Judgment is coming.
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 11/03/2010 6:12:22 AM PDT by Colofornian
Colorado voters on Tuesday rejected what was said to be the nation's only pro-life amendment.
Personhood Amendment 62, which would have given human rights to the unborn, was defeated by a nearly 3-to-1 margin. This is the second time the pro-life measure was voted down.
"Tonight’s victory sends a strong message that Colorado is a pro-choice state," Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Monica McCafferty told The Colorado Independent.
After a failed attempt in 2008, "pro-life missionaries" and volunteers were optimistic this time around as they mobilized churches and the pro-life faithful. Language was also altered to define "person" to include "every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being" as opposed to "any human being from the moment of fertilization."
Opponents criticized the amendment, saying it would not only outlaw abortions but also ban emergency contraception that interferes with the implantation of a fertilized egg as well as embryonic stem cell research.
But proponents of Amendment 62 pointed to the approximately 20,000 deaths through surgical abortion that occur every year in Colorado. Tens of thousands more are killed through chemical abortions and research, said Personhood Colorado Director Gualberto Garcia Jones.
"Twenty-thousand people is enough to fill the Pepsi Center. Twenty-thousand people with little arms and legs, eyes and ears, eyelashes and fingernails, and rapidly beating hearts are exterminated," he wrote in an earlier commentary.
"Amendment 62 stands for the revolutionary ... proposition that all human beings are created equal and are endowed by their Creator, not the government or the Supreme Court, with inalienable rights such as the right to life, due process of law, and equality of justice," he said. "Amendment 62 loves all human life with a wild abandon; the opposition loves power of the developed over the developing human being with a fierce defiance of science, reason and humanitarianism."
The measure was endorsed by Pam Tebow, mother of NFL rookie quarterback Tim Tebow.
"A child's right to life begins at conception, not at birth," stated Pam, who had been pressured to have an abortion by her doctor when she was pregnant with Tim.
Amendment 62 was the only pro-life law on the 2010 ballot in the nation, according to Personhood Colorado. Meanwhile, signatures are being collected in other states, including Florida, to get a personhood measure on a future ballot.
How sad....but don’t give up folks. Keep working for this!
How the hell can you even think of killing babies in the womb is beyond me. There’s a special place in hell for these people.
was the measure poorly written? funded? what? Hate this happenend.
The left simply cannot kill enough, their lust for innocent blood is unquenchable...evil exists folks and he lives in the minds of the liberals.
Were this election strictly about "social" issues, I don't believe we would be faring so well.
That's correct.
While a great majority of citizens believe in God and support "social" issues, the vast majority believe (rightfully) that it is not the place of government to legislate morality. The past fifty years or so of attempting to make "social" issues into political issues has been detrimental to both our society and politics. That's a fact. Otherwise, our politics would be Constitution based, our economy would be fiscally sound, and our culture would be morally sound. "Social" conservative politics has been a disaster all around.
Ironically, when our Constitutional republican form of government is upheld, and when the Constitution is used as the base for political debate, the moral health of the society is promoted by default. Without a nanny state, Uncle Sugar, government as father and caretaker, without lifestyles and government business conducted under a train load of debt, citizens are pressed to adhere to some semblance of civilized behavior and fiscal prudence within their communities, in order to survive and prosper within those communities.
Call it what is really is, Monica.
Same result as last time with this same amendment here in Colorado. The problem is that this is a very bad legal approach and it should now be seen that continuing to approach this issue from this angle is simple tilting at windmills.
But 90% of Americans, if their teen daughter was raped, would send her for a first-trimester abortion in a nanosecond.
The pro-life movement - nationally, and here on FR - is in complete denial about this.
Judgment is coming.
Call it what it really, TRULY is...
I respect their consistency, but a demand for all or nothing in this case seems to produce, in every case, the "nothing" alternative.
According to church teaching, abortion is wrong under any pretext. Playing devil's advocate here, but how is the pregnancy in any way, shape, or form the BABY'S fault? Isn't the BABY the one which has no voice/DEFENSE against anything?
Just sayin'...
According to church teaching, abortion is wrong under any pretext (with the exception of saving the mother's life in cases where childbirth will cause certain death). Playing devil's advocate here, but how is the pregnancy in any way, shape, or form the BABY'S fault? Isn't the BABY the one which has no voice/DEFENSE against anything?
Just sayin'...
Strike the “Devil’s advocate” part...lol. Not working on all cylinders this morning, I guess! :-)
A referendum that saves 90% of unborn lives, and passes, or a referendum that saves 100% of unborn lives, and fails by a 3-1 margin??
Not really. Pro-life leaders like Gregg Cunningham have been saying that for a long time (20 years!). He would quote a pro-abortion leader saying something similar, and then say that was true.
George Grant wrote a book about Planned Parenthood in the 1980s...he mentioned when abortion records were found in a dumpster outside an abortuary (TX, I believe)...they did a random sampling of the records and found a high % of women who had listed some affiliation to a specific church & pastor.
So the pro-life movement has known this for the past 25 years at least that a high % of women/girls who were getting abortions were members of various Christian and non-Christian counterfeit churches. I've heard a number of speakers reference all this in the early to mid-90s.
One clarification, though...I'd say the % you claim is more in the upper 60s...NOT 90% as you said...although I have no doubt that such a % climbs another 20% in many cities.
Also...to belie your claim that the pro-life movement is in denial about this as it pertains to personhood amendments like this...the LA Times a very long time ago had a poll where a majority of people conceded abortion was murder, but they wanted it legalized, anyway.
Once the frontline groups came along and started putting pictures of aborted babies in political campaign TV commercials (circa 1989-1990) people in this country could no longer claim stupidity or ignorance re: NOT knowing abortions kill baby PERSONS.
Now how is this last polling data relevant to this?
For 21 years people have been comfortable calling abortion murder but still wanting it legal. (They haven't been in denial about that at all; they've been forthright enough to speak it into polling questions when asked)
So this vote reflects the same thing...I would surmise, based upon other polling data, over 1/3rd of Colorado voters who voted against the personhood amendment, if asked, would tell you abortion is murder. IOW, they'll tell you the amendment they voted against does indeed effect living persons...they just want the right to be able to dismember those living persons if it comes down to that.
The pro-life movement indeed recognizes this. People are indeed ethically utilitarian, even when murder is being discussed.
It sounds as if there are many more hearts that have to be won over at the retail level.
Ah, now that's a better way of saying it...although you still added "if not denial."
Hey, if God told you that 1% of those on death row were innocent -- and if He was specific in naming names...and if you got a bunch of others to do everything they could to lobby, and cajole, and expose, and investigate, etc...anything to get those specific men off of death row -- and you failed -- how would you feel if somebody accused you of a great exercise in futility?
It sounds as if there are many more hearts that have to be won over at the retail level.
Good analogy.
Imagine if marketers only tried to sale their products with words...no images...no commercials...no billboards...no ads...except just words in commercials...billboards...printed pages.
Think they would sell as much?
Well, we're only about 20 years overdue in showing the reality of abortion -- real aborted babies...real pictures -- more than what's been done...in a couple of political races...or tracts...or a few not well circulated DVDs...or the truth squads that make the rounds on college campuses.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.