Mississippians are voting today on Proposition 26, a very dangerous ballot amendment that, if passed, would define life as beginning at the very moment of fertilization. It’s part of a national campaign by a Colorado group called Personhood USA, which wants to get all 50 states to define a fertilized human egg as a person.
What’s even more dangerous is that there are people in the N.C. General Assembly who would support such a legislative atrocity. (Calling Rep. “Skip” Stam . . .) The goal of the legislation is, of course, to ban abortions, and even ban some types of birth control (not to mention that it would turn specific religious beliefs into laws, thus creating one more instance in which religious fanatics tell everyone else how to act). The latest polls show the state’s citizenry is evenly divided over Prop 26.
The New York Times describes the consequences of passing the proposition:
The amendment in Mississippi would ban virtually all abortions, including those resulting from rape or incest. It would bar some birth control methods, including IUDs and “morning-after pills,” which prevent fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus. It would also outlaw the destruction of embryos created in laboratories [thus affecting some attempts at in vitro fertilization].
The man who drafted the proposal is the infamous Les Riley, who, as TalkingPointsMemo puts it, “has a long and colorful history in the fringes of right-wing politics.” Riley, it turns out, was part of the “Christian secessionist” group Christian Exodus, which tried to get all “right-thinking” Christians (i.e., demented zealots) to move to Greenville, S.C. He is also chair of something called the Mississippi Constitution Party, which says it wants to “restore” the government’s “Biblical presuppositions.”
There are approximately 200,000 jokes one could make about Riley and his crew, and about the extreme right’s disconcerting success in even getting such claptrap onto a state’s ballot, but here’s the bottom line for me: In most civilized countries, these modernity-challenged throwbacks have been tossed onto the trash pile of history. So, for the love of God, country and family, why do we still grant any legitimacy to these sad, scared people?
Here, as a blog bonus, are more thoughts on Proposition 26, some original and some from the comments section of TalkingPointsMemo:
* It’s like saying that those eggs you ate this morning were chickens.
* Or that the pile of wood in your back yard is actually a house.
* If this passes, it will require every miscarriage to be investigated as a homicide.
* How can a clump of cells that only has a 75% chance of making it through three months before it miscarries be considered a person?
* Someone should file a writ of habeas corpus for all the frozen embryos.
* Will pregnant women be able to take a tax deduction for that dependent “person” inside them?
* So, since under U.S. law corporations are “persons,” does this mean that anytime someone starts up a small business, it is automatically a corporation?
* If an illegal immigrant couple conceive, is their fertilized egg a U.S. citizen?
* If it passes, will the drinking age be lowered by nine months?
* Does this mean we all have to change our birthdays to whenever our parents had sex to create us? Because I don’t really want to know.
* How about “it’s none of your business”? How about butting out of women’s medical decision, unless you want them to review YOUR records for treatments they find objectionable?
This article appears in Nov 15-21, 2011.
You people are anti-life.
Actually, the eggs in grocery stores are not fertilized. If they were, you’d actually see a little chicken in there starting to grow. Eggs sold in grocery stores can’t be fertilized. That’s sorta the law.
Liberals are morons. They wave around “women’s rights” when it comes to taking the life of a child and then take to the streets with candles every time a scumbag gets the death penalty.
They believe that cows and chickens have some sort of rights, but protecting an unborn child just doesn’t rank up there with a cause to stand up for.
Clueless.
You were that clump of cells that you claim only stood a 75% chance. Are you human?
If that thing you call “blob” contains 46 chromosomes then it’s a human embryo.
If it doesn’t have any chromosomes it’s probably a tumor…
Ummmm hello there where’s all the common sense…. you intellectual behemoths
Google “chicken balut” if you want to see what makes fertilized chicken eggs different from the eggs you ate this morning.
Look, here’s the deal. Like it or not, abortion takes the life of a child. Whether or not it’s alive or not, you are preventing life. You are killing a living thing.
If you support a woman’s right to do that, you are supporting her “right” to take a life.
The question of when life begins is irrelevant. I choose to stand up for unborn children.
There are a lot of bad analogies in this article giving the previous commenters something to crow over. Doesn’t change the fact that the proposition is absolutely backwards, terrifyingly intrusive, and unconstitutional.
You are a twisted, sick individual. As a man, why are you so angry about something that has to do with women, not you?
Look, you religious nuts – stop shoving your beliefs at me, because my beliefs are based on science and not an old book. Abortion isn’t taking the life of a living thing, there is no life or soul in that tiny clump of cells in a pregnant woman – until a fetus is viable, it is NOT a human. If you don’t like abortion, don’t get one! But since we are SUPPOSED to have SEPARATION of church and state, you are NOT supposed to be able to tell me what I can do with my body.
Thanks for a great article John.
I’m glad I don’t know you, it has nothing to do with separation of church and state. You need to grow a brain. A life is a life. Abortion is taking a life. End of story. Don’t turn this into something that it’s not about. You shouldn’t have sex if you don’t want to get pregnant.
I don’t see religion involved here, it’s all scientific for those who knows biology.
What separates us human beings from other blobs or fetuses ?
Chromosomes……. 46 of them…. go ahead count them before you abort… if could be your future hero !
Y’all claim that imposing this belief- which it is, since nobody has either proven or disproven that life begins at that point (how is it measured, etc.- all of that depends of beliefs)- would not violate the first amendment. That’s simply ridiculous. Unfounded beliefs of any kind have no place in the law.
The first amendment protects your right to religion and religious practices, but it protects at the same time MY right to not have those practices placed upon me. Until you are able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that “life begins” at that stage of development- at what point does a cluster of cells become a human?- you are not able to impose that belief upon me or anybody else.
In response to that person who said “You are a twisted, sick individual. As a man, why are you so angry about something that has to do with women, not you?”: You know what? You’re right. Abortion has only to do with women. A man is never involved in the creation of a child. In fact, why would men ever bother to think about that aspect of life? We’re not involved; we play no part.
Oh, wait. Sperm is required to form a child. Child-bearing couples are often if not always made up of a man and a woman. How interesting.
Beyond that simple fact, the implications of your comment are seriously disgusting. How about rape, for instance? I as a man am not allowed to get upset about rape, since it is something that only happens to women- and if a female that I know happened to get attacked and raped, I wouldn’t be able to provide care, be worried, or try to be there for her. It didn’t involve me; I’m not a woman; why should I care?
Unfortunately, while abortion is something that is only ever performed on women, men are intricately involved in the situations. It would not be necessary in the absence of sperm, which to the best of my knowledge is only produced by men. Being a bigot will get you nowhere; I hope you take some time to think through your comments before you leap in the fray and attack people simply because they happen to disagree with your BELIEFS.
I would feel a little more for the fervent pro-life commenters here if any of them were consistent with their beliefs. Who knows, maybe some are.
If you identify as a pro-lifer, I would expect that you would be anti-death penalty. I would expect that you would be anti-war. I would expect that you support funding all programs that benefit unwanted children and orphans as well as assistance for single or impoverished mothers. I would expect that if you hold the beginning growth of cells, even without brain function, as sacred as a fully-developed human being, that you would also find just about every other equally-developed life form on this planet equally sacred. Therefore I would expect that you are anti-euthanasia and probably should even be anti-meat.
However I know that the most die-hard pro-lifers are that way not from a well thought-out philosophical standpoint, but from the religious and political “team” they root for and are spoon-fed by.
When life begins is a question no one can answer. Ancient Hebrews believed humans existed in sperm and the womb was merely an oven. Henry VIII killed too many women because he did not understand, even with his scholarly background, that HE determined the sex of the child, not his wife or consort. This is a women’s issue and male opinions are just that. There is a world of difference between anti-abortion and the right to life. If we were truly concerned with the right to life, we would be forced to mitigate capital punishment. In addition, the right to life movement only cares about the unborn fetus. Once the fetus passes through the birth canal, both neonate and mother are on their own with no right to lifers in sight!
What I really like among some of the commenters here is their literal take on a joke, with arguments about whether eggs are ever sold fertilized, etc, etc. These are jokes, people, they’re not meant to be taken literally. God-a-mighty, just the fact that this has to be explained says more than I want to know about America’s overall education level. These nuts are friggin hilarious and don’t even realize it, which makes it even funnier, but also kind of pitiful.
Just to be clear on my feelings, no, a first trimester abortion does not kill a living human being. Sorry, but no one will ever convince me that a lizardy-looking zygote is a human being — it’s a potential human being, sure, but there’s such a thing as “reaching full development,” which certainly doesn’t take place at 10 weeks, much less at one minute! What is wrong with these people!? I can’t make up my mind whether the anti-abortion extremists are stupid beyond all comprehension or merely lunatics. What do you folks think?
Thank you John Grooms. People don’t seem to understand that these laws really do have bad effects. Women in Mississippi are already fighting a steep uphill battle. Let’s refrain from rolling a big rock down that hill onto them.
I truly can’t fathom how people are actually considering passing this proposition.
It doesn’t matter if you consider the fetus a “person” or not. If I met a random person on the street who was dying, I would not be legally obligated to support that person in any way. So why should a woman be forced into allowing her body to be used to sustain another “person”? Call it a cluster of cells, a person, whatever. Let’s take a look at the dictionary definition of a parasite:
1. An organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host’s expense.
2. A person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.
No matter how difficult this may be for some of you to swallow, a fetus absolutely fits the definition of a parasite. No one is forced to donate blood, or bone marrow, or a kidney for the sake of saving some else’s life. So why should anyone be forced into letting another “person” live off their nutrient uptake?
Don’t think of abortions as “killing babies”. Think of them as “removing persons from a woman’s uterus”. And hey, if once removed, that person is unable to survive, tough luck.
And to the person who said “you shouldn’t have sex if you don’t want to get pregnant”, you probably aren’t getting any, are you? Go get laid and maybe you’ll have a different perspective.
As was once done with slavery, pro-choice folks treat the little human as property, not a person. “A person’s a person, no matter how small. -Dr. Seuss” It’s a human liberation issue. Give a voice to the voiceless in the womb. “We are here, we are here, we are here, we are HERE!” -Horton Hears a Who
Everytime I look in the mirror and I see the clothes hanger scar on my forehead, I thank God that mom didn’t have the legal right of “choice” back in 1961, or she may have been successful!
Abortion is a complicated issue. I do think there should be access to abortions BUT abortion is an awful thing that should NEVER be celebrated as the left does. The chicken egg analogy is about the single dumbest thing I have ever read on here. Grooms once again shows off his very over simplistic mind.
Oh and one more thing Grooms…..you fool. Now you try to pass the chicken analogy off as a “joke”. You weren’t joking. You know it was a stupid idiotic analogy and now you say its a joke???? You are even dumber than I gave you credit for. So how many other of the bullet points at the end of your article are “jokes”? Are they all jokes or were you trying to make a point? You are a pathetic excuse for a writer. Creative Loafing should be embarrassed by you. Speaking of jokes….you are ONE BIG JOKE.
Thanks so much for throwing up your bile on this website, Super Chuck 2 (a cool name, to 6-yr-olds). Yes, Superboy, several of the bullet points *were* jokes, albeit darkly humorous. Sometimes dealing with you social conservatards is nothing if not sadly funny, thus the jokes. As I wrote earlier, “just the fact that this has to be explained says more than I want to know about America’s overall education level. These nuts are friggin hilarious and don’t even realize it, which makes it even funnier, but also kind of pitiful.” Frankly, I thank God every day that not all readers are one-note dullards like my good personal friend Super Chuck 2 (seriously, that probably IS a really cool name to most 6-yr-olds).
You are a complete waste of humanity Grooms. You write an entire article that is a joke? About abortion? Seriously? If in fact you were joking, your jokes are not even slightly humorous. Maybe that is why lots of people don’t recognize them as jokes because jokes are usually funny. Only a complete immature, unintelligent, self absorbed, mentally disturbed person would think abortion is something to crack jokes about. But you prove your lack of intelligence with every article you write and every comment you post. Once again the only joke is you.
I figured it was obvious to everyone that this was a satirical piece that didn’t make fun of abortion but made fun of the right-wing Neanderthals trying to impose their beliefs on the rest of the country. But after reading these comments, especially those by Super Chuck 2, it seems that some people somehow thought this was all done in absolute seriousness? Really? Lines like “If it passes, will the drinking age be lowered by nine months?” didn’t tip you off? Can people really be that thick?
To answer Grooms’ question: “I can’t make up my mind whether the anti-abortion extremists are stupid beyond all comprehension or merely lunatics. What do you folks think?” Maybe a bit from both columns?
And there is the typical crybaby liberal response…..”right wingers trying to impose their beliefs on the country”. That is such a weak argument. In a lawful society one side always gets their way. In a society with rules and laws one group of people always has their views “imposed” on society. Get over it. Furthermore, I know most of you libturds have a hard time with reading comprehension. But did you even read what I wrote? I said I am FOR abortions to be available YOU IDIOT. I said abortions should not be a joking matter or celebrated as you left wingers do. I don’t find anything about the article funny at all. Only you left wing loons could find humor in abortion.
Libturds! Super Chuck 2! My, what a mature adult we’re dealing with!
Again, read the column and read my comment. Abortion isn’t the laughing matter; right-wing politicians are the joke. Talk about a hard time with reading comprehension…
And abortions aren’t being “celebrated” (what an idiotic notion); they’re merely being protected under the law. (Ever heard of Roe v. Wade?) As you say, one side gets their way, but the right doesn’t particularly like this way. Well, in your words, get over it.
In response to Clint’s question, “Can people really be that thick?” I can only say, “Unfortunately, yes.” It’s not a surprise, though, from someone who would actually want to sign his posts as Super Chuck 2. My guess? Some young so-called “libertarian,” a cult that personifies the adage “A little knowledge [in this case the emphasis is on ‘little’] can be a dangerous thing,” and from which this city suffers in abundance.