JACKSON, Miss. — Mississippians could redefine the national abortion debate if they vote Yes on a ballot initiative this coming Tuesday. But some Catholic and pro-life leaders are warning that passage of a personhood amendment could harm pro-life efforts in the long run.
The initiative would legally define the term “person” as including “every human being from the moment of fertilization.”
Proposition 26 has garnered a lot of national media attention, including some international press, because it is likely to pass in this highly pro-life state, and, if so, it would be the first successful referendum of its kind.
A grassroots effort led by Les Riley collected more than 130,000 signatures from registered voters, nearly 40,000 more than was necessary and only the fourth successful ballot initiative in the state’s history. The amendment is endorsed by both the Democratic and Republican gubernatorial candidates, as well as Attorney General Jim Hood, a Democrat, who promises that, if adopted, he “will defend it if challenged.”
Personhood petitions are active in all 50 states, according to Personhood USA in Arvada, Colo., but ballot initiatives and legislative efforts have thus far been unsuccessful.
Voters in Colorado rejected a 2010 personhood initiative, and a ballot initiative in Nevada was struck down by the court as being too vague. Legislative efforts in several states, including North Dakota and Montana, have not gone far enough to pass into law. The Mississippi ballot initiative was unsuccessfully challenged by Planned Parenthood, the ACLU and the Center for Reproductive Law & Policy in the lower courts and lost an appeal to the state Supreme Court by a vote of 7-2.
“We’ve been sued in pretty much every state where we’ve been active. This is very common for us,” said Personhood USA’s director, Gualberto Garcia Jones. “Planned Parenthood says they trust Mississippi families, but they sued twice to prevent Mississippi families from ever voting on this. It’s a heated battle.”
Stephen Crampton, general counsel and vice president for legal affairs at Liberty Counsel in Tupelo, Miss., who defended the case in Mississippi courts, expects that if the amendment passes there will be an immediate federal challenge on the basis that it’s contrary to Roe v. Wade. That has not deterred his enthusiasm, and he is astounded by the discussion that’s taking place.
“It’s already been an eye-opener, and we’ve already accomplished something by awakening folks to the reality of the [abortion] situation. We’ve had high-level medical experts debating which contraceptives operate as abortifacients. Abortifacients? Even the Mississippi section of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and Mississippi State Medical Association concede that life begins at fertilization in their position papers addressing these amendments,” said Crampton.
“It is a wonderful opportunity for the state Legislature to rethink what we really need to do in recognizing this simple truth that this is fully human and fully alive from that moment of fertilization, and do we not have to do everything in our power to protect and nurture that new life?” he asked.
Wake Up Mississippi, organized by the Jackson Women’s Health Organization, has sponsored billboards urging people to “Vote No on 26,” claiming on its website, “If passed, Personhood Amendment 26 will not only ban abortion but also ban most [if not all] forms of birth control, end in vitro fertilization, and make stem-cell research illegal. In addition, women who miscarry will be subject to criminal investigation.”
Bishop’s Warning
The amendment has already been catapulted onto a national level, with some Democrats warning that Mitt Romney’s support for such laws make him a threat to “women’s health.” In early ctober, the former Massachusetts governor and GOP presidential candidate said he would “absolutely” support a constitutional amendment that would establish the definition of life at conception.
Some pro-life leaders and groups have not endorsed the personhood efforts, claiming it could result in a serious setback in efforts to overturn Roe v. Wade, particularly at the U.S. Supreme Court. The Diocese of Jackson is asking Catholics to study the issue and decide for themselves how to vote. A statement released by Bishop Joseph Latino upholds the Church’s defense of human life from conception to natural death and its efforts to promote a human-life amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
“While we sincerely respect the goal to amend the Mississippi Constitution,” the statement reads, “if such an amendment were to pass, we are convinced that a federal district court would strike it down based on Roe. This decision would undoubtedly be affirmed by an appellate court, and the case would either not be granted further review by today’s U.S. Supreme Court, or worse, lead to a reaffirmation of Roe. The unintended effect would very likely jeopardize current protections in state law and cause a loss of momentum in the ultimate goal of establishing full legal protection of the unborn from the moment of conception.”
Don Nelson of Nevada LIFE, which opposed the personhood initiative in Nevada, said the amendment “could be dangerous. There are not five justices on the court that will go along with this, and it could cause greater damage by getting to the court and failing,” he said. “In the past, we have not supported efforts like these because we don’t think they will succeed and present greater harm to the movement.”
Nelson adds that the number of children born per thousand is up and the number of abortions per thousand is down, which shows a change in the country.
“All the regulations and laws that we put in place that are changing the attitude of the American people and that have saved maybe millions of unborn children from certain death could be put at risk by the personhood strategy,” said Nelson. “The bishops have been very brave for going out and opposing these strategies.”
Precedent in Racial History
Though frustrated by the diocese’s refusal to endorse the ballot initiative, Garcia Jones, a Catholic, said Personhood USA did not provide negative comments on competing pro-life strategies. “That doesn’t help the movement, and it’s the attitude we would like others to have, too.”
Perhaps one of the most compelling arguments in favor of personhood comes from the Rev. Walter Hoye, who is leading the effort to pass a human-rights amendment in California that would define not only the personhood of the unborn, but also the elderly and disabled, and has garnered support from Protestants and Catholics alike.
A black man, Hoye has repeatedly traveled to Mississippi to tell his great-grandparents’ story to African-Americans in the state and make a connection between racism in the segregated South of the 20th century and ongoing resistance to the personhood of the unborn child.
The Ku Klux Klan came one night and surrounded the house of his great-grandfather in Macon, Ga. They lynched him and committed unspeakable crimes against his great-grandmother, lit the house on fire, killing seven of their 14 children. His grandmother’s oldest sister, Annie, saved six of the kids while on fire herself and was not allowed treatment in the local hospital or justice from the local sheriff or a judge.
“Even in the early 1900s, black folks were still considered property, not persons,” said Hoye. “I share that story, and, when I do, communities of color instantly resonate with it. We understand what it’s like not to be a person. Personhood is the final chapter in the civil-rights movement. I’m hoping they vote Yes on Amendment 26 on Tuesday, and I’m hoping California will be the second state.”
Register correspondent Barb Ernster writes from Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Edward Pentin: Images of Rome's 2013 March for Life
Comments
Post a Comment
I do not follow the thinking of those opposed. We do not have five Pro-Life justices on the Supreme Court? Okay, but if Obama is re-elected we still will not. If he is not re-elected, even if a Justice like Ruth Bader Ginsburg resigns before her term is up, there will not be time to confirm her liberal replacement. If a Republican wins the presidency, he will nominate someone for the Court like a Scalia, Thomas, Roberts or Alito. Are we content with the status quo: over one million abortions each year? What direct, focused, intense, forceful measures are the Catholic Bishops of Mississippi taking to make sure that the consciences of the Catholic faithful in Mississippi are properly formed in order to vote for Pro-Life candidates and against culture of death candidates? To anyone advocating that we wait, that now is not a good time, I suggest he read Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.‘s “Letters from a Birmingham Jail”.
http://www.rpconradio.com
Oh great! Now the women of Mississippi will just be the baby farms for the men in power. Aside from dismissing the personhood of women and their right to make decisions about their bodies, will this vote require Mississippi to actually provide decent education, a humane living standard and access to vital health care necessary for these children AFTER they are born?
We will go down, as the group who has as dogma, life beginning at conception and that to be protected and seen as a person, who took no stance. The irony. I have played it so many different ways and so many different times that even if all it does is define in our state constitution when life begins…how on earth could we not support our fellow Christians in this. The Bishop must see something we are not because I dont see SCOTUS getting any better. So what if it doesn’t win. WE, in the state of MS, who are mocked for being fat, unhealthy, have gotten one thing right…when life begins. This really kills me we are not supporting this as the Catholic community.
We do not need a repressive form of Christainity using big brother
State or Federal Government passing Sharia equilvalent laws.
Christian Conservatives and the Catholic Church are bent on taking our persoanl freedoms away. (Sharia Islamist or Christian equilvalent)
You know what? It may not be the perfect time, but I say go for it. If we fail, we fail. But what if it stands? What if, by some miracle, it stands?
“If passed, Personhood Amendment 26 will not only ban abortion but also ban most [if not all] forms of birth control, end in vitro fertilization, and make stem-cell research illegal. In addition, women who miscarry will be subject to criminal investigation.”
This is shameful scare tactics on their part. There may be some kernel of truth to the implications here, but not by any means all of it. Note the refusal to distinguish between adult and embryonic stem cells. And I do not know a single pro-lifer or looks at a woman who has miscarried, or even a woman who has aborted, and thinks “Let’s put her on trial. Great idea!”
Personhood is trying to submit a similar amendment to the Ohio constitution. But this was result of submitting it to the attorney general to get it approved.
“Patrick Johnston of Personhood Ohio said Wednesday that the group will change the amendment to say it won’t affect contraception or in vitro fertilization.”
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/ohio-news/personhood-group-in-ohio-to-refile-its-amendment-1278512.html
What would that even mean? It seems to me that it’s like putting an amendment into the Constitution that recognizes that slaves are citizens under the Constitution but this recognition will not be allowed to affect the practice of slavery.
The Catholic Church plays a very long game. I suspect they think that persuading people gradually will soften hearts more permanently, and that adding limits and constraints on abortion over time will boil the frog so slowly it won’t notice until it’s too late to reverse the trend.
The passage of this amendment will present a huge target for challenges besides the one argument that it conflicts with Roe vs Wade. The bishops might be thinking of all kinds of cases that would suddenly expose all the implications of giving a fertilized egg human rights. The re-writing of the Ohio law is attempting to prevent some of these cases, but that makes it look like eating your cake and having it too.
Birth control: Most medical professionals say that IUDs work by a different mechanism than preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg. Some people disagree with them. Will people who believe a fertilized egg has human rights try to criminalize IUDs? Some believe birth control pills work the same way. And what about the morning after pill? Medical professionals believe that under some circumstances it might work by preventing implantation of a fertilized egg. Will it be criminalized?
Abortion law: Will all the laws pertaining to murder be automatically applicable, making a woman guilty of hiring a contract killer if she gets an abortion? If she takes RU-486 will she be executed or sent to prison for years? If not, why not?
Abuse: Will vindictive husbands or boyfriends try to use the law against women who have a natural miscarriage, demanding homicide investigations after one missed period followed by a period?
Ectopic pregnancies: Will surgeons be obliged to try to implant the “person” who started to grow in a fallopian tube into the woman’s uterus?
Fertility clinics: Will fertility clinics be guilty of murder if they dispose of unused fertilized eggs? Is keeping them frozen until they are no longer viable an acceptable choice? If so, why? They have human rights and it would not be legal to do this to fully developed humans.
Inheritance: Estates are sometimes divided by fractions among living relatives at the time of death. If a woman miscarries after being pregnant at the time of the death, did the child inherit a portion of the estate? Under state law the mother and father usually automatically inherit their child’s estate, so this would have the effect of giving them a larger share than, say, the siblings got.
Laws devised to get around these quandries in the immediate future are more likely to trivialize the concept of “personhood” than to prevent abortions. And think about how it would energize a new generation of young women grew up with birth control and absolutely rely on it.
You can call the bishops cynical, but I suspect their strategy is correct.
The position of the bishops conference is a scandal…you should consult legal experts who could explain that reinforcing states rights in this and other issues is what is necessary to restore our constitution to what the founders envisioned.
My undestanding is if a law such as this is enacted and the courts let it stand Roe v Wade would evaporate because there was attached to this court final judgment a statement that if a fetus were ever identified as a human from conception it would inherit rights such as freedom from murder in the womb and Roe v Wade would become non-effective. There is no question in my mind that life begins at conception and must not be snuffed out by the whim of selfish parents. The fetus inherits the right to live by virtue of what it is. I think that any people who urge caution because of possibly renforcing Roe V Wade are mistaken.
Abortion takes the life of a complete, distinct, living, unconditionally viable and fully human being. There is no reasonable defense of it.
All Catholics including Bishops are required to adhere to the teachings in the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”.
CCC ” 2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion.
This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.
Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.
God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.”
The USCCB has been working with the Federal Government against abortion since 1973 to no avail. Since that time over 50 MILLION innocent babies have been murdered.
I read the Bishop’s warning on his Diocese web site. He gives no concrete reasons for his concern about this initiative.
Those who support abortion or vote for a pro-abortion politican should not receive Holy Communion. On the internet see: “Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion, General Principles” by Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict).
The CCC states that Catholics are obligated to VOTE - (# 2240).
Let us Not forget - “Thou shall not kill.”
It is simply bringing the constitution in line with what science already recognizes: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.” Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic
“The only times we even question whether human beings are persons (or “truly” human) are during exploitation and injustice. During the Holocaust, in support of slavery, and to spread eugenics, for example, we have questioned whether the people exploited or abused are really, truly human. To me, that’s powerful.” Ana Banderas http://liveaction.org/blog/is-it-a-person/
AIN’T I A WOMAN? This is what Sojourner Truth asked when she gave her famous speech about the rights of black women.
WELL, AIN’T I A PERSON?
Ryan Bomberger answers this question in this beautiful music video written by a man who was conceived by an act of rape:
http://www.theradiancefoundation.org/portfolio-item/unwanted-a-story-about-choice/
How fortunate his mother recognized his “personhood”!
Maybe you can explain why even though the eagle is no longer an endangered species, its eggs are still federally protected while they’re still in the mother eagle; once they are laid; through the 35-day incubation period and beyond through hatching. In fact, even the nonliving eagle egg shell is protected by the federal law. We’re talking a $100,000 fine! Shouldn’t a human baby have at least the same protection under the law?
I THINK WE SHOULD VOTE “NO” ON THE BALLOT
Why, Teddricka? Why would you vote No?
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.