North Dakota Moves Toward Passage of Pro-Life Personhood Amendment

New American ^ | Feb 10, 2013 | Dave Bohon

[EXCH54FE]

The North Dakota state Senate approved an amendment last Thursday that would protect unborn babies from the moment of conception. The proposed “personhood” amendment (SCR 4009) declares that “the inalienable right to life of every human being at any stage of development must be recognized and protected.” The Senate also passed another bill (SB 2303) meant to ensure that “the protection that our criminal laws afford to victims of crimes extends to all human beings born and unborn.”

The amendment's sponsor, Republican State Senator Margaret Sitte, said she intended the measure to serve as “a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, since [Supreme Court Justice Antonin] Scalia said that the Supreme Court is waiting for states to raise a case. By passage of this amendment, the people of North Dakota are asking government to recognize what science already defined.”

In 2009 and 2011 the personhood proposal was passed by the state House of Representatives but died each time in the Senate. This time, predicted Jennifer Mason of Personhood USA, a group that lobbies for personhood bills around the nation, the bill has a good chance of making it all the way to the the 2014 state ballot, where she believes voters would overwhelmingly approve it. “We just need the North Dakota House of Representatives to stay strong and vote as they did before,” she said, “and we’ll see this pass for the first time in the United States.”

Similar personhood amendments have fallen short on ballots in other states over the past couple of years. If North Dakota succeeds in implementing the amendment, it could provide motivation for renewed attempts in other states. “North Dakota is leading the way for equal rights and protections for all human beings,”

[DoctorBulldog]

Excellent news!

Roe v. Wade contains within itself the tool for its own abortion:

[SNIP]

Roe v. Wade:

Opinion of the Court:

Section IX:

“[Texas] argues that the fetus is a ‘person’ within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment…If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case (or Roe’s case) collapses, for the fetus’ right to life is then guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.”

[SNIP]

In other words, the Supreme Court admits that if states merely define when personhood begins in the development of a fetus, Roe v. Wade collapses.

Cheers!

[DownInFlames]

This will never be upheld in the current SCOTUS.

[mosaicwolf]

I think many States are getting to the point where the SCOTUS decisions are meaningless, unconstitutional in their own right, and will be declared null and void.

[DownInFlames]

Wrong. Zero will use the Fed gov to back up SCOTUS on rulings he likes and doesnt like.

[Kevmo]

I hope this thing passes, but I doubt the current SCOTUS would uphold it.

From my home page:

___________________________________________________________________
I’ve posted this in a couple of places and it doesn’t seem to get much more than a yawn, even though it’s kinda-sorta an incremental approach.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1908148/posts?page=125#125

I believe a fetus is a human being who deserves protection under the law from being killed.
***I do too. That fetus deserves protection extended by the state.

I do wonder if it is biblical to extend “full” protection to a fetus? I.e. when a man hurts a pregnant woman, he’s expected to pay an eye for an eye & a tooth for a tooth. But if the unborn baby is killed, the price is not the same.

Perhaps it is time to consider a 3 (or even 4) tiered system of protection.

Tier 1: Living, viable, late term baby which will not be aborted unless the life of the mother is at stake.

Tier 2: Living, not-yet-viable pre-born human who should have the right to protection and life and a safe womb to which it can attain viability. Cannot be aborted unless there is an open rape case associated with the pregnancy or the life of the mother is at stake.

Tier 3: Living, early stage, not yet viable pre-born human for whom we do not extend the rights of life in this society because of a historical snag where we once considered such tissue not to be a baby. We as a society thought it was best to consider it a private decision. I personally do not believe in Tier3 abortions, but I can understand that there are many who think it is a “right to choose” at this stage. It may be time to consider a program where the woman declares her pregnancy and intent to abort. Our societal function at this point would be to provide a family that is willing to adopt this baby and to put up this woman for 6-8 months in a safe environment so the baby can grow and maybe the woman can learn some life skills. If our society cannot muster the forces necessary to save this baby, the woman has the sickening “right” to abort this pregnancy. Time for us to put up or shut up.

With a 3-tiered plan in place, women would stop using abortion as a means of birth control. Millions of lives would be saved. We would extend the right to life to every human that we have resources to save. Unfortunately, if we cannot put up the resources to save the Tier3 babies, we still would have this horrible practice staining our nation’s soul.

125 posted on 10/08/2007 1:43:20 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

___________________________________________________________________