In response to:

Is the Personhood Movement Really Pro-Life?

kgsnccc Wrote: Jun 23, 2012 4:02 PM
The article is one-sided, but I agree that state-by-state personhood efforts are probably a waste of resources -- we can all agree that conception and prenatal development are the same in every state, so why should there be 50 different attempts at personhood laws, all to be trumped by federal Supreme Court decisions. If it's to be done it should be at the federal level -- after all, even the Supreme Court admitted in Roe v. Wade that "If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment."
3482 Wrote: Jun 23, 2012 5:37 PM
OK, but you'll never get it at the federal level without getting public support. How do you get public support without making the case? What better way to make the case than with state level personhood amendments?
Yan5 Wrote: Jun 25, 2012 7:48 PM
So you are saying we should pass laws that we know to be unconstitutional and that doing so is justified because it increases public awareness.

The primary public awareness that is increased by such cynical shenanigans is that of skepticism toward the legitimacy, morality and intelligence of pro life people. For shame.

One of the most controversial wings of the pro-life movement is the “personhood” effort. Championed by Personhood USA out of Colorado, its goal is to have personhood defined in law to include the unborn. Theoretically, it sounds good. Practically, it will never work and meanwhile is severely hurting the pro-life movement.

The pro-life movement does not support the personhood effort. Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum issued this statement about it, “Nearly every reputable pro-life leader has criticized the approach of the personhood amendment, which will simply give more power to pro-abortion judges.” Another statement from...