Oh, yeah...no doubt about that. Contraceptives have come a long way since it was a personal concern for me. So many options are now available. Though this measure isn't clear, I've heard nothing from its sponsors that there's any intent to ban contraception, except for RU486. If this measure passes (and indications are that it will), the sponsors will work with the legislators to craft specifics that will spell it out. Even though Mississippi is a conservative state, I don't think there would be support to ban hormonal contraception or IUDs.
Sadly, for the "pro-lifers virtually ALL of those options are ABORTION to the "pro-lifers". They HATE birth control in ALL of its forms, and many desire to ban ALL OF IT in any way possible. FOr an example, this is the backing organization of a Personhood amendment in Montana. http://www.all.org/nav/index/heading/OQ/cat/Mzc/id/NjgxMA/ PART ONE is about hormonal contraception: PART TWO - I am going down their list of other contraceptives. I omit their description of the particular process, but am including their conclusion of the particular contraceptive's "abortifacient" nature. Spermicides and condoms are NOT considered to be causing abortion! So, enjoy your spermicide and condoms, folks!
Actually this should be entertaining See I realise what most, particularly American, Pro-lifers do not. Legislation surrounding abortion is most commonly not worth the paper it is printed on. Too strict and it becomes almost an excuse to lock women of child bearing age into purdah. Allow for any degree of a health clause or leave it open in relation to substances which may or may not cause abortion and you open a flood gate to allow medical abortion They are on a hiding to nothing with this but they do not realise it.
RU-486 is not a contraceptive, it is an abortion pill which can be used up to 7-8 weeks gestation. The "morning after" pill, or emergency contraception, is contraception. If this bill passes, a fertilized egg is considered a person, and sponsors and legislators have no authority to decide that a fertilized egg is only a person in certain circumstances, they are bound by the law as anyone else is. Hormonal contraception or IUDs could cause the premature deaths of "fertilized eggs" and will therefore be banned, and that is the INTENT of those pushing the bill.
I think I mentioned to you before that I see problems with this legislation, too. Many times a bad law can be worse than no law. I am sympathetic to the pro-life issue, but am not sure this effort will work out. Yes, I realize that about RU486. Perhaps I wasn't clear, but that would be the only thing that I've seen that would be prohibited. The options that are considered contraceptive would not be banned as I understand it.
The real issue is we have no clear understanding of what is and what is not an abortifacient, There is some evidence that Paw Paw (AKA Papaya) is an abortifacient - will Mississippi be banning women from eating Paw Paw???
All I can tell you is this - a couple of Sunday's ago a bunch of us went to lunch after church, and amongst our group was our state representative. I questioned him about this topic - because I find it fascinating - and I'm merely repeating what he told us. According to him, there are no plans to outlaw contraceptives. If the law passes, the legislature has bigger issues to worry about to make the law operational - most specifically the issue of residency. A huge portion of the state's residents live near Memphis, TN, or New Orleans, LA. If a female Mississippi resident discovers herself to be pregnant and goes to Memphis for an abortion, has she committed a crime? Will Mississippi women be legally permitted to leave the state to have an abortion? Will she have to leave the state for a specified time - say three months - establish residency in another state, have the abortion, then return? Or consider this - You and Mrs. Mertex are driving from North Carolina to Houston. You spend the night in Meridian, Mississippi, begin feeling amorous, and do what married couples do. Three weeks later Mrs. Mertex discovers herself to be pregnant. Since the actual conception occured in Mississippi, does the child have "rights" under Mississippi law? Is the child legally a resident of Mississippi because conception occured and its life began in Mississippi? That's why I say, they've no plans to outlaw contraception - they've bigger issues to deal with. BTW - He's where I got the "bread dough" analogy from.
Good article. It is hard to believe how supporters of this bill are willing to ignore or pretend to not understand/believe that certain BC pills actually cause abortions (even though an article from a pro-life group spells it out). They seem to think that because the bill doesn't spell out that certain contraceptives, because they cause abortions, would stand scrutiny once this bill is passed, that those against the bill are just trying to instill fear in them.
I know there are no plans to outlaw contraceptives - duh! However, it is not up to to your state representative, the ones formulating this bill will move to their next step - if their agenda is to prevent abortions. How can you think that those who are aware that BC pills cause abortions are going to sit idly by while these pills continue to be on the market? That may be another thing to consider. If abortion is illegal in Miss, and women from Miss are going to other states to have them done, will they be able to come back to Miss and not face some charges? Will women who have miscarriages be suspect of willingly doing something to miscarry? Whoa! I don't have a Mrs. Mertex, I am Mrs. Mertex. I seriously doubt that anyone is going to try and figure out where an egg has been fertilized - as it is, it is pretty confusing to try and figure out when a woman actually became pregnant, unless, of course, she doesn't have sex too often and is able to pin it down to the exact day/night. There are so many issues to deal with in considering a zygote a person, that I don't think they could possibly take care of all of them in one bill - which is why I think it is a waste of taxpayer's money. Yeah, right now, there may not be any plans to outlaw contraceptives, but keep in mind, those that are legislating this bill know exactly where they want this bill to go - and I have no doubt that if they consider the fertilized egg to be a person, anything that prevents it from living, is considered pro-abortion and I seriously doubt that they will sit idly by. I don't think his analogy would be acceptable to many pro-lifers, as I understand, most of them believe that life begins at conception - which had always meant when the sperm fertilizes the egg. I realize that some are now claiming that life doesn't begin until the egg implants itself in the uterus, but regardless - some BC pills cause the uterus to become inhospitable to a "fertilized" egg, which this bill considers a person, and by all accounts is an abortion. Bread may not be bread until it is baked in the oven, but if you are comparing that to a "person", one could claim that a fertilized egg is not a person until it starts looking like a person.
My apologies, I thought you were Mr. Mertex... I understand where you're coming from, and I agree - somewhere down the road the legislature may try to outlaw contraception. But, as it stands now, they've no plans to do so. From what I got from talking to my legislator, they've simply got bigger issues to deal with - trying to write a law that will pass the legislature as well as withstand a court review for its constitutionality. There are the residency issues to resolve, as well as what, if any, action should be taken regarding a Mississippi woman who has an abortion. Is an abortion to save a woman's life (ectopic pregnancy) legal? Plus, there's a question as to whether or not the amendment is "self-executing" - does it change the Mississippi law, or does it require the legislature to enact the law? BTW - I've no idea whether or not this will pass. I've looked at Zogby, Rasmussen, and Gallup, and can't find any poll results.
It is even more complicated than that - think on those times when the woman's life is not "endangered" but her health certainly is. I am talking about things like cardiomyopathy related to pregnancy. May not kill her outright - might just leave her with a heart so floppy that she cannot move from a bed to a chair without gasping for breath - but hey! She is still "alive"
Sounds like your legislator doesn't know where this bill stands, it is supposed to go to the vote next Tuesday, as it is written. And, FYI, Personhood USA is the one introducing this bill and they've made no qualms about what they are after. Personhood USA Confirms that Mississippi Abortion ban would outlaw birth control pills Even the Governor of Mississippi (Republican) thinks the wording on this bill is vague and broad - and may have negative impact on women's access to health care and their rights. The hard right is gathering strong behind Mississippis personhood amendment and their goal of criminalizing abortion and outlawing contraception. But there may be a few cracks in the shell. Yesterday, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) expressed significant concern over the bills very broad, and very vague, language, telling MSNBCs Chuck Todd that he may not vote for the bill due to its ramifications on womens access to health care and maybe even their rights. The Personhood USA campaign, (snip) was quick to attack Barbour, pointing out that Barbour took campaign contributions from pharmaceutical companies Monsanto and Pfizer, companies that both manufacture the abortion bill. (snip) reveals the larger, more terrifying problem for conservatives (let alone women) in this debate: deviation from the agenda is simply not allowed. Barbour noted his concerns surrounded the fact that there are at least four ways an egg can be define as fertilized and the Mississippi bill deals with only one. The others, which can result in life-threatening medical conditions for women and ban in vitro fertilization procedures for couples trying to conceive. He did so while reiterating that he firmly believes life begins at conception and would normally support a personhood bill and he was still attacked by Personhood USA. When Barbour is attacked by the anti-choice community it is clear there is no possibility for a sane, rational debate, grounded in science, about this bill. And that right there should tell you what the real agenda behind the egg-as-person movement is all about. Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/barbour-may-vote-against-mississippi-personhood-bill.html#ixzz1cmESpk88
What will happen when a woman has an ectopic pregnancy? The egg is already fertilized, but unless it is taken out it can kill the woman. Yet this bill does not make exceptions for cases like these. Are these people coming up with this legislation insane? I'd hate to think that the women in Mississippi are that inane, to think this bill is good for their state and for them.
The ways that pregnancy can and do go wrong are legion. All you ever have to do is look at a country like Sierra Leone and the horrific maternal death rate of one in eight women http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-...leone-quothuman-rights-emergencyquot-20090921 But the radical right would rather try and "save" make believe "babies" (remembering 50% of fertilised eggs never implant in the first place) than put one cent towards the women of the third world
If this a perfect world was and we really believed in GOD. Don't, which you think that we would have followed the requirements. We function like Christians, but we are mainly wolves in the sheep clothes, and our Ministers or church leader specify the same problems them swarrn at the GOD, in the name JESUS of the CHRIST. Not all, but I call a liar, if one me explained a sin, designating me from the meeting, then must I specifies, explains, why people the sins to specify and fame fall below. They follow satan' S-plan, to not to say you the truth on the real reasons of, why they try to up-succumb to guidelines obligation of the sex. The leaders, that try them to up-succumb them break it. It is always human nature to, not to word of God to hear since the beginning. After the case of Adam and of Eve, our sins are, mostly as God them asked to multiply and be many. This at the beginning Man took it where satan helped.
