Liberal MSNBC commentator Rachel Maddow attempted to combine the topics of gay marriage and the personhood movement on her September 29 show, only for her talking points to collapse into a blob of inconsistencies.

Rationalizing why citizens in over two dozen states have voted to ban gay marriage, which Maddow, a lesbian, supports, she said, “When we vote on minority rights for many if not all stripes in this country, we tend to vote ‘no.’ It’s part of the whole concept of rights, they are not supposed to be up for a vote. They are supposed to be inalienable, even by majority vote.”

More of Maddow’s thoughts on the concept of “rights” when it comes to gay marriage: “And again, when you vote on rights anywhere in this country, generally you get reminded of why there was a need to call some things ‘rights’ and to protect those rights from a vote, to protect them from majority rule.”


Maddow was inadvertently making the case to add a personhood amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which she would obviously oppose, since she supports abortion.

But when it came to state personhood initiatives, which would have the effect of banning abortions, Maddow, trying to have it both ways, was pleased that to date the only effort to have made the ballot has failed.

“And even though, as I say, Americans generally love to vote against rights, particularly controversial rights, this thing tanked when they got it on the ballot in Colorado,” crowed Maddow, adding later, “So even in a country that loves to vote against each other’s rights, anti-abortion activists trying to ban the pill with these personhood bills, so far these things aren’t flying….”

Which is it, Rachel? Do Americans love or hate minority rights?

But Maddow is worried about the upcoming Mississippi personhood initiative, Amendment 26, to be voted on this November, because Mississippians are not just conservative, they are über conservative. Here’s the definition of “person” that will be on their ballot:

The term “person” or “persons” shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional eq1uivalent thereof.

Calling this the “Birth Control Ban and Total Abortion Ban,” Maddow complained, “The way the most widely used forms of birth control work is that sometimes they stop the fertilization of an egg. Sometimes they stop the implantation of an egg that has been fertilized. So if a fertilized egg is now going to be a person in Mississippi, does that mean that using birth control is going to be committing murder in Mississippi? Birth control is gonna be illegal?”

I love personhood initiatives for many reasons, but one important one is they educate the American public that hormonal contraceptive and the IUD may kill babies. They force pro-aborts like Maddow to say out loud that The Pill may end a human life.

In touting the group opposing the Mississippi personhood intiative, Maddow failed to mention (or to give her the benefit of the doubt, perhaps she didn’t do her research) that Mississippians for Healthy Families was organized by the executive directors of ACLU Mississippi, Planned Parenthood Southeast, and Planned Parenthood Greater Memphis Region.

Of course, Planned Parenthood has a financial interest in abortions and contraceptives.

But that has no bearing on its opposition to the Mississippi Personhood Initiative, I’m sure. The group is merely standing up for the “right” of mothers to kill their children.

Beware, Rachel. Supporters of the “right” to abort are quickly shrinking to a minority.

[Photo of "Vote Yes on 26" sign via the The Maddow Blog]