E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSBy msnbc.com's Tom Curry
On Tuesday Mississippi voters will decide whether to approve a measure, Initiative 26, that would amend the state constitution to define the word “person” to include every human being “from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof.”
On the surface, it would seem to be a favorable advance for the cause of abortion opponents but the nature of the measure has sparked concern among some anti-abortion advocates that the passage of the measure could eventually threaten already-existing abortion restrictions.
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a Republican, told NBC’s Chuck Todd last week that he believes that life begins at conception but “unfortunately, this personhood amendment doesn’t say that. It says that life begins at fertilization or cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.” He said, “That ambiguity is striking a lot of pro-life people here as concerning.”
Nonetheless Barbour later overcame his misgivings and said he voted for the measure when he cast his absentee ballot in advance of Tuesday. He also complained Friday that a group opposing the ballot measure, “has called people's homes and deceived voters into thinking I'm opposed to Initiative 26, the Personhood Amendment. As I've previously stated, I voted for the Personhood Amendment.”
Opinion: Human rights for fertilized eggs? Initiative at odds with science
Despite his vote, Barbour was articulate in explaining why some anti-abortion advocates think the Mississippi measure is either misguided or may lead to unintended consequences.
He said, “Strategically, there’s some national organizations that think this may mess up trying to get more pro-life policies adopted nationally.”
He also said, “I am concerned about some of the ramifications on in-vitro fertilization (and) ectopic pregnancies, pregnancies outside the uterus in the Fallopian tubes. That concerns me, I have to just say it.”
Jennifer Mason, a spokeswoman for PersonhoodUSA, a Colorado group which is supporting the Mississippi measure, said its proponents “were able to answer his concerns and that’s why he voted for it.” Mason cited a study by a conservative group, the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, which determined that Initiative 26 would not outlaw in vitro fertilization.
A statewide vote has a lot of women in fear over the future of certain forms of birth control. NBC's Than Truong reports.
But, in an opinion piece in the Mississippi Business Journal, Jonathan Will, director of the Mississippi College School of Law’s Bioethics and Health Law Center, who opposes the measure, said “If two out of three pre-embryos are lost in the (in vitro fertilization) process, this would seem to be an unacceptable loss of life. If we are committed to pre-embryonic personhood, we should be committed to banning IVF and other similarly risky fertility treatments until such technologies are safe for all persons (including pre-embryos) involved.”
Prominent conservative lawyer James Bopp, who has argued several abortion and free speech cases before the Supreme Court and is the general counsel for the National Right to Life Committee, said that lower federal courts would be likely to strike down the Mississippi measure, if it were enacted, and that the Supreme Court would likely not review the lower court’s ruling.
But if the high court did agree to hear the case, Bopp said, there is a “very substantial danger” that a majority of the justices would adopt a stronger basis for finding that there is a fundamental right to abortion than the due process rationale Justice Harry Blackmun used in the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.
If that were to happen, Bopp said, the current state and federal restrictions on abortion, such as the Hyde amendment banning federal funding of abortions in the Medicaid program, and laws requiring parental notification before a minor get an abortion, would be swept away.
Bopp sketched out his concerns in a widely circulated memo, pointing to the argument that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg made in her dissent in Carhart v Gonzales, the 2007 decision in which the justices upheld the federal law banning the procedure known as partial birth abortion.
A constitutional right to abortion, Ginsburg said, ought to “center on a woman’s autonomy to determine her life’s course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature.”
Mason said Personhood USA’s lawyers think Bopp is wrong. “What we’re expecting to happen with the personhood amendment is that abortion will be made illegal in Mississippi. And that is what the pro-life movement has been working for since the passage of Roe v. Wade -- to ensure that all children in the womb have their personhood rights recognized…. This is a definite way to see some actual results.”
A ballot measure similar to that in Mississippi was rejected by Colorado voters in 2010. Proponents of personhood efforts plan to try to get the measure on the ballot in Florida, Ohio, Oregon and Indiana in future elections.
Updating with a comment from Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project:
She said the group is hopeful that "voters will reject this attempt to allow government to interfere in the most personal health care decisions of Mississippi’s women and families. However, should the amendment pass, all options are on the table -- including litigation. We will not stand by while thousands of women and families are placed at risk.”
Leave a Comment:
Wait until the airlines get wind of this. They can charge for two passengers.
Will these pregnant women be able to get in a casino? After all they will be carrying a person under the age of 21!
LOL that made my day! Especially the casino!
Aren't these idiots supposed to be working on job creation?
If this passes Mississippi may need a wire coathanger factory. Think of those job opportunities!
They are...don't you know how much care is needed for disabled and abandoned babies? - lots of jobs!
A couple come to the US on vacation from Europe (or Asia). They have intercourse in their Disney World hotel room on Wednesday night and go home on Saturday. Is the zygote (person) that was conceived an American citizen under the 14th Amendment even though his/her birth certificate will say the "birth" occurred 9 months later in Liverpool (or Calcutta).
People are important BEFORE they are born, not after. They don't need to worry about them after birth- the glory of Capitalism will allow them to become Millionaires!
So if you had a 13 year old girl, and she was raped, and she got pregnant.
Would you make your physically and emotionally immature, 13 year old carry her attackers baby? She may never be able to have children again. She may be scared for life. Oh, but I guess that fetus is more important than her right?
Because thats what this law will do. This law includes rape babies as "life to be protected"
Ha ha ha ha Mandy I agree with you, often my sarcasm doesn't read well without seeing my eyes roll or the tone in my voice! And I certainly hope that if they force girls and women into that situation it happens to their own!
I know where I'm building my group home for the disabled.
You ever notice how rightwingnut christians only want the government out of their lives but see no problem using the governemnt to interfere in someone elses lives? The next step will be the banning of birth control and sex except for the express purpose of procreation...isn't that what you nuts are really after? Ending sex except to carrry out the lords work or some BS like that?
To be fair the sign in the attached photo should also read:
"War kills chidren"
The pro-life people are only pro-some-life.
Don't know about any other guys out there - but I, for one, am damned sick and tired of these blow-hard preachers and preacher-wanna-be's - trying to get laws passed that are all about intruding upon a woman's body. Most preachers are uglier than all hell, and couldn't get laid even if they wore the paper sack. But still, the 'woman shall do' as they command.
Ya know what? Piss off, buddy. I don't need or want you or any politician or cop sticking their nose in my wife's vagina to see if anybody killed the egg. That is between me and her. It is OUR privacy...ya know..PRIVACY!!!
As for you - you want to come clean on all those hanky babies you tossed away?? Millions of sperm just killed - repeatedly.
Just go get a magazine and provide yourself a bit of relief - 'cause you are really wearing me thin.
Riddle me this? If abortion is not murder, why is a pregnant womans murder considered a double homicide? It can't be both ways. Either the fetus is a life or it is not.
Seriously? If a woman is murdered, that is not her CHOICE.
Not every states recognizes that a fetus is a victim in a homicide- 36 do. Next it's INTENT. If a woman intended to have that baby than losing it causes her harm as life wanted is now gone- therefore it's a homicide. Since the current law gives women the right to terminate a pregnancy of a unwanted fetus or embryo ti does not constitute as homicide.
The current law does not recognize a fetus as a baby until it can survive without it's mother out of womb.
How about a separation of church and state? Clearly, this issue is a biblical issue right? Please, keep your bible away from my body.
Chill Madge, it was a question. I can care less what you are anyone else do with your bodies. Inadaze thank you for your input! That was something that I have asked a few people and your the first one that answered without throwing a temper tantrum one way or the other.
@ Dog- it's a sensitive issue, this is deeply personal to me because while I would likely not get an abortion myself, the concept of the government telling me I have to give birth to my rapists baby or put my life at risk should complications arise during pregnancy is sickening. I am also extremely angry at the apparent lack of thought of what and how this law could affect everyone else- how it will be enforced and other unforeseen consequences.
@Inadaze, thank you again for your levelheaded answers!
We just passed the 7 billion mark in world population. Let's make sure that the women in Mississippi get to add a few thousand more to that number. I recommend that everybody who votes for this legislation agree to adopt and raise at least one unwanted child. But, of course, they see the results of their vote as someone else's problem and will simply turn their backs on them on their way to church.
Oh no-agreeing alleges CHOICE, something they are taking away. Instead they should be forced into adopting unwanted children and be taxed for their welfare. If churches can pour so much man-power and money into this campaign, imagine how much they could give to those kids that already exist!
If a zygote is a "person" does a pregnancy increase the population even before birth and possibly affect how many representative a state gets in congress?
So let me guess. They'll now tell the 8 month pregnant Mexican crossing the border that their kid isn't going to be a US citizen because she got knocked up in Mexico?
If this thing passes, all pregnant women should use the carpool lane. If an officer pulls them over, they should just show them the stick they peed on.
So if embryos, fertilized eggs, etc will have "personhood", what will that do to the census? Will they all have to be counted? Can the parents claim them as dependents? what will their address be And how will that affect the changing of the election districts?
Inquiring minds want to know!
What happens if Mississippi effectively bans abortion? Those who can afford to travel outside the state for abortions will do so. The poor will be denied, giving two main results: more harm from illegal abortions and more children born into poverty.
What happens if the US bans abortion? Those who can afford to travel outside the country for abortions will do so. The poor and lower-middle-class will be denied... and you can finish the story on your own.
Conclusion: You cannot stop all American citizens from having abortions with one law or one thousand laws. You can only, at best, create a legal-abortion-free underclass along with an massive increase in child poverty and, sadly, an attendant rise in crime.
As far as I'm concerned, a fetus is a parasite that must live off of the host (mother) up to the time that it can survive on its own outside the womb. Once it reaches that point, then it can be called a person.
So will we now have citizenship in the country we are conceived in?
After all, we are a "person" then. Does that mean we can get dual citizenship if we are conceived in one country and born in another?
Many bloggers seem to believe that the Citizens United decision last year was the first case to declare that corporations are “persons.” That is completely incorrect.
In an 1826 US Supreme Court case called United States v. Amedy, 24 U.S. 392 (1826), the US Supreme Court stated, “That corporations are, in law, for civil purposes, deemed persons, is unquestionable. And the citation from 2 Inst. 736 establishes, that they are so deemed within the purview of penal statutes.” Ibid. at 412. As Amedy shows, corporations have been considered “persons” for purposes of filing suits and being sued since at least the early part of the 19th Century.
What Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion in Citizens United did was to extend First Amendment protections of the political rights of persons to corporations. Just as persons may not be limited in how much they may contribute to politicians or political causes, corporations may not be limited either. And, just for laughs, corporations are entitled to the same anonymity as ordinary persons in contributing to non-profit political action committees. The upshot: corporations may contribute whatever amounts they want anonymously to political action committees, thereby assuring that the voices of wealth and power will be continue to be heard much more loudly by politicians than the voices of ordinary citizens.
Conservatives contend that’s not a problem because unions enjoy the same rights as corporations in this respect. Of course, such a position fails to reflect the reality that the power and influence of unions have waned considerably during the last 30 years of constant attack by our missing-in-action “job creators” and their political acolytes, the Republican Party. The assault on collective bargaining for public workers in Wisconsin is just the start on a broader attack on collective bargaining.
As a practical matter, Citizens United ensures that we will have a corporate oligarchy corrupting a representative democracy, a tyranny using paid-off politicians to conceal what truly influences their decisions. Did I happen to mention that some legal theorists regard Justice Roberts’ as our first and foremost “corporatist” justice?
In any event, there is no basis for believing the Citizens United had anything to do with declaring that corporations are persons—that had happened almost 200 years earlier.
Damn conservatives,I thought they were against government in everyone's personal life.Hippocrates.
Uh-huh. Yet more hypocrisy from the party that has made it their calling card. The right screams and stomps their feet and threatens to let the country crash if Democrats don't eliminate what they believe are government 'intrusions' - unless it suits their ideology. You can't have it both ways. You can't say less government on one hand and call for more government on the other.
This is an interesting debate. I am impressed by the civility shown on this
divisive and contentious issue.
The "conceptionist" implies that conception is similar to a
light switch. One millisecond in time
you have two separate genetic packages and one millisecond later they exchange
genetic payloads and you have conception.
When in fact the process takes several hours even days. Millions of sperm make their way up the female's
reproductive system. About seventeen
hours later one or two of them survives the hazardous journey and comes in
contact with egg.
The chemical changes that the sperm undergoes takes another
several hours before the sperm boy or girl can start to deliver their genetic
payload.
Is this the moment of conception? Because this process continues for several
days after the initial contact between sperm and egg.
Even as the egg starts its journey out of the fallopian tube,
the process of fertilization is still continuing.
And as many of you have noted, the egg sometimes fail to
attach to the wall of the woman's uterus and is expelled.
Today's technology can not answer the question at what specific
moment in time during the process; the male sperm completes the chemical
transition and completes delivery of the genetic payload.
What you are saying conceptionist, is that life begins at
conception, which occurs at some point in time after sex.
Any attempt to define the exact moment of conception will
have to be arbitrary.
I agree with "Most Americans" who feel that we don't want bigger government, and certainly don't want to give the government power to determine when a person should or should not bear children. I would also agree with "Most Americans" who believe that an acorn is not an oak tree, an egg is not a chicken, and a handful of seeds is not a marijuana plant.
On the other hand, I might consider that a zygote is already a person with rights, if the Conservative/Libertarian/Tea Party Koch-suckers will change the law to read, "A Corporation is only an Individual if it was initially incorporated by a zygote."
The late, great Senator Barry Goldwater (also known throughout his career as "Mr. Conservative" once said, "Religion has no place in public policy". The Republicans and those who hold them hostage want it both ways. If they were really true and honest conservatives, they would propose good, sound economic policies, stay the hell out of our bedrooms and private lives, and stop legislating morality.
You know what is really scary here? This includes conception by rape.
Oh, your 13 year old got raped by a man in a white creeper van? I'm sorry. But she has to carry his rape baby. I hope she enjoys her life and her new child.
Control their religion and you control their politics - especially in Mississippi.
Don't waste your resources on arguing logic. They take their instructions from the BigGuy who communicates directly to their Pastors.
You betcha it will pass, the Federal Courts will enjoin and the Supreme Court will decline the case. "Say what, you want to overturn Roe vs. Wade with this clever wordsmithing"?
Everybody is happy. What is your problem?
Control their religion and you control their politics - especially in Mississippi.
Is the government going to set up uterus inspection stations at the Mississippi state line. what if a woman from California goes to Mississippi and has a miscarriage, can she be tried for murder? That is why I suggest uterus inpection stations at all airports and all points of entry in Mississippi.
are they going to monitor every time a woman has sex? Because a lot of miscarriages or failures to implant happen without the woman's knowledge.
And they thought going through the body scanner at the airport was invasive!