They require it if you, by law, declare a fertilized egg a "person". Because this Personhood Amendment would declare a fertilized egg a "person". They require it if you, by law, declare a fertilized egg a "person". What don't you get about the ramifications of declaring a fertilized egg a "person"? If this law makes no difference, why is it proposed?
Are you being purposely obtuse, trying to be funny or really can not understand what the proposed laws means, because it is glaringly obvious who is looking less than smart?
They require no such thing, obviously. Non sequitur. Nothing important. Who the hell said it makes no difference?
If lifers didn't wish to control the reproductive systems of women, why do they insist on trying to shove through anti choice laws?
From Public Policy Polling.com -- It's going to come down to one thing tomorrow - voter turnout. The voter demographics for Mississippi break down as -- 18-29 - 19.9% | 30-44 - 27.3% | 45-64 - 34.0% | 65+ - 18.8% Male - 42.6% | Female - 57.4% White - 61.2% | Black - 36.9% | Hispanic - 1.0% | Other - 0.9% Mississippi doesn't have voter registration by party, but the numbers of people who identify themselves as belonging to a political party are -- Republican - 47% | Democrat - 38% | Independent/Other - 15% I think Prop-26 is going to pass tomorrow - not by much, but I think it will pass.
The truth comes out. In spite of its supporters' claims that Initiative 26 would not threaten women's lives, or make some contraceptives illegal, we learn that is precisely the goal. http://www.peoplesworld.org/initiative-26-life-threatening-proposition-for-mississippi-women/
We can only hope that should this pass into law SCOTUS will quickly deem it unconstitutional for the sake of all women of reproductive age that live there. =(
YOU! This law makes a fertilized egg a "person" under the law. Yet YOU say this new "person" will have NONE of the rights and treatment under the law that CURRENT persons do! But that is NOT what this law says!
If it bans birth control like the pill, women will just go to their doctor and get it anyway. You can't ban it, many women take it for medical reasons.
If this law passes tomorrow - and I think it will - there are going to be oodles and oodles of issues the Mississippi legislature is going to have to work out. Issues of residency - Can a woman in Mississippi leave the state to have an abortion? If so, is there a certain time frame that she must remain out of state? Is a fetus conceived in Mississippi a legal resident of the state? Issues of birth control - What, if any, forms of contraception will be unavailable under the Personhood amendment? Issues of unwanted pregnancy - Will the state allow abortion in cases of rape and/or incest? Will the state allow abortion in the case of an ectopic pregnancy? If Prop-26 passes, it's going to get really interesting here in the Magnolia State!
If this passes, and nothing is then done to stop it, the people should abandon the state on-mass, letting it sink into extreme poverty, with the closing of businesses, transfer of all that money, and income, taxes, etc, out of the state. It will either die, or fundamentalist Christians and the like will move there, being a win-win for the rest of us.
I hope it does pass... the things coming out of Hollywood are boring, and I need a good reason to pop some popcorn and watch the festivities.
If it passes, the lifers will congratulate themselves for asserting their control over women. I propose a law that says it is illegal for a man to have sex without a condom. Such a simple law, but it would cause outrage among men, angry that women would dare try and control what they did with their bodies. Well, now you know how the women feel...
I don't think so. WIth fetal homicide laws and the unborn victims of violence act making Roe more and more questionable, this may bring some reason back into abortion laws.
Except fetal homicide law have nothing to do with abortion. This proposition is nothing more than religious zealots attempting to impose their ignorant views on society.
Of course it will be struck down.. The state controlling the reproductive AND medical choices of women is a human rights violation.
Well Margot, we'll just have to wait and see. There is a large group of people that thinks that Roe v Wade is bad law - that there is no "right" to abortion, and that the SCOTUS overstepped its bounds when it legalized abortion. If Prop-26 passes today in Mississippi, it will doubtedly find its way to the SCOTUS. If there is a majority of conservative judges on the SCOTUS at that time, it wouldn't surprise me a bit to see Roe overturned, the "right" to abortion withdrawn, and the legalization of abortion returned to the states to decide individually whether or not they wish to allow it. Personally, I think that is the motivation behind the "Presonhood Amendment" here in the Magnolia State - eventually overturning Roe and making it a state issue. Although I'm begrudgingly pro-choice, I could live with that - some states allowing abortion, while others don't. BTW - For the record, when I when to the polls this morning, I didn't vote on Prop-26 - I skipped that page. I don't have a uterus, it's not my decision.
Wait and see indeed.. Federal law supercedes state law when they are in conflict. Mississippi can't take away human rights.
You're right - Mississippi can't take away human rights. But the SCOTUS can, especially if they rule there was no "right" to begin with. As I said, that's where I think this is going...
So, being a resident of Mississippi, how has it been over there concerning this proposed law? I am next door in Louisiana and I didn't even know about it till I read it here. You think it will pass? How blown out of proportion is it on these boards compared to the more rational debate going on locally there?
