Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How an anti-abortion push to redefine ‘person’ could hurt women’s rights

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Choice Donate to DU
 
MountainLaurel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 12:31 PM
Original message
How an anti-abortion push to redefine ‘person’ could hurt women’s rights
A common message from anti-abortion activists is that “women deserve better than abortion.” Today, however, one branch of that movement is taking women down a notch with a new strategy that could prioritize the rights of fertilized eggs over the rights of the women carrying them.

A question on the ballot in Mississippi next month will ask voters to decide: “Should the term ‘person’ be defined to include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the equivalent thereof?” This issue is before voters thanks to the “personhood” movement, which says that conception is the moment that a person, and a person’s legal rights, begin to exist.

Personhood ballot measures were defeated by wide margins in 2008 and 2010 in Colorado. But observers say Mississippi’s measure is likely to pass; personhood efforts are also underway this year in Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and other states. On paper these measures would grant a zygote the same rights as the woman who carries it; in practice, however, they could mean that the zygote’s rights come first.

Many of the abortion-rights advocates battling these efforts point out that personhood laws would not only make abortion illegal, they could also ban IUDs, emergency contraception and other hormonal forms of birth control.


The author goes on to discuss several cases in which a fetus's life was placed above the mother's, including one in which the mother died.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-an-anti-abor...
Refresh | +10 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. I wonder if corporations are fertilized and if this would undo corporate personhood and Citizens
United.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Lionessa Donating Member (842 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Yep, since corporations are persons, I should sue the gov't for letting mine
die because it wouldn't give me a loan during the recession to keep my employees, market, or stay afloat in anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. That's corporacide! (Sorry to hear that happened.) nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. I don't understand how this is supposed to work
They want to give a fertilized egg "rights"? How exactly is it supposed to legally exercise its "rights"? How will the state decide if, when, and how to intervene on its behalf to protect its legal interests? This would be going way off the edge of a VERY slippery slope IMHO!

:wtf:
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Fertilized eggs get rights while Occupiers get shot at. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Really screwy, isn't it?
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. 'How exactly is it supposed to legally exercise its "rights"?'
By suing the pregnant woman in which it resides for false imprisonment, of course!

A guardian ad litem will have to be appointed, and when the fetus wins, the woman will have to make the necessary arrangements to have it removed from her body.

And you can see where I'm going with this ...

;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. The implications of this kind of law are so blindingly mind-boggling
that they won't last long. In a way, I kind of hope that they pass one of these laws and let the madness play itself out. They've been "frittering" around the edges of insanity like this but most people don't pay much attention to it b/c stuff like this never actually was allowed to go anywhere before and thus nobody was adversely affected by it. The instant that some woman gets hauled into a police station over a miscarriage or doing something deemed adverse to a fertilized egg, anybody who supported voted for this monstrosity will (likely) be out on their butts in the next election IMHO. Likewise, if the right makes a serious effort to take away birth control pills. I doubt even most Republican women (with the possible exception of the "Quiverfulls") would be happy with such a move. I think that it's time for the right to just put up or shut up about birth control, abortion, etc. If they REALLY want to do away with these things, then they need to put their money where their mouths are and just put it to a vote and let the voters sort it out. It's probably going to come to that at some point anyway IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
haele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. Time for Tampon checkers...
Edited on Sun Oct-30-11 12:57 PM by haele
I wonder if they remember what happened in 1970's/1980's Romania after they imposed their forced birth policy...
Even without birth control, only 1 in 4 fertilizations ends up viable. Lots of "concieved" embryos get flushed out with the next menstral cycle.
So time to set up a department to check them tampons and maxi-pads, as well as all them lady-parts for every female of child-bearing age in Mississippi, Bubba.
That's what they had to do in Romania to make sure every conception ended in birth - and if it didn't, by Ghod, that slut had to be punished!
From Wikipedia - "After birth rates (in Romania) fell, Securitate agents (at that time, Ceauşescu's Secret Police Agency) were placed in gynecological wards while regular pregnancy tests were made mandatory for women of child-bearing age, with severe penalties for anyone who was found to have terminated a pregnancy"


Haele
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
mzteris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
4. "Mississippi’s measure is likely to pass"
hmmm.... I wonder why?

From Wiki:

In 2007, Mississippi students scored the lowest of any state on the National Assessments of Educational Progress in both math and science.<73>

In 2008, Mississippi was ranked last among the fifty states in academic achievement by the American Legislative Exchange Council's Report Card on Education, with the lowest average ACT scores and sixth lowest spending per pupil in the nation.

Mississippi is currently ranked at the bottom of the American Human Development Index.

Since the 1970s, fundamentalist conservative churches have grown rapidly, fueling Mississippi's conservative political trends.<36>


For more stats: http://www.statemaster.com/state/MS/Bottom-Rankings
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. I think their ES&S machines have more to do with it. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
mzteris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. no, i think they're just that backwards
too little education and too much "religion" will do it everytime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. In other words....
Women are not people...they're incubators. May all women feel the insult and rise to face their oppressors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-30-11 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
10. A right winger could argue that this promotes the nebulous "homosexual agenda".
Edited on Sun Oct-30-11 02:18 PM by valerief
See, here's how it works. In order for women not be tried for murder, they wear metal chastity belts to prevent pregnancy (never know when you're gonna get raped, after all), so they never have sex. This forces men to have sex with each other.

Then again, it could promote the "sheep agenda".

I have a hard time getting in the head of crazy. All I know is that this bill is designed to make rich people richer, cuz that's the most important thing in the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
HockeyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-01-11 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
15. Breastfeeding
in the early months can work the same way as the Pill. Ovulation is supressed, but it can also thin the uterine lining. Ovulation can occur before the first normal period and since the cycle is not fully back to normal, the zygote may not implant.

When my daughter was around 2 months old, she got a cold and cut back a little on her nursing. Right before my scheduled checkup, I noticed some slight staining, but it stopped. When I was examined, my doctor asked if my periods had returned. When I told him about the staining, he said from his exam it looked as if I had ovulated and become pregnant, but the fertilized egg passed in that staining because my uterine lining had not be able to build up enough because of the breastfeeding. In effect, nursing had prevented implantation, according to my doctor.

Under this stupid law, would a doctor have to issue a death certificate? Would the "body" have to be produced and buried? Would a woman be charged with involuntary manslaughter, or even murder, after a miscarriage? Just imagine all the repercussions this stupid law could have.

Women, children, and already living and breathing babies, have more of a "right-to-life" than a 4 or 5 cell blastocyst, and THEY SHOULD.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kath1 Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-05-11 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Right On, Hockeymom!
These "pro-life" proposals seem to get more ridiculous all the time and the life that gets ignored is always that of the woman!

Lord, please forgive those of us women who have real lives, dreams, careers and ambitions and are ignoring your mandate to be incubators. I happen to be a mother and I am one by choice!

I'm sure there are well-meaning people on the "pro-life" side but is getting harder and harder for me to see their arguments for anything other than anti-woman BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Jul 13th 2014, 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Choice Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC