Nevada Moves Ahead With “Prenatal Protection” Amendments

After several “misses,” anti-choice activists in Nevada have finally succeeded in writing petitions that have passed legal muster, and can begin gathering signatures in an attempt to add anti-abortion, anti-birth control, anti-fertility treatment amendments to the state constitution.


The personhood measure seeks to add a constitutional provision called “the right to live for young and old alike.”

In a description filed with the secretary of state’s office, backers say the amendment would apply “whenever the life of any human being is jeopardized,” beginning at conception.

It would prohibit some forms of birth control, fertility treatments when selective reduction is used, and embryonic stem cell research.

The other measure sponsored by the Nevada Prolife Coalition would extend protections to “prenatal” persons, ban abortion even in the case of rape or incest, and also outlaw any medical procedure or birth control that “kills a prenatal person.”

“This is not about birth control. This is about ending abortion,” [Chet Gallagher, director of the Nevada Prolife Coalition] said.

Nah… it’s not about birth control.  Unless, of course, you’ve decided to redefine the medical definition of birth control as something that causes abortions by not allowing fertilized eggs to implant in the uterus. 

I’m sorry, I meant “prenatal persons,” aka fertilized eggs.

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

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact

Follow Robin Marty on twitter: @robinmarty

  • ahunt

    Heh…as infuriating as these petitions are…the political climate is suddenly toxic for them. So if there is humor to be had here…it is in the timing.

  • colleen

    I’m certain that every male in the Nevada ‘Prolife’ Coalition has used those services.

    The religious right and the forced birth movements reason as if humans reproduce through parthenogenesis. I suppose that’s the only way the ‘pro-life’ movement can rationalize  the obvious and glaring omission of any mention of male responsibility for ANYTHING.