UPDATE, 7:18p: Thanks to American Life League for posting the Fox story on YouTube toot sweet. The volume is a little low, but I could hear the piece just fine with ear phones.

I disagree with commenter Nancyu that the story “was very slanted toward pro abort POV.” I thought it was quite fair and balanced….

I liked that this point by Keith was spotlighted: “So we’re changing the word ‘pro-life’ to mean personhood. No longer can you claim to be pro-life unless you support personhood.” This means that the contraception issue is coming to a head. Personhood initiatives force pro-lifers and groups looking the other way to acknowledge that some forms of contraception can kill children. These initiatives also mean pro-life groups will have to address the IVF issue.
This also means pro-abort groups will be forced to acknowledge the abortifacient aspect of contraceptives, which they’ve successfully avoided for decades, primarily by changing the definition of pregnancy. Personhood initiatives put pro-aborts in the tough spot of trying to scare women that they will lead to the outlaw of contraceptives while not being able to articulate why. The Fox story showcased their dilemma. NARAL CO rep Emilie Ailts’s explanation was quite clumsy, if not comical: “The proponents of Amendment 62 have been very clear that they do want to outlaw any forms of contraception that would impede the… um… fertilization and implantation of a fertilized egg.” Huh?
I also like how Fox ended by showing how expansive the personhood movement is.
Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for breaking.jpg3:16p: It could get bumped, but as it stands, Fox’s Special Report with Bret Baier is scheduled to run a story tonight on the personhood movement, with a focus on CO’s proposed Amendment 62. The show airs at 6p EST.
Much of the backstory, via the Associated Press, March 27:

The Secretary of State’s Office said Friday [March 26] that CO-based Personhood USA submitted enough valid signatures to put an abortion-ending proposal to a statewide vote this fall. The proposal would give unborn fetuses human rights in the state constitution, setting up a likely conflict with the US Constitution over a woman’s right to abortions.
The group is pushing similar measures in 40 states this year.
Personhood USA first turned in almost 80k signatures in February, nearly 4k more than what they needed to get their proposal on the state ballot. But thousands of the signatures were rejected. The group turned in several thousand more signatures last week and those were accepted.
A similar abortion measure was on CO ballots in 2008 and voters soundly rejected it.

In 2008 the CO initiative was indeed “soundly rejected” – 73% to 27%.
Interviewed for the Fox piece were Keith Mason of Personhood USA and Gualberto Jones of Personhood CO. Keith said his response to the question, “Why do it again?” was, “We are educating people about the dignity of the preborn child. The State of CO is our classroom. We are bringing the class to attention, and any teacher knows the best time to teach is when students are paying attention.”
Keith said the political winds have changed and he expects a much stronger response to the CO’s personhood initiative in 2010 than it received in 2008.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...