Mississippi personhood amendment fails

The amendment was controversial as it pitted some pro-life advocates supporting it against others who recognized the amendment would not ban abortions and would perhaps give a pro-abortion dominated Supreme Court or lower courts a chance to reaffirm the Roe v. Wade decision that allowed virtually unlimited abortions in 1973.

With 1559 of 1876 precincts counted, the amendment failed by a 58 to 42 percentage point margin.


Catholic bishops reported to be “neutral” on Mississippi Personhood Amendment. Why?

by Doug Lawrence

Other than the liberal personal political leanings of many Catholic bishops, why would they choose to stay neutral on what may turn out to be the single greatest weapon against abortion, since the passage of Roe v. Wade?

The surprising answer: Almost 2000 years of Catholic doctrine confirms the fact that there is a world of difference between the status of a baby in the womb, and a baby who has already been born.

(For a comprehensive article on the subject of miscarriages and still births, click here.)

The term “juridical” describes an entity whose rights and/or particular status is defined, according to law, whether it be natural law … civil law … criminal law … international law … or Catholic Canon Law.

A corporation, for example, is defined as a legal entity (a juridical person) under civil law. It is also the beneficiary of certain legally specified rights and protections.

While there is absolutely no doubt that a yet to be born fetus constitutes a being that can be defined as nothing other than human, both Catholic Canon Law and the laws of nations make very significant distinctions as to the actual legal rights and status of such little souls.

The Catholic Church, for instance, does not make ANY of the sacraments available to someone who is yet to be born, or for whatever the reason, fails to be born. Since the sacraments are known to be the primary channels of God’s grace, and since Baptism is the essential remedy for Original Sin and “the door to the Church” this is a very substantial distinction, indeed.

But it is a fact!

The Mississippi Personhood Amendment has yet to be voted on, so we don’t know as yet, all the ways it might change things, but we do know that it would serve to protect those which up until now, have routinely been the subject of inhumanly violent and bloody injustice.

It seems to me there must be some way for all people of good will to come together, in order to save the babies.

What do you think, bishops?


Mississippi Governor Barbour “gets some last-minute religion” – votes for personhood amendment.

Amendment 26 defines personhood as beginning at the moment of conception, and if passed by a majority of voters on Tuesday, will amend the state constitution to make Mississippi the first state in the union to provide legal protection for all unborn babies since the infamous Roe v. Wade ruling of 1973.

The pro-life governor had sent shock waves through the pro-life community in Mississippi by telling Fox News that the language in the amendment is “ambiguous.” Unfortunately for the governor, the language is not ambiguous at all. It defines personhood as beginning at the moment of conception. That’s it. Nothing confusing or ambiguous about it at all.

That the governor could be misled about the amendment at this late stage shows the effectiveness of the lies Planned Parenthood has been telling about it.

Read more

Democrat chairman Schultz doesn’t care about killing women (or men) in the womb.

Wasserman Shultz called the personhood amendments being considered or petitioned for in Mississippi, Ohio, Texas, Kansas, and Florida “the most extreme assault on a woman’s right to choose.”

Personhood amendments define when a human being becomes a “person” under the law. An amendment proposed in Mississippi, for example, says that a person is “every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.”

Wasserman Shultz said that the Mississippi amendment–which will go before voters on Nov. 8–will outlaw all abortions and some forms of birth control (presumably because they kill human embryos) and also IUDs, the morning-after pill, and in vitro fertilization procedures that create and discard human embyros.


Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour just one of many “secret” pro abortion Republicans

Haley Barbour, the conservative, pro-life governor of Mississippi, surprised and infuriated supporters of the state’s anti-abortion “personhood” initiative on Wednesday when he told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd that he might be voting against it. The Personhood USA campaign retaliated on Thursday by pointing out that Barbour took campaign contributions from Monsanto and Pfizer — pharmaceutical companies that manufacture the abortion pill.

“We thought it was really strange that he would oppose this measure, since we have the support of nearly every other politician in the state, both Democrat and Republican. So we did a little digging,” Jennifer Mason, spokesperson for Personhood USA, told HuffPost. “We discovered that he has received campaign contributions from the makers of the abortion pill as recently as 2007.”


Editor’s note: This is the guy who was the chairman of the Republican Party for a number of years, and also the guy who urged Republicans to ignore social issues. There’s a lot more in the party, just like him.

What if “the most extreme in a field of extreme anti-abortion measures” wasn’t an anti-abortion measure at all?

“The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.”

That statutory definition, in the form of Proposition 26, a constitutional “personhood amendment” on the ballot in Mississippi, is creating a firestorm of controversy. Its opponents call it the most extreme anti-abortion measure in the country, and the New York Times news story tells us the amendment “would ban virtually all abortions, including those resulting from rape and incest,” would “bar some birth control methods, including IUD’s and ‘morning after pills,’” and would “outlaw the destruction of embryos created in laboratories.”

Funny, I just read the entirety of the amendment — so did you — and I didn’t see the words ban, bar or outlaw. Or the words abortion, birth control or embryo.

Read more

Florida Catholic Bishops Take a Powder On State Personhood Amendment


In an interesting twist, the Florida Catholic Conference said today in a statement that it will not support a controversial pro-life initiative.

The “Personhood Florida” effort already faced long odds, needing to get more than 670,000 signatures collected by February to put a strict measure on the 2010 ballot that would constitutionally ban all abortions and perhaps some birth control.

In a statement, the FCC said, “Although, the bishops of Florida clearly share the desire for our state laws to recognize all life from its very beginning to natural end, after careful consideration and deliberation with legal counsel, the bishops do not support this current amendment effort.

“In addition, the bishops have resolved that there be no collection of petition signatures in any Catholic parish or other diocesan entity.”

Read the whole story