Feminist gaming blog with a heaping dash of science and politics

Dear Mississippi, your Amendment 26 scares the ever-loving crap out of me

Final Update: Thankfully the Personhood Amendment was defeated in Mississippi by a vote of 58% to 42%. It’s a narrow margin, but it is the result of the hard work and sweat of the grassroots activist and local women that turned the tide. They were up against PersonhoodUSA and its rich backers who poured outside funds into the state to try to get this bill passed. The local activists had scant few weeks to break through PersonhoodUSA’s flood of misinformation and propaganda, but they did it. And in doing so they protected not just the rights of women and pregnant people in Mississippi, but in the rest of the US as well. We can’t relax just yet though, PersonhoodUSA has got similar Fetal Personhood bills working their way onto the 2012 ballots in California, Nevada, Oregon, Montana, and Florida. And to add insult to injury, Republicans in US House of Representatives are trying to introduce and pass Fetal Personhood bills as well. We won this fight, but the War on Women still rages on.

* * *

No, seriously, it does. These “Fetal Personhood” bills are terrifying.They’ve been introduced in Ohio, Colorado, Louisiana, and other states, but they have all, thankfully, been voted down by the populace. This year, however, there is one being introduced to the Mississippi ballot and it is expected to pass. Let me repeat that, this horrible, terrifying piece of legislation is expected to pass. And once it’s passed, the bill’s sponsors expect it to be challenged in court and for it to go all the way up to the US Supreme Court and overturn Roe v. Wade, overturning nearly 40 years of feminist progress. This bill is terrifying to me. However this may seem like no big deal or maybe even a good thing for those of you out there who don’t know what Fetal Personhood bills are or who have only heard the anti-abortion rhetoric that glosses over the real ramifications of these types of bills. Please believe me when I say that this is indeed a big deal and that it is also most definitely not a good thing. Allow me to explain:

What is Fetal Personhood?

To begin with, we need a little background information on what Fetal Personhood bills are before we can get into what effects they will have on our country. Most Fetal Personhood bills read something like this:

“The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.” — from Mississippi Amendment 26

Short, bittersweet, and to the point: these bills rewrite all existing laws, statues, mandates, and rulings so that the term ‘person’ applies from the moment of conception (i.e. when the egg and sperm fuse together, fertilization) onward. Morula, blastocysts, zygotes, embryos, and fetuses would all become legal persons under the law. Attempts to get these bills on the ballots are cropping up in all 50 states, pushed for and funded by Personhood USA, a political organization whose express goal is to see Roe v. Wade overturned. It is amazing (and, again, terrifying) that such a small bill could radically change our society, but it is undeniably true that granting personhood to fetuses would have far-reaching ramifications.

The Immediate Consequences of Fetal Personhood Bills

This bill is designed to do one thing very well: ban all abortions. That’s right, ALL, no exceptions for rape, incest, or even health and life of the mother. It doesn’t matter if your 5 weeks along with no house, no food, no partner, no healthcare, no job, and no way to afford a baby or 24 weeks along with a life-threatening complication, your right to an abortion that would save your life or livelihood has been taken away. Even if you’ve found out you have an aggressive form of cancer that can only be treated with chemo that would harm the fetus your carrying, you’re out of luck because, again,  your right to an abortion has been stripped away. Banning abortions puts women’s livelihood, health, and lives at risk.

Of course, banning abortion does not stop women and pregnant people* from seeking out the procedure, it just forces the desperate to try dangerous self-abortion methods or rely on abortion providers who lack the medical training and resources to provide safe abortions. We would find ourselves going back to the days of back-alley abortions, pre-Roe, where 5000 women died annually from unsafe, illegal abortions. Compare that to when abortion is legalized and can be done in a clean, safe environment by trained staff, where the death rate is just .06 per 100,000**.  Making abortion illegal KILLS women and pregnant people by the thousands.

Secondary Consequences

The language of this bill was purposefully left very vague, as such it will do far more than just outlaw abortions. Some of these consequences may or may not have been intentional by the bill’s designers, but all of them are very real possibilities if a Fetal Personhood bill is passed.

Because the bill grants personhood at the moment of conception, there is the distinct possibility that most forms of birth control will be banned, including all forms of hormonal birth control (the Pill, the Ring, the Patch, Depro Vera, etc) and IUDs. Even though the hormonal methods and IUDs primarily work by preventing ovulation or making the uterus inhospitable to sperm (thus preventing fertilization) there is also the possibility that they can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. If a Fetal Personhood bill becomes law, that would be defined as murder and thus those forms of birth control could become illegal. The only remaining forms would be barrier contraceptives (such as male and female condoms), spermicide, withdrawal, and fertility-awareness methods, all of which are among the least effective forms of birth control. To add insult to injury here, the outlawing of the most effective forms of birth control will cause an increase in unplanned pregnancies, which will in turn cause an increase in demand for dangerous illegal abortions. Women and other people capable of being pregnant will always have a need to control their fertility either because they don’t want more or any children, want to space out their pregnancies to keep their bodies healthy, don’t have the resources to care for a child (or another one if they already have some), an existing condition makes pregnancy exceedingly risky for them, or for any other of a number of reasons. Again, I stress, taking away access to birth control and safe, legal abortion puts people’s livelihood, their health, and even their very lives on the line.

Since this bill grants personhood at fertilization, anything that stops embryonic or fetal development would be considered the death of a person. This opens up the very real, very scary possibility that miscarriages and stillbirths will need to be investigated as potential homicides. I know that seems far-fetched, but there have already been cases of this happening in many states, and that’s even without the impetus of a fetus being legally considered a person. Laws that were originally designed to protect pregnant women from assault and to give them some form of redress for the loss of their fetus are now being turned on the women themselves, and would be with even greater force and frequency if Fetal Personhood becomes law. Grieving mothers would be subjected to murder investigations and allegations that they caused their miscarriage with their reckless ways. Of course, reckless becomes very subjective when it comes to the myriad of reasons why pregnancies might miscarry and can mean anything from drinking coffee, sodas, or alcohol, to taking illegal or legally prescribed drugs, to smoking, to wearing heels and falling down, to being over or underweight, to having a diet not high enough in nutritional value, to not explicitly following doctor’s orders, to not taking enough prenatal vitamins, and who knows what else (and all of this can apply even before you knew you were pregnant). Also, since all of these actions would now be tantamount to child abuse or child endangerment, law enforcement and agencies like CPS would be able to intervene in any number of ways to protect the ‘person’ residing in a pregnant person’s womb, up to and including arrest and forcible medical action (if you think this is an absurd impossibility, it’s actually already happening).

The Extreme Consequences of Following This Bill’s Logic to Its End

As if a huge death-toll from back-alley abortions, or manslaughter charges for stillbirths and miscarriages, or the loss of the most effective forms of birth control weren’t enough, this bill could give license to the government to take things even further. The big question is if Fetal Personhood is enacted in only one or a few states, how are they going to keep pregnant people from going across state lines to get abortions in the next state over where a fetus is still just a fetus? Will there be border patrols and checkpoints in Mississippi forcing people who appear to be women in their child-bearing years to take pregnancy tests? Or would it be easier to just track pregnant people with some form of electric monitoring like they do with criminals on probation or under house-arrest? But then that requires that the authorities already know that the person is pregnant, most likely through a doctor’s appointment. Will doctors now become agents of the state, reporting to authorities who is and isn’t pregnant and thus needing to be monitored? That, though, would make women who have unwanted pregnancies highly unlikely to go to the doctor. Thus, the only way to really ensure the protection of fetal ‘persons’ is to electronically monitor all people who have the reproductive capacity to bear children. Of course, their movements and locations wouldn’t be the only things tracked, forced pregnancy tests would need to be frequently taken from the age of menarche to menopause to ensure no ‘person’ comes to harm through negligence or intentional harm (i.e. illegal abortions).

This is the Reality of this Bill

I know all of this sounds like some fever dream of an anti-choice dystopia, but this is a very possible reality that we, as a nation, are facing. Fetal Personhood is not just an attack on abortion, but an attack on all reproductive choice and reproductive freedoms. The right to choose when you become pregnant, by whom you become pregnant with, how your pregnancy progresses, and how you are allowed to act during your pregnancy will be stripped away if this bill becomes national law. Which, make no mistake, is the end goal of Personhood USA, the organization behind the Mississippi bill. This does not just threaten to turn the clock back 40 years to the times before Roe v. Wade became the law of the land, but creates an even more inhospitable climate for reproductive freedoms by outlawing the most effective forms of birth control and criminalizing pregnancies that don’t end in a full-term birth of a healthy child.

Abortion is not something that anyone takes lightly, it is not done for kicks and giggles or for funsies. It is a medical procedure that is vitally necessary for both wanted and unwanted pregnancies. As both a medically indicated, life-saving procedure and as an elective one, it keeps people and their families safe, happy, and healthy. Reducing the rates of abortions can be a very laudable goal because no one wants to find themselves in the emergency room with a very much wanted pregnancy quickly going south, and no one wants to find themselves stuck between having a child they may or may not want and losing out on life-goals or time and resources for the family they already have. The solution however is not to ban abortion or make it difficult to obtain legally, because like I said earlier, that does not actually lower the rate of abortion, it just increases the complication and death rates from it.Instead, if we really want to lower the abortion rate, we need to work on the underlying issues that cause people to seek them out: we need birth control that is more effective and readily and freely accessible; we need healthcare that makes pregnancy and child-birth affordable; we need affordable child care and stronger parental leave policies; we need more comprehensive sex education; we need more medical technology and knowledge so we can put an end to life-threatening pregnancy complications; we need a culture and law system that actually deters rape and incest; we need many things in this country that could and would reduce the abortion rates, but not one of them makes abortion illegal or hard to obtain.

So please, Mississippi, do not pass this awful bill. Fetal Personhood is not pro-life, it is not small government, it is not pro-family. It is very much anti-family, anti-life, anti-woman, and a step towards big, intrusive government. This bill, and all others like it, put government officials in the middle of the medical decisions of private citizens and puts the lives, health, livelihood, and freedoms of women and pregnant people on the line. Everybody in this country needs to speak out against this bill and its counterparts wherever they may rear their ugly heads. For our mothers, sisters, daughters, aunts, nieces. For our fathers, brothers, sons, uncles, and nephews. For our friends, our families, our freedoms. Do not pass Amendment 26, the Personhood Amendment.

For more information on how to help stop this bill, go to or their facebook page.

*It’s not just women that can become pregnant and thus are subject to the consequences of this bill. Abortion is also an issue that impacts transmen, as well as intersex and genderqueer people. Reproductive rights are not just a women’s rigths issue, but a human rights issue.

**That is, by the way, 11 times safe than carrying a pregnancy to full-term, which is, again, why abortion should remain legal, because pregnancy can put people’s lives in danger.

Update 1: Mitt Romney, and other Republican presidential candidates, have voiced support for a federal Fetal Personhood amendment to the Constitution. They also, conveniently enough, tend to gloss over or be ignorant of the fact that this would ban hormonal birth control (or any of the other consequences I outlined above). Check out this Rachel Maddowsegment for more info on this.

Update 2: The National Advocates for Pregnant Women, working with local activists in Mississippi, released this video that explains the harmful effects Fetal Personhood laws have on pregnant women who wish to carry their very much wanted pregnancies to term. Amendment 26 is not just an anti-abortion, it is anti-reproductive rights including the right to give birth free of medical and legal coercion, the right to not have invasive surgeries forced upon your body, and the right to not have your own life sacrificed, against your will, for a dying or dead fetus.

Update 3: More evidence that access to birth control would be on shaky ground if Amendment 26’s  Fetal Personhood became law. If the proponents and main backers of this bill are so unsure if birth control will be illegal or not, then you can sure as hell bet that the question will have to be tackled by the state government. By the way, Republican controlled legislatures and conservative politicians have had a pretty sketchy record lately of protecting women’s rights to birth control, reproductive healthcare, medical decision making, or bodily autonomy and self-determination. Do not trust the YesOn26 proponents when they guarantee you that hormonal birth control, IUDs, IVF, or miscarriages will not be criminalized because those topics aren’t specifically mentioned in Amendment 26. It is precisely because of the amendment’s vague language that we face the reality of birth control being considered a lethal weapon and women being prosecuted because they suffered a miscarriage.


14 responses to “Dear Mississippi, your Amendment 26 scares the ever-loving crap out of me

  1. Dee October 19, 2011 at 4:02 pm

    So… considered emigration yet? O_o

  2. Cluisanna October 19, 2011 at 4:09 pm

    Truly shocking, but wonderfully said! I’m going to add this article to my list of articles I refer to because they put it better than I can 🙂

  3. emkfeminist October 23, 2011 at 9:46 pm

    Hey! I was directed here from Shameless Self Promotion Sunday on Feministe. Yes, yes, and YES to everything you’ve written! I found your post to be extremely well-written, clear, and thoughtful. I agree with all of your points, especially regarding what social issues we need to focus on if we want to lower abortion rates (in other words, why do people seek abortion in the first place?).

    I live in Canada so I’m a little more removed, but the Conservative politicians here keep rumbling about “reopening” the abortion debate (as well as about a million other terrible things I vehemently disagree with).

    Anyhow, thanks for this — great job! 🙂

  4. AK October 26, 2011 at 9:27 am

    A lot of your information is misleading.

    • Zaewen October 26, 2011 at 11:44 am

      On the contrary, that video is the only thing misleading around here. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you actually read my post in which I debunked most of her ‘facts’ instead of just seeing the highlighted words and going “Oh God, someone who doesn’t agree, must use propaganda!!” Just in case though, let me match actual statistics and true stories with her ‘facts’, some of which have a grain of truth to them but are wildly misleading or twisted into lies:

      Claim: Women die from abortions.
      Fact: True, women do die from legal abortions at the rate of .06 per 100,000. Women also die from childbirth at a rate of 7.06 per 100,000. Having a legal abortion is safer than birthing the child.

      Claim: “Will the Personhood amendment overturn Roe v. Wade? This is about Mississippi…”
      Fact: She’s sidestepping the issue. This amendment is not about Mississippi, it is most certainly about overturning Roe v. Wade. Personhood USA, the main sponsor of the bill, states as much on their website: “If the [Supreme] Court considers the humanity of the preborn child, it could end this age-based discrimination and restore the legal protections of personhood to the preborn.” Their main goal is to see a Fetal Personhood amendment passed, be legally challenged, and go all the way up to the Supreme Court where they hope it will overturn Roe V. Wade.

      Claim: Fetal Personhood will not ban the use of hormonal contraceptives.
      Fact: This is both true and a lie. It is true that the bill itself will not ban hormonal contraceptives, but then again its true that the bill itself will not outlaw abortion, its the logic and the spirit of the bill that does that. The logic and spirit of the bill is also what will almost inevitably lead to hormonal birth control being banned. Like I said up above, although its not the main way that hormonal birth control works, there exists the possibility that they can keep a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. This will be considered murder or manslaughter under Fetal Personhood and thus would be illegal. This includes the Pill, the Mini-Pill, the Patch, the Ring, Depo Provera, Norplant, IUDs, Plan B, and the Morning After Pill. RU486, which is not to be confused with any of the above despite what the woman in the video says, is one of the drugs use for medical abortions and would be banned by the bill.

      Claim: It will not end IVF.
      Fact: Again, this is not delineated within the bill itself, but if you follow the logic of the bill, yes IVF will become much more difficult, dangerous, and prohibitive. Fertilized eggs will not be allowed to be frozen or destroyed and all must be implanted and cannot be selectively reduced through abortion. This means that for each round of IVF a new batch of eggs must be harvested which is a painful, invasive, and expensive procedure. After that each egg that successfully fertilizes must be implanted, so doctors have to choose between attempting to fertilize several eggs and risk forcing the mother to carry to term a multiples pregnancy (which tend to be very risky and complicated) or attempt to fertilize only one or two and risk having to go back through the egg harvesting procedure. So yes, it will probably still be available, but only for the richest among us and at a much greater bodily risk.

      Claim: It will not keep doctors from saving the life of the mother.
      Fact: Doctors are not allowed to kill one person to save another. If a woman comes in with pre-eclampsia, toximia, an ectopic pregnancy, or any other of a myriad of complications a doctor will either have to wait for the fetus to die before attempting to save the mother with an abortion or (if past viability) will have to attempt to deliver it through C-section or induced labor, both of which will put the mother’s already distressed system at a higher risk of complication and death. Fetal personhood does interfere with the sound practice of medicine by putting limits on what a doctor can do to save the life of an already born, independently living, cognizant person

      Claim: Miscarriages will not be prosecuted.
      Fact: Again, this is not within the bill itself, but if you follow the logic of the bill the door is open for this to become reality. Miscarriages and stillbirths are already being prosecuted under feticide laws in states that do not legally consider the fetus a person. If Mississippi passes Fetal Personhood then anything that stops fetal development will be considered murder and will open the mother up to a criminal investigation that can result in charges ranging from child abuse and neglect to manslaughter to homicide. It does seem silly and cruel, but it is the reality of this bill.

      Claim: Rape and incest exceptions are not needed because women enjoy having their rapist’s child.
      Fact: This is a cruel lie. Some women may find carrying the pregnancy to term fulfilling or give them a sense of closure. For others, and most likely most women, having their bodily autonomy and right to self-determination stripped from them by their rapist was violation enough. Having the state repeat that violation of their bodies and their rights by forcing them to carry the product of that rape in their bodies and give birth to their rapist’s child is unconscionable. It should be the woman’s choice as to what to do so as to best protect her physical and mental health in this situation and in every other pregnancy.

      Claim: We shouldn’t worry about healthcare costs because babies are blessings.
      Fact: Personally, I am a-ok with that statement when it is applied to wanted pregnancies, healthcare costs should definitely not have to be a factor in determining whether or not to keep a pregnancy. The sad reality, though, is that for poor people and families pregnancy and childbirth (let alone raising a child) can be too expensive to make keeping the pregnancy feasible. Of course, that’s not what the woman in the video was talking about. She was talking about healthcare costs to the state and rising premiums. Well yes, those would go up because suddenly insurances, both private and government funded, will have to cover the costs of taking care of the aftermath of illegal abortions and the huge upswing in numbers of pre-natal appointments and childbirths (remember hormonal birth control got banned). Preventing unwanted pregnancies saves money to the tune of $1 spent on prevention saves $4 down the road in medical costs. There’s also wrongful death and malpractice lawsuits that doctors will be opened up to with all the new confusing ideas surrounding life-threatening pregnancy complications to consider. Oh, and the costs to the state to pursue outlawing hormonal birth control and investigating miscarriages. So yes, this bill will be very expensive for the state to enact.

      Claim: A woman’s right to choose is outweighed by a fetus’ right to life.
      Fact: This is actually a conflation of ideological and legal viewpoints. The appropriate ideological argument is actually between a woman’s right to bodily autonomy and the (religious) belief that a fetus has the right to life. A woman’s right to choose is the legal compromise that lets those who weigh their bodily autonomy and right to self-determination above the idea that a fetus has the right to life to choose abortion. Meanwhile those who believe that a fetus has the right to life are free to choose to go to term with their pregnancies. To legislate that a fetus has a right to life, that it is a person, is to legislate a particular religious belief. Also, while I’m sure anti-choice activists could wrassle up someone that claims to have thought they were aborting something akin to a clump of skin cells, that is not nearly the case with most all women who get an abortion. To claim that women do not understand that they are terminating a pregnancy, a potential child, is to claim that women are inhumanely stupid and incapable of making decisions on their own.

      To summarize: Fetal Personhood does not create a culture of life. It creates a culture of heightened maternal death, dangerous back alley abortions, and criminalizing pregnant people. Fetal Personhood is not good for the babies or for the mothers. It will create families that have too many mouths to feed with missing mothers due to either incarceration for a miscarriage or from dying from an illegal abortion or pregnancy complications (maternal mortality increases with the number of pregnancies a mother has carried). I know a lot of this seems far-fetched and impossible. Trust me, I do, but it is the reality of Fetal Personhood. It’s what the logic behind this bill dictates should happen.

  5. jo October 29, 2011 at 1:39 am

    Hmm a lot to think about.

  6. AK October 30, 2011 at 7:52 am

    In response to your analysis of this video, I don’t necessarily agree with your multiple statements beginning with “I know this isn’t stated in the bill, but it’s in the logic of the bill.” If it’s not stated in the bill and their sitting there saying those things will NOT happen, then why would that ever become a reality? I agree that politicians can be very misleading and bills passed could one day be interpreted in many ways, but your thoughts behind what they could do with hormonal birth control and miscarriages seems REALLY far fetched, and I don’t think they would ever go that far because they know the outcomes it could produce. Almost all hormonal birth controls do NOT allow an egg to be fertilized. They give the body the impression that an egg was released (while it wasn’t), and then the uterine lining flushes out of the system. So I cannot see how they would ever be able to construe this bill to one day forbid use of all hormonal birth control. Yes, if they did that, the world would be in a lot of trouble due to overpopulation. I agree with this. I’m just not sure this bill would do that.

    Also, I cannot see how miscarriages could EVER be made to look like a criminal issue on the part of the mother. SO many women have miscarriages and it’s unavoidable! (unless, of course, a woman makes an effort to cause a miscarriage… then that could be an issue?)

    And then lastly, I don’t see the conversation of whether a fetus is a real person as a religious issue, if there is a beating heart. I see it as very scientific. It doesn’t make sense to me that a baby could be “not a person” inside a woman’s stomach, but then immediately when it comes out, it is a person. If there is a beating heart, then it is a person! And the issue does not revolve around what a woman has a right to with her body, the issue is whether or not you can kill a life, and unfortunately that involves the mandate that women carry a baby to full term. But I can’t see any other way to handle it. If we have a national law that you cannot kill someone, a moral law, then the idea behind banning abortion seems to go along with that law. Where I can see the religious/scientific debate is whether a fetus is a life before there is a heartbeat. And yes, that could be a religious opinion. So I guess being a religious person, and viewing a life beginning at conception, how can I go against any law that would help protect those lives? It’s like morally in my own head, its not a religious decision. Once someone comes to the conclusion that life begins at conception, and you are a person who values life and believes lives shouldn’t be taken because of OUR decision (abortion, death penalty) then I feel morally wrong not trying to protect those lives.

    I do not know everything about this bill yet, so I’m not sure if I will vote for it if it ever is presented to my state. I am hoping to find more concrete facts about the stuff that everyone is “wondering” about. If your statements about miscarriage and ALL hormonal BC were true, then I could never vote for it. BUT, I cannot fathom those statements ever being true.

    • Zaewen October 30, 2011 at 2:01 pm

      I don’t necessarily agree with your multiple statements beginning with “I know this isn’t stated in the bill, but it’s in the logic of the bill.” If it’s not stated in the bill and their sitting there saying those things will NOT happen, then why would that ever become a reality?

      The initiative says simply that a ‘person’ should be defined as all human being from the moment of conception/fertilization. Technically abortion is never mentioned within the amendment but we can all understand that it is designed to outlaw abortion because the logic of the bill says that embryos and fetuses are person and killing a person is against the law. The bill does not do anything on its own other than change the definition of person in the Mississippi constiution and laws, which means that every single effect the bill will have will have to be drawn from conclusions about its logic. Since the bill’s logic says fertilized eggs are people, then anything that harms a fertilized egg or stops its development (i.e. kills it) will be considered illegal just the same as abortion. This can mean birth control will become outlawed because, while it is scientifically proven that the main mechanism of birth control is to completely prevent ovulation and to make the uterus inhospitable to sperm, there is the outside chance that the thinned lining of the uterus can cause a fertilized egg to fail to implant properly. This, by the bills logic, would be the killing of a person. This fertilized-egg ‘killing’ mechanism of birth control has never been scientifically proven to take place, but government policy is not always based on scientific evidence just look at the War on Drugs and abstinence-only sex education, among other things. There is a strong contingent of conservative politicians that do feel that birth control is tantamount to abortion, especially with things like the Morning After Pill or Plan B, and that beleif is very strong among the right-wing extremists and fundamentalists that make up organizations like Personhood USA, the main backer of this bill.

      As for the criminalization of miscarriages, I cannot stress enough that this is already happening in this country in many different states, none of which have the impetus of a fetal personhood law declaring fetuses persons that can be killed. (Seriously, go read those articles I keep linking on the issue if you haven’t already) Yes, it seems far fetched, yes it seem cruel and an inhuman thing to do to a grieving mother, but it is already happening and will happen even more frequently in Mississippi if this bill becomes law. Again, its not said in the bill itself (just like abortion isn’t mentioned), but following the logic of the bill, anything that brings harm to the fetus is tantamount to child abuse and anything that stops its development is murder or manslaughter. If law enforcement is ready and willing to use feticide laws (that were meant to give women and families an avenue to punish a third party that caused their miscarriage) to put women in jail and prosecute them as murders for miscarrying, then they will be just as willing to use fetal personhood laws to do so as well.

      With regards to your last point, I don’t want this to devolve into that particular debate, so I’m going to leave it as is. I’d rather this discussion focus on the bill itself and what ramifications it would or would not have, not whether abortion is morally right or wrong and who’s rights trump who’s.

  7. Angel Schmermund November 4, 2011 at 9:10 am

    Good post good information

  8. mombis November 8, 2011 at 3:36 pm

    First of all , God makes persons. He says if an innocent human being shall die, not you, not government not even the mother. If you continue to think that man is God and is the giver and taker of life you will will be very surprised hen you stand before the King of Kings to answer for your choices and decisions and wht u supported on this Earth. I would recommend you rethink your position on the murdering of Gods innocent children before that day my friend, I absolutely assure you He will call u to answer. Man wants to keep God out,, He made you!!!!!!!!

    • Zaewen November 8, 2011 at 5:32 pm

      Hmm, I don’t think your God and my God are the same gods. But, hey, that’s why we have Freedom of Religion and Separation of Church and State as ideas enshrined into our secular, human-made United States law system. You keep on believing in your God and following His rules, and I’ll keep on believing in mine and following my God’s teachings. Neither of our religious views should be written into law because you shouldn’t be forced to live by my religious tenets and I definitely shouldn’t be forced to live by yours. Fetal Personhood laws, though, are most definitely religious ideas codified as laws and are thusly un-Constitutional.

%d bloggers like this: