’ shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.”

Anyone who graduated from an eighth-grade health class knows that the start of the biological development is the human egg, and girls are born with all the eggs that their ovaries will ever contain. So removing an ovary – even if diseased – would mean the removal of thousands of “persons.”

A woman whose doctorate is in biochemistry and is loosely associated with Georgetown University wrote this wording. An ethicist against abortion, what she has framed is so poorly defined that the above scenario is possible. A lawyer – or even a physician – could have done better!

I’m fairly certain that Amendment 62 does not apply to all eggs, just fertilized ones.  The wording is loose and ridiculous enough as it is — no one should feel the need to go an extra step into possible fabrications.

Especially not when the propaganda from the “vote yes” side is this utterly heavy-handed. Such as the idea that making fertilized eggs people is the greatest of social justice.  From NewsBusters:

Duval misses the mark again when she claims that “a society that forces a woman to reproduce against her will – a society that prevents a woman and doctors from using advances in technology – is not civil. That society is not right.”

Society has never forced any woman to reproduce; the Colorado amendment is attempting to establish personhood for an unborn fetus, so as to guarantee protection for the fetus from having its life terminated. According to the text of the amendment, it is to provide the person “inalienable rights, equality of justice and due process of law.”  Unwanted babies cannot defend themselves, and the government exists to protect and defend the rights of all people. If Colorado citizens pass Amendment 62, they are merely extending the same rights they have been granted, to the most vulnerable members of society – unborn babies.

That’s something a “minister of social justice” might want to consider.

Want to go past heavy-handed to downright nutty with a flair for the dramatic? How about this piece by actor Michael Moriarty being run in Enter Stage Right:

My regular readers know me well enough to comprehend my seriousness about the curse that the Supreme Court loaded on the back of America in 1973, with its Roe v Wade decision legalizing abortion. Little did I know – historically challenged little me – that America’s legalized abortion actually began in Colorado in 1967. Yup, the practice of murdering your own children with impunity began not 37 years ago, but 43.

That is half the length of time America took to finally end slavery.

Yup, Hollywood’s Little Getaway Spot, with the ski trails of Aspen and the seven figure vacation homes, revolutionized America’s very soul.Colorado did more to destroy America’s “inalienable right to life” than even Dr. Evil and his Mini-Me have accomplished so far.

No wonder the Evil One and his Mini-me’s merely want a Statist Capitalism to run their Marxist, New World Order with. The most successful Capitalist in the world is Glenn Beck’s favorite Creepy Dude, George Soros.

The Evil One or Creepy Dude and Friends are having a tough time these days. Between Glenn Beck and the firing of Juan Williams from NPR, the face of George Soros is all over Fox News.

The New Mao, as I now call Mr. Soros, was better off hidden in the shadows of his Long March toward a Sorosian New World Order. His Mini-Me, Barack Obama, still owns the White House for another two years at least, so we’re actually in the Maoist-style Cultural Revolution years of the Obama Nation.

The cornerstone, the seminal and central building block of this nightmare?

It was Colorado’s grand achievement as the first state with legalized abortion.

Without Murder Inc. or Planned Parenthood, Dr. Evil and his Mini-Me would, at best, be applying for jobs at or ownership of Columbia University, the place they like to either lecture at or claim they graduated from.

I applaud Fox News for turning George Soros into the most talked-about, Indelible Bad Guy of this entire Presidency, rivaling those other great candidates for the prize: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and Hugo Chavez of Argentina.

However, no matter how persistent Fox and Friends are to put the same “Wanted” sign on the back of Soros that Soros has tried to brand Glenn Beck with, Dr. Evil and his Major Mini-Me will triumph with their Cultural Revolution if Colorado’s second effort to overturn legalized abortion this year fails.

On election day, Tea Party Coloradans, be sure to vote yes for Amendment 62!

If Colorado again falls asleep on this effort to clean its own house, I’m not so sure that Dr. Evil, his Mini-Me and the neo-Maoist Cultural Revolution won’t be entrenched in the White House with national emergencies necessitating martial law in America.

Ummm…yeah.

Mini Roundup: Here’s an interesting parental notification twist – a judge in Ohio allows two teens to get married without parental permission, because the girl was concerned she would be forced to abort her baby otherwise.  The furious mother says abortion was never on the table.  A good summary from both sides is here.

October 23, 2010

October 22, 2010

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Follow Robin Marty on Twitter: @robinmarty

To schedule an interview with Robin Marty please contact Communications Director Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • ithiaca

        Why is it, that folks are trying to so hard to shove the Genie back into the bottle. I understand the idea behind amendment 62, being a voter in Colorado this will be the second time it has been voted on. However I am still suprised as to why it is folks want to push back on a medical procedure that has accountability should an incident happen that makes a women infertile or results in her death or some other serious medical imparment. If Abortion is made illegal then we go back to the back alley clinics and now have to face the daunting prospect of not ending one life, but in ending two.

        Now for the record I will state this, Just like the last time I will also vote NO on this amendment and not from any hype, but on the simple idea of that the procedure for abortion is at this moment a medically recognized procedure and as such the doctors and/or technitions have accountability and can be brought up on charges as necessary. If the Pro-Life movement wishes to make some end roads into this issue. Then what need to happen is an acknowledgement of the medical necessity of this procedure, but to also work with groups like Planned Parenthood to present options to a mother to be who may be faced with an unwanted pregnancy.

       I agree that going and getting an abortion as a form of Birth control is really the worst possible choice, but it should also be a choice of absolute last resort and not the first thing. We need to start educating people and in the case of those who go through with a pregnancy and either keep the child or give them up for adoption there needs to be programs in place that ensure the safe and wellbeing of the child and the parents (mom, dad or  both).

  • katwa

    Whether you like it or not, that’s what abortion IS: controlling whether you give birth. Whether you think it’s “the worse possible choice” is really irrelevant. It might be a bad choice for YOU, and you are free to do whatever you think is a good choice when you are pregnant. Please don’t judge what might be the BEST POSSIBLE CHOICE for others who don’t want to be pregnant.

  • arekushieru

    but to also work with groups like Planned Parenthood to present options to a mother to be who may be faced with an unwanted pregnancy.

    Not only do I agree with KatWA, but the above quote suggests that Planned Parenthood is the one falling short on their end of the bargain.  It isn’t.  Women generally understand what abortion means in its full context, and, if they don’t, Planned Parenthood provides counselling to all women who come in seeking abortions, anyways.  And, if the woman still seems unsure or ambivalent about her choice, they won’t let her do it.  ProLifers are the ones who are falling short, and falling short on their ACTual goal; reducing the number of abortions.

  • catseye71352

    Reducing the number of abortions is NOT their goal. It is  to terrorize and coerce women for MEN’S purposes.