Embryos Up for Personhood in Colorado, Even the Gay Ones?
| Thu May. 15, 2008 5:09 PM PDT
Lots of big news the last couple of days. The polar bear apparently has the right to protection under the Endangered Species Act. California same-sex couples can, in fact, marry. McCain has amended his Iraq 100-year-plan to say most troops will out by 2013. Hell, we may even tax porn. But amid all of the news of progress have you heard this one?
On Tuesday the group Colorado for Equal Rights submitted 131,245 signatures to place an initiative on the November ballot that would define a fertilized embryo as a person. Voters will decide on the measure that would amend the state Constitution to extend a fertilized embryo equal rights and protections. It would define "any human being from the moment of fertilization" as a "person" for purposes of the state's constitutional provisions "relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice and due process of law."
Never mind that the 'moment of fertilization' is not a medical definition and is almost impossible to determine. Consensus from women's rights organizations is that the amendment would be catastrophic for women and their ability to determine their own futures. Doctors and legal rights experts say the amendment could trigger governmental investigations into miscarriages, restrict in-vitro fertilization by couples trying to conceive, and could limit birth-control methods.
And to those hundred thousand-plus Coloradoans who endorsed the measure into being, if they so passionately believe in equal rights, what about the gay embryos? Equality still fair game? Just a thought.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
Wouldn't your age count from the time of fertilization then, rather than time of birth? Doesn't seem reasonable that your age would reflect a shorter period of time than you've been a person. So will they change the driving, drinking, voting, etc ages, or start issuing fertilization certificates instead of birth (or in addition to) certificates?
Ugh...except I really should have previewed my post! Let me try that sentence again:
"Re: gay embryos, I imagine anyone who signed onto this who is a through-and-through social conservative doesn't consider a gay embryo possible since in their minds, it is a choice."
Submitted by Politiscribe (not verified) on Fri May. 16, 2008 12:48 PM PDT.
Good call, DaveD. It makes me wanna go to Colorado and buy some 20-years-and-3-months-old kids a beer.
So the 80% of embryos that don't implant into the wall of the uterus in the course of natural procreation, do the parents get charged with negligent manslaughter for allowing those "people" to die?
Don't these idiots realize that by their stunningly ignorant metric, any woman who has had a child is likely to also be a mass murderer?
We could also wonder when the fertilized eggs that will become females, whether gay, straight or bi, will lose their rights. Will it be just after birth and will they then be labeled as baby factories unable to control their own destinies?
I'm live in Colorado and one day I saw one of the (male) petitioners standing in front of a chain grocery store soliciting signatures for this nonsense. My partner wouldn't let me run over him but I did call the store manager to ask if I could bring my petition and obtain signatures right beside this nut. She asked what my petition was and I told her. She gasped, then she laughed (women laugh, men recoil). I have been using this line since the '80s, "Mandatory Vasectomies done with a coat hanger in the back alley". The burden would then finally shift to the other half of the population and would really stop abortions given that birth control medication and devices are in such short supply; )
Even though I live in New Jersey, I find that such a state constitutional amendment is worrisome to me--and I'm pro-life. I can see how an amendment like this could backfire, causing far more liability than benefit. It would be far better for those people to petition for equal rights for the poor, the uninsured, the undereducated, and others who have received the political finger from the Bush administration. Let's get the science in place first, then go from there with who's a person and who isn't.
Submitted by Rita Hill (not verified) on Sun May. 18, 2008 7:59 AM PDT.
Swarm Hypocrites do anything to try to create a viable plurality to continue their cult. We are getting them out of places like Colorado now, because it is their cult to demean Christians.
The Swarm are so afraid of sanity that they cannot bring charges against the wife who, in front of a deputy, killed James Tatum who took my money, though he was too uninformed to represent my case against Colorado.
I look down on the town of faithless faithkeepers, and they want me to kill their Swarm town.
Is there a better faithkeeper to part retrograde?
I don't see you in front of my face in this town.
The Left used to champion the powerless and voiceless.
Apparently, that's not a rule for the unborn, for the incapacitated and for the very elderly. Just kill them when they are inconvenient! Its certainly a progressive position to take. All human life deserves to be protected under natural law. Even if some find its existence gets in the way of whatever they would like to do.
The Colorado Personhood Amendment reminds us that the principle of the sanctity of human life should be beyond debate, since without a fundamental guarantee of the right to life, its not possible to exercise the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That's the question Colorado voters will be asked to decide in November. Does that principle merit affirmation in the state's highest law? Its more than just about abortion but about the value of a human life, since the law is the ultimate teacher of society's values.
Submitted by Guzel Sozler (not verified) on Sat Aug. 9, 2008 11:10 AM PDT.
find that such a state constitutional amendment is worrisome to me--and I'm pro-life. I can see how an amendment like this could backfire, causing far more liability than benefit. It would be far better for those people to petition for equal rights for the poor, the uninsured, the undereducated,
Submitted by güzel sözler (not verified) on Tue Sep. 2, 2008 4:09 PM PDT.
very interesting subject but ı do not know much about it. Polar bear ıs in danger.
Thank you for promoting the personhood agenda here in Colorado! I am starting to store frozen embryos from the in vitro fertilization clinic where I work. Destroying them would be murder, which I certainly do not want to commit!
I am going to keep them frozen, since it is well proven that since they are alive when they thaw, they must in fact be alive when frozen. I have adopted 608 embryos, named them, and christened them all with full first middle and last names. The same pastor who married us performed the ceremony, being careful not to get our personhoods too warm with the holy water. She and her life partner from Massachusetts seemed to enjoy the day immensely. They were here together for our joyful day!
I have applied based on their personhood certificates, for social security numbers for each of them too. As a tender touch my partner (we're married women from Massachusetts, not recognized yet in Colorado, but sure to be eased by our recent adoption of 608 persons! ) made and put their little test tubes in hand knitted pink and blue 'socks' to put them back in the freezer. her knitting is getting so much better! The boys in blue are all together and the girls in pink are in their own little pink freezer, Another nice touch by my life partner. It really is quite a sight to see, and when the liquid nitrogen wafts up it actually brings tears to our eyes to see our little crop of personhoods. Our plan is to keep all of our personhood family frozen, most likely indefinitely since my partner doesn't like actual live children, besides with the cost of baby food, clothing, diapers, not to mention college, makes having actual live children near impossible under President McCain's continuation of our beloved W's policies, unless you have the salary of a vice president!
We are going to promote for the personhood amendment to be adopted in Alaska, home of our hopeful future VP, Sarah Palin. Once it does pass, along with having Mrs. Palin for president by then, (Poor John doesn't look too good these days) we will then move our whole family, all 610 of us, to Alaska. For one thing we'll save on refrigeration costs by having the personhoods freezers outside for winter! We imagine that personhoods will be cared for and their welfare assured by the state, so the Social Services department will undoubtedly want to see our freezer temperature records, to show that we aren't abusing the kids!
Then with the "Permanent Fund" proceeds, even if we only get $2500 for each person and personhood in our family, let's see $2500 x 610= $1,525,000 a year income for our family alone. We could live on that, my partner and I. As it is already today before personhood even takes effect, Sarah Palin this year alone gets $3258 per person for her 7 member family just for living in Alaska. Her daughter figured out she wanted some of that permanent fund money too, and is getting a father for her baby, how sweet, at least a father "on paper!" Did you ever see that Simpson movie about Alaska? He says that's where you can never be too drunk or too fat! Boy did he nail it!
So again, please go forward with this well thought out plan, and so every little egg that meets a sperm and finds him friendly, can become a full fledged and legally privileged personhood!
I'm sending a copy of this to the local papers to help spread the word for them too! Maria and Theresa
Defining fertilized embryos as "persons" would certainly complicate many issues. Consider taxation -- besides Maria and Theresa's Permanent Fund income, would pregnant women get additional deductions? Or representation -- would embryos have legal rights or influence apportionment of congressional seats?
But our nation has faced such difficult issues before, and we can look to our history for a solution. Both sides should compromise and count each fertilized embryo as three-fifths of a person.
replica watches
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon Nov. 23, 2009 3:29 AM PST.
replica watches Discount Watches, Fashion Watches, Wristwatch, Fake Watch, Wholesale Watches, Jewelry Watches, Replica Jewelry Watches. Replica Roger Ulysse Nardin Watches Replica Oris Replica Watches Dubuis Fake Omega is Baume & Mercier Replica Watches a growing Longines Replica Watches young Manufacture, Hublot Watches begun in 1995 Emporio Armani Watch Replica with Fake Movado Watches Replica Ebel Watches the Michele Wristwatch Fake Concord Fake Chopard Watch Replica Jaeger LeCoultre partnership of Replica Breguet Roger Parmigiani Watch Glashutte Replica Watches Dubuis and Carlos Fake Mont Blanc Watch Dias.Looking at the Cartier Fake Watches off-beat models Gucci Watch Audemars Piguet Replica designed by Carlos Fake Christian Dior Watches Dias one Replica Vacheron Constantin Watch can Fake Tissot Watches Replica Breitling easily TAG Heuer Wristwatch lose Swiss Fake Watch sight of the watchmaking prowess involved. Blancpain Ladies Watches The limited Roger Dubuis Mens Watches Maurice Lacroix Watches edition pieces and flamboyant designs Replica Bedat & CO Watch are all based Replica Seiko Invicta Watches Wristwatch on a foundation of Panerai Wristwatch solid watchmaking Replica Richard Mille Watch skill and in-house Swiss Army Mens Watches complications. Whimsical Technomarine Replica design is A Lange & Sohne Wristwatch the IWC Wristwatch hallmark Zenith Replica Watches Piaget Wristwatch of Patek Philippe Fake Watch Roger Dubuis. Just a decade replica watches old, Manufacture Roger Dubuis Replica Watch S.A. replica watches marries traditional and Replica Chanel rather complicated Girard Perregaux Mens Watches watchmaking with Raymond Weil Fake Watch irreverent Louis Vuitton Watch styling.
