Human Life Amendment on 2008 Colorado Ballot

According to Colorado for Equal Rights, an historic constitutional amendment defining when "personhood begins" is now on the ballot for November of 2008. According to a May 29 press release from the pro-life, anti-abortion activist group, at least 103,377 valid signatures have been collected; the citizens of Colorado will be voting on the definition of what constitutes a human being. This group defines "personhood" as starting at the moment of conception.

"This proposed constitutional amendment will define a person in Colorado as a human being from the moment of fertilization, the moment when life begins. This amendment will establish a cornerstone for protecting human life in our society... and we all know this is the right thing to do."

This bold pro-life initiative not only poses a major threat to the legality of abortion, but possibly creates a legal standard by which certain forms of birth-control, most notably emergency contraception, sometime know as the "morning after pill," could be banned.

Proponents of the ballot measure say that such an amendment would be a major victory in ensuring the rights of the unborn. Opponents see such a measure for a major setback for women's reproductive rights.

Colorado for Equal Rights states their case dramatically, in term of life and death:

".... we can transform our nation from a culture of death into a culture of life. Therefore, we are taking the necessary action to allow Coloradoans to guarantee every person equal rights under our laws."

Planned Parenthood believes that the best way to prevent abortion is sex education, and points out that since the Bush administration's push for "abstinence only" sex-ed, the actual number of teenage pregnancies, abortions, and STDs has increased dramatically. According to Planned Parenthood, "...a recent CDC study showed that at least one in four teenage girls has a sexually transmitted infection..."

Nela Silva, a former social worker and women's rights activist, has a different view:

"The issue is not whether abortion is right or wrong, or whether a woman has a right to remove something from her body that is alive. What it comes down to is whether abortions will be performed with some degree of safety and medical supervision, or whether they will be performed by unqualified personnel, placing women in grave danger. Women have always had abortions, and will continue to; it's a part of life. Some women have them because of danger to themselves or the fetus, others have them because the pregnancy is simply inconvenient, or even because they fear harm to the physical appearance. But women will continue to have abortions, regardless of the legality."

Ms. Judith Mage, a long time women's-rights activist, in a June 15th telephone interview with the author stated:

"This could be really bad, we could be going back to back alley butchering," referring to the potential consequences of a generalized ban on abortion, and the implications of a Republican victory in the general election. Ms. Mage's statement summarizes the fears of women's reproductive rights activists with regard to this issue in general.

By defining a fetus as a person, even as it transforms from a one-celled to two celled organism, the Human Life Amendment sets a legal standard by which, at least in theory, any interference with the post-conception reproductive process by a woman or her doctor could be defined as murder. The implications of this amendment are far reaching, and its presence on the Colorado ballot promises to provoke much in the way of passionate and often vicious debate between the Christian Right and feminists. If this measure passes, it will doubtlessly face numerous legal challenges.

References:

http://www.coloradoforequalrights.com/

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/issues-action/stds-hiv-aids-issues-6133.htm