Hold onto your hats, boys and girls. This is not a happy post. But I'd encourage you to read it anyway, especially if you're in the US. And
very especially if you live in Colorado. (I really hope this is coherent all the way through...)
I thought the new law in Oklahoma was bad.
Unfortunately I simply hadn't heard of
Colorado Amendment 48, which will, according to the state's constitution, define a person as a fertilized egg and grants it all the same inalienable rights as any human actually born into the world. (Not sure how I missed
ashfae's posts discussing this before, but she's got some good analysis on it whereas this is my kneejerk reactions.)
At first glance that just sounds like the usual pro-life position right? As I've said before, whatever position you take, the discussion of pro-life vs pro-choice is a valid one.
But this is so much more than that. And so much worse.
According to
Blogcritics Magazine:
Fertilization will be the new starting point of rights and privileges for U.S. bor… er, unborn citizens, so purging the unborn will now be known to the legal eye as “murdering.”
This amendment is the brain child of one Kristi Burton, who is part of a group ironically called “Colorado for Equal Rights.” According to the group, all abortion, even in the case of rape and/or incest, should not be permitted. Those are the so-called “hard cases” for abortion that even some pro-lifers agree should be allowed. According to some groups supporting 48, though, there are no “hard cases” for abortions ...
...
Possibly the worst part of the entire ordeal is the horribly vague wording on the amendment. Under its statute, even birth control will not be legal, as ejecting/destroying any fertilized eggs will be counted as murder. So the removal of abortion rights and the ability to use birth control will both be prohibited by this amendment.
...
If any of these unfortunate occurrences were to happen, Amendment 48 will strip all rights of choice away from the woman, even if she is not healthy enough to have a child. You read that correctly. Even if having the baby would kill the mother, the baby still cannot be removed.
I'm aware this is a blog, but google isn't turning up straight up news articles, so. Apparently the Denver Post came out against the amendment, saying "it would create an absurd and unworkable maze", but I can't find the original release.One of the scariest parts? Apparently it's
not getting the attention it deserves in light of the economy and presidential election. Basically people would be voting without noticing the broad sweeping implications this would enact. That's terrifying, given that there's plenty of people that would define life as beginning at conception/fertilization, but wouldn't necessarily apply all the rest.
There's more discussion of the legal issues at
LifeIssues.Net, about some of the problems with the vague phraseology as it would need to be applied. For instance, the fact that this would essentially make in vitro fertilization illegal while simultaneously opening the door to human cloning and the like (because a human created asexually would not be considered a person and therefore would not be eligible for things like justice or basic human rights).
The friend of mine who pointed this out to me (she lives in CO, and oooh is she riled up) brought up an interesting question:
Should a woman who suffers a miscarriage be charged with negligent homicide because she failed to protect a fertilized egg she may not have even known she carried? Should a man who fertilized an egg be entitled to file a civil lawsuit against a woman who miscarries, charging her with the wrongful death of his week-old fertilized egg?
So I wonder... If every fertilized egg is considered a full person, does that mean it needs to be registered with Social Security, or any other portion of local and federal government? What about people who have to take medications that could interfere with the reproductive process? What if a person has biological issues that make maintaining a pregnancy difficult, would it be considered manslaughter or murder because carrying to term was unsuccessful? What about people that have psychological problems, but are still functioning members of society that don't want to have children; are they relegated to using condoms when birth control is more viable and responsible and enjoyable? And seriously, what about people who honestly want to have a family of their own flesh and blood, and their only option is in vitro? Will coorperations looking to capitalize on stem cell research and human experimentation utilizing cloned organs/fetuses/etc be permitted to market their products, results, and cloned materials outside the state? What happens to under-age rape victims that run away out of state in order to have an abortion, can a lawsuit be filed against them by the father in Colorado? (I was yelling about more issues, but I've forgotten what they are now. ::sighs::)
It's also interesting to note that
Colorado Right to Life managed to split national anti-abortion groups, going so far as to challenge the National Right to Life's position (if I'm reading this correctly, they basically aren't anti-abortion enough), and also alienated the Catholic Church. Considering how conservative those groups are, how staunch in their positions, that's pretty damn impressive. It probably has something to do with the fact that they (CRL) view incest-related abortions as enabling the perpetrators of incest, as though forcing a young girl to give birth would prevent her from being molested again. As though the pregnancy itself won't be traumatic (in some circumstances).
(Oh, but
that's right the new amendment has
nothing to do with abortion. Riiiight. Just like it isn't impinging on the separation of church and state, not
at all.)
I just don't understand this level of... of
ignorance. I don't understand how you can claim to cherish life and have no compassion. And be that cruel. The complete disregard for personal freedom, the greed for power and control that has nothing to do with morality or ethics and is only thinly
thinly veiled in religious terminology... How the fuck did this even get to the ballot? I've got my fingers and toes crossed that this doesn't pass. Because while I'm sure there would immediately be a movement to have it stricken, that would still take time to work it's way through and go up for a vote. So much damage can be done in so short a time. And if it can pass in Colorado, God knows Congress is next. I have my doubts that such a thing could ever pass on the federal level, but there's more important things Congress should be focusing on. And if it did pass? Well. I'd have to promptly become an ex-patriot.
And now I'm devolving into babble, so I'll shut up. Just. Fuck it all, yeah? If you're in CO make sure to vote November 4, make sure to vote no to this damn thing...