North Dakota Personhood Measure Passes State House By Laura Bassett | HuffPost | 03/22/2013 4:02 pm EDT Excerpts: North Dakota became the first state on Friday to pass a fetal personhood amendment, which grants legal personhood rights to embryos from the moment of fertilization. The state House of Representatives voted 57 to 35 to pass the amendment, after the Senate passed the same measure last month. The measure will now appear on the November 2014 ballot, and voters will be able to accept or reject it. If it passes, it will amend North Dakota's constitution to state that the inalienable right to life of every human being at any stage of development must be recognized and protected. The amendment would ban abortion in the state, without exceptions for rape, incest or life of the mother, and it could affect the legality of some forms of birth control, stem cell research and in vitro fertilization. Similar fetal personhood initiatives have been rejected by voters in several other states, including Mississippi, one of the most socially conservative states in the country. North Dakota state Rep. Kathy Hawken (R-Fargo) told HuffPost on Thursday that she and several of her Republican colleagues strongly oppose the bill and are planning to protest it at a women's health rally on Monday. "I have so many friends with grandchildren from in vitro fertilization, and to take that away from these people who desperately want children is not okay," she said. "I believe if men had babies we would not be having this discussion." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/22/north-dakota-personhood_n_2934503.html?utm_hp_ref=politics ....... Again, North Dakota men with various agendas have zeroed in on the War Against Women and have passed a heinous bill to have the people vote on it in November 2014. In this nation of a majority of rational, adult people who realize that women are bright enough to make up their own minds, and who realize their rights over their own bodies, this cowardly subterfuge to get rid of full medical care for women is repulsive, draconian, and a great insult to all women. It will never be put into effect no matter what states do to try to put an end to full services to women who request it. Roe v Wade is the law of the land, and any attempt to force, criminalize it because of radical brainwashing will never survive in the courts of today. Certain states are hell bent to grab power of the government and use it in their own states contrary to the Constitution, which has designated the power of central government to run the country, make laws, declare wars, tax the people, and preserve and protect its citizens. Some radical groups want the power to return to the states, contrary to the Constitution, and will do anything to demand the power they seek when in every instance, states could never be autonomous in today's world of high finance, equality, and interstate commerce.
Roe v Wade ranks among the highest miscarriages (< no pun intended) of justice ever foisted upon the public by the SCOTUS. Right up there with classifying obscenity as speech.
I dunno why, but this thread reminded me of a story years back about a pregnant woman who claimed she could use the diamond lane on a freeway because her unborn baby counted as a second passenger! It was thrown out!
According to the wording of the "law" a pregnant woman could claim her fetus as a dependent on her income tax return (State, not federal).
I personally think this is a personal decision not a law. I know of a couple of cases where abortion was the right choice but as a birth control tool I am against it.
Another interesting thing about the new "law" is that it makes it possible for the cops to arrest any pregnant woman who engages in risky behavior, from drinking to speeding. That's because such behavior is endangering the life of a child. She could be charged with a felony.
We need state where the women in other states could see just how well these laws would work for them. Imagine the rapist mecca ND will become when rapists find that not only do they get to a woman pregnant, but she will be forced to keep the pregnancy and he can have no end of mishief making her life miserable. As if Repukes already had not done enough claiming a pregnant woman was NOT raped, or she wouldn't be pregnant. The deep seated hatred towards women by these people is sickening.
Women inthat state better get ready for this, too@ The "personhood" whackos claim ANY hormonal birth control, whether the pill, the implants, the injections ALL "magically" cause abortions, along with IUD's and cervical caps, can cause abortions! This has nothing to do with "saving children" and everything to do with controlling womens' lives.
I'm quite sure there are sincere people in North Dakotastan absolutely convinced that GOD wants them to make mandatory personal decisions for others, but not vice versa. I doubt you could find a single individual in the state who would want the government making such a decision for them, against their will. God could not possibly agree with anyone else's opinion.
It saddens me to see so much of the Empty Quarter swallowed up by hard-right politics. Even a decade ago this never would have made it to the floor.
Yes, that is the motivation of many rapists, or at least puts the icing on the cake to leave their baby in their victim's belly so she can NEVER forget his torture, use and abuse. It delights them tah all her friends coworkers and family will KNOW, if they are Religious Right or Conservatives, that she is a slut.
Not even in the case of rape or life threatening pregnancy? I'm more middle of the road when it comes to abortion. I don't think anyone should get an abortion because they had an accident, but rape or life threatening pregnancy? Screw that sht...
Hmm , but don't liberals want to control how much soda a women puts in her body ? Why can't she control her own choices ?
States' rights. About the only time progressive leftists wrap themselves in the 10th Amendment is when states violate federal drug and immigration laws....with most everything else, they're howling "Supremacy Clause" or "Commerce Clause"..... Duplicitous bunch, they.
...the nub of that agenda being the right to life as expressed in our Declaration of Independence, have protected that unalienable right. Most states have constitutionally validated laws the prescribe severe penalties for murder or injury to a baby in the womb. ND is extending this protection. The conflict can be logically argued in court. .
This fails an important test of logical consistency. If your intention is strictly to punish an irresponsible woman with a baby (to semi-quote Obama) then your idea makes sense. If you intend to protect nascent life in the womb then it's massively flawed. The baby's right to life isn't dependent upon its conception circumstances. That right is stand alone. I'll be the first to admit that there are political realities that might require a compromise to make forward progress but don't start with a flawed rationale.
I'll have to disagree with you. If my daughter gets brutally raped, she's getting an abortion. And if the states doesn't allow for it, then ill kick the s*** out of her stomach. Unless she kills it herself (which she likely would.) She's not having that child. I don't care what anyone says on either side of the paradigm. And that's the bottom line. Now, if she runs off and willingly has sex with some punk and gets knocked up, then that's her fault for being stupid, and she should keep the baby.
I hope you understand that the fundamental portion of this position is to punish your daughter, not respect life. If you get that then we're done here. All is clear.
She's punishing herself by making an irresponsible decision. People should take accountability for their actions.