A leading supporter of Colorado’s “personhood” amendment disputes a Fox News story reporting that she believes the amendment could make criminals of women.
Colorado Republican senatorial candidate Cory Gardner has dropped support of state “personhood” amendments because he didn’t know they would have banned some forms of birth control. But an anti-choice group now says Gardner was briefed on the amendments and understood them.
Amendment 67 is not a law designed to protect pregnant women; rather, it would give law enforcement officials grounds to potentially imprison mothers.
With Colorado Senate candidate Cory Gardner repeatedly saying “there is no federal personhood bill,” even though he’s a co-sponsor of such a bill, Democrats are now airing a television ad correcting Gardner and telling viewers, “Gardner’s bill is called the Life at Conception Act. Look it up yourself.”
North Dakota is far from alone in spending large sums to defend anti-choice laws. But what makes the state unusual is that fiscal conservatives are now criticizing a double standard, where the lawmakers backing these bills are more regularly seen opposing other instances of what they call government interference, and decrying so-called “big spending.”
Mississippi politicians aren’t sitting still while they wait for the state’s only abortion clinic to close. Instead, they’re preemptively restricting abortion and even birth control access.
Mississippi wants to take granting legal rights to fertilized eggs back to the voters, even though the voters already resoundingly said no.
There’s an old saying: A hit dog will holler. That phrase came to mind as I read Personhood USA’s unhinged response to the new study conducted by Lynn Paltrow of National Advocates for Pregnant Women and Professor Jeanne Flavin of Fordham University. Never mind the facts, Personhood USA makes up its own.
Pregnant from your rapist? Too bad. Have that baby anyway.
The group turned in over 112,000 signatures, but too many could not be validated.