No on Amendment 67: Don’t be fooled by end run on medical rights and privacy

Make no mistake, this measure has nothing to do with protecting the rights or health of women, and this has everything to do with usurping the medical privacy guarantees for women created by the U.S. Supreme Court

Like the warning to truckers coming down from the Colorado mountains, thinking that they’re in the clear even though treacherous curves await — don’t be fooled on Amendment 67, Colorado.

For those thinking that voters have not once, but twice, no, make that thrice, turned back misleading and dangerous so-called personhood amendments, Colorado’s not out of the woods yet.

For the fourth time since 2008, national anti-abortion groups are trying to trick voters into “protecting” pregnant women and unborn children with the same old smoke and mirrors.

Voters have previously trounced these measures by big 3-1 margins, except for in 2012 when backers couldn’t even get enough signatures to force it on the ballot.

Make no mistake, this measure has nothing to do with protecting the rights or health of women, and this has everything to do with usurping the medical privacy guarantees for women created by the U.S. Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision.

4e0e245c1589c.image_-300x250These are the same extremist groups trying to trick Colorado voters with the same anti-abortion tactics.

Plain and simple, Amendment 67 would bestow constitutional rights on fertilized human eggs, creating a labyrinth of medical and legal nightmares for women, hospitals and doctors. It’s a dangerous idea that even the most ardent critics of legalized abortion have worked previously to defeat.

It’s unnecessary. The U.S. Constitution already lays out human rights to: anyone born of another U.S. citizen; or someone born inside the country.

While science and medicine have helped improve the viability of infant humans by keeping prematurely born babies alive and treating a wide variety of lethal maladies, science and laymen have agreed for generations that we become “persons” at birth.

The notion that a person is created each and every time a human egg is fertilized is as nonsensical as endowing constitutional rights to female ovaries themselves or uterine cells. Studies going back decades reveal that between 50 percent to 80 percent of fertilized human eggs never implant in the uterus, becoming “spontaneous miscarriages” in the course of human nature.

Should a measure banning abortion by granting rights to fertilized eggs become law, we would invite bureaucratic government agencies to police doctor offices and the very homes of pregnant women, ensuring they are satisfactorily treating their uterine collection of cells like we demand people treat their babies.

It would mean that so-called ectopic or “tubal” pregnancies — always fatal to the embryo and easily fatal to the mother — would have to proceed, resulting in the tragic loss of countless lives. Measures like this could easily turn Colorado into a third-world country for women, where people would live in fear of problem pregnancies, which actually send women to jail for miscarriages in some countries where personhood laws exist. Doctors in places like Guatemala cannot treat ectopic pregnancies until the pregnancy ruptures, creating huge health risks for the mother.

Vote “no,” again, on this repugnant and dangerous measure. Once again, this measure wastes Colorado voter’s time and proponents’ money. They can keep asking, but we won’t be fooled.

Comments are closed.