Taking misleading media to task on personhood
In 1989, the Supreme Court ruled… that language alone cannot be used to justify the regulation of abortion. In other words, calling unborn human beings “persons” under the law does nothing to prevent the legal abortion of these “persons.” …
If Roe were overturned, it would not have the effect of making abortion illegal. It would only return the legislation concerning abortion to the states.
Even if induced abortion were ultimately made illegal, it still would not necessarily apply in cases which endanger the health of the mother. There is a huge difference between a life-saving operation for the mother which also results in the death of the unborn baby and one which only seeks to end the life of the baby.
~ Nicole Cooley, responding to the editor of Newsleader.com’s fearmongering predictions about Mississippi’s failed personhood amendment, November 20
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Right to Life posts this regarding personhood issues in Wisconsin:
http://www.wrtl.org/pa/
Wisconsin Right to Life has been repeatedly asked to provide legal precedent/case law to substantiate these claims and consistently insists we take their word for it.
PersonhoodWisconsin.com as a detailed legal analysis put together with top state and national pro-life attorneys that debunks WRL’s unsupported claims.