Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Mississippi's "Personhood Amendment" fails at polls

Posted by on Nov. 9, 2011 at 3:58 PM
  • 11 Replies

Thoughts?

Mississippi's "Personhood Amendment" fails at polls

Christi Chandler, left, and Stacy Hawsey, both of Madison and supporters of the Personhood Amendment promote their initiative as they waver signs at drivers in the midst of last minute campaigning Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2011 in Madison, Miss.

Christi Chandler, left, and Stacy Hawsey, both of Madison and supporters of the Personhood Amendment promote their initiative as they waver signs at drivers in the midst of last minute campaigning Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2011 in Madison, Miss. (AP Photo)

(CBS/AP) 

JACKSON, Miss. - Mississippi voters Tuesday defeated a ballot initiative that would've declared life begins at fertilization, a proposal that supporters sought in the Bible Belt state as a way to prompt a legal challenge to abortion rights nationwide.

The so-called "personhood" initiative was rejected by more than 55 percent of voters, falling far short of the threshold needed for it to be enacted. If it had passed, it was virtually assured of drawing legal challenges because it conflicts with the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that established a legal right to abortion. Supporters of the initiative wanted to provoke a lawsuit to challenge the landmark ruling.

The measure divided the medical and religious communities and caused some of the most ardent abortion opponents, including Republican Gov. Haley Barbour, to waver with their support.

CBS News correspondent Randall Pinkston reported earlier that the vote could set a precedent for the nation. The major concern for many regarding the strict law and new anti-abortion tactic was its possible affect on fertility treatments, especially for people like Atlee and Greg Breland.

"When I was 28-years-old, Greg and I were diagnosed with infertility," Atlee said. They used in vitro fertilization to conceive their 5-year-old twin girls. Atlee had worried the proposed state constitutional amendment could limit fertility treatments for other Mississippi couples.

"I don't want Mississippians to have to go Washington, D.C. or New York or California to have infertility treatment," she said.

Opponents said the measure would have made birth control, such as the morning-after pill or the intrauterine device, illegal. More specifically, the ballot measure called for abortion to be prohibited "from the moment of fertilization" — wording that opponents suggested would have deterred physicians from performing in vitro fertilization because they would fear criminal charges if an embryo doesn't survive.

Supporters were trying to impose their religious beliefs on others by forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies, including those caused by rape or incest, opponents said.

Mississippi votes, when does life begin?
Doctors call Mississippi "personhood" initiative dangerous
The politics of personhood in Mississippi

Amy Brunson voted against the measure, in part because she has been raped. She also has friends and family that had children through in vitro fertilization and she was worried this would end that process.

"The lines are so unclear on what may or may not happen. I think there are circumstances beyond everybody's control that can't be regulated through an amendment," said Brunson, a 36-year-old dog trainer and theater production assistant from Jackson.

Hubert Hoover, a cabinet maker and construction worker, voted for the amendment.

"I figure you can't be half for something, so if you're against abortion you should be for this. You've either got to be wholly for something or wholly against it," said Hoover, 71, who lives in a Jackson suburb.

Mississippi already has tough abortion regulations and only one clinic where the procedures are performed, making it a fitting venue for a national movement to get abortion bans into state constitutions.

Keith Mason, co-founder of the group Personhood USA, which pushed the Mississippi ballot measure, has said a win would send shockwaves around the country. The Colorado-based group is trying to put similar initiatives on 2012 ballots in Florida, Montana, Ohio and Oregon. Voters in Colorado rejected similar proposals in 2008 and 2010.

Barbour, long considered a 2012 presidential candidate before he ruled out a run this year, said a week ago that he was undecided. A day later, he voted absentee for the amendment, but said he struggled with his support.

"Some very strongly pro-life people have raised questions about the ambiguity and about the actual consequences — whether there are unforeseen, unintended consequences. And I'll have to say that I have heard those concerns and they give me some pause," Barbour said last week.

Barbour was prevented from seeking re-election because of term limits. The Democrat and Republican candidates vying to replace him both supported the abortion measure.

Specifically, the proposed state constitutional amendment would've defined a person "to include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof."

The state's largest Christian denomination, the Mississippi Baptist Convention, backed the proposal through its lobbying arm.

The bishops of the Episcopal Diocese of Mississippi and the General Conference of the United Methodist Church opposed it.

Bishop Joseph Latino of the Catholic Diocese of Jackson, a church traditionally against abortion, issued a statement neither supporting nor opposing the initiative. The Mississippi State Medical Association took a similar step, while other medical groups opposed it.

Mississippi already requires parental or judicial consent for any minor to get an abortion, mandatory in-person counseling and a 24-hour wait before any woman can terminate a pregnancy.

© 2011 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.


by on Nov. 9, 2011 at 3:58 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
Peanutx3
by Silver Member on Nov. 9, 2011 at 4:50 PM
3 moms liked this

It is good this failed. 

MTM
by MTM on Nov. 10, 2011 at 10:32 AM
1 mom liked this

clappingFANTASTIC!!!! It should have failed. 

kirbymom
by Sonja on Nov. 10, 2011 at 7:37 PM

 Why should it have failed? What is wrong with this initiative exactly?

Mommy_of_Riley
by Just Jess on Nov. 10, 2011 at 9:27 PM
It was WAY too crazy and I'm glad it did not pass. Too much "unknown" and too much wiggle room for that slippery slope...
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
TruthSeeker.
by CM Junkie on Nov. 10, 2011 at 10:02 PM
1 mom liked this

 

Quoting kirbymom:

 Why should it have failed? What is wrong with this initiative exactly?

    This could have opened up a slippery slope to birth control no longer being allowed since most can cause miscarriage. It also could have allowed women to be interrogated and prosecuted for miscarriages. If person-hood is said to start at conception, then eventually the state would be allowed to control what you eat, your activities, etc all at the pretense of protecting a person.

     It's a subtle but slippery slope to go down this road.

PEEK05
by on Nov. 10, 2011 at 11:04 PM

I'm glad this failed. I think that once something like this passes, like the author said it would probably start being seen all over the place.

txmom-o-3
by on Nov. 10, 2011 at 11:55 PM
3 moms liked this

While I may personally believe that life begins at conception, if this had been on the ballot here, I could not have voted for it, and I'm glad it failed there.  It would open the door to more government invasion into our lives.  As the pp said, it could open the door to the govenment dictating what we could eat, what activities we could/could not do, and even the potential for criminal charges should a woman miscarry.  

paganbaby
by Bronze Member on Nov. 11, 2011 at 12:49 AM

I know!

Quoting MTM:

clappingFANTASTIC!!!! It should have failed. 


paganbaby
by Bronze Member on Nov. 11, 2011 at 12:49 AM
1 mom liked this

I love this reply :-)

Quoting txmom-o-3:

While I may personally believe that life begins at conception, if this had been on the ballot here, I could not have voted for it, and I'm glad it failed there.  It would open the door to more government invasion into our lives.  As the pp said, it could open the door to the govenment dictating what we could eat, what activities we could/could not do, and even the potential for criminal charges should a woman miscarry.  


TruthSeeker.
by CM Junkie on Nov. 11, 2011 at 10:21 AM

   Completely agree.

Quoting txmom-o-3:

While I may personally believe that life begins at conception, if this had been on the ballot here, I could not have voted for it, and I'm glad it failed there.  It would open the door to more government invasion into our lives.  As the pp said, it could open the door to the govenment dictating what we could eat, what activities we could/could not do, and even the potential for criminal charges should a woman miscarry.  

 

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)