'Personhood' abortion amendment clears Missouri House committee


#1

[quote=Kansas City Star]JEFFERSON CITY
A Missouri House committee on Tuesday approved a “personhood” amendment to the state constitution that would grant the right to life for “unborn human children at every stage of biological development.”

Critics say the legislation, which if passed by lawmakers would have to be approved by voters, would make abortion illegal in Missouri. Its proponents disagree.

The bill, House Joint Resolution 98, was amended Tuesday to remove any exemptions for rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

“All life is life, regardless of how it was conceived,” said Rep. Rick Brattin, a Harrisonville Republican.

Rep. Stacey Newman, a St. Louis County Democrat, called the proposal “extreme,” saying it “would be placing many women in danger.”

North Dakota voters in 2014 rejected a state constitutional amendment that would have declared “the inalienable right to life of every human being at every stage of development must be recognized and protected.” That same year, voters in Colorado rejected a similar proposal.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court in 2012 ruled that a proposal to grant “personhood” to human embryos would be an improper ban on abortion.

Voting in support of the Missouri proposal were Republicans Diane Franklin, Jim Neely, Nathan Beard, Brattin, Cloria Brown, Elaine Gannon, Marsha Haefner and Jeanie Lauer. Those in opposition were Democrats Sue Meredith, Newman and Charlie Norr.

With only a few weeks left before the legislative session adjourns for the year, passage of the bill is a long shot.

Read more here: kansascity.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article71369937.html#storylink=cpy
[/quote]

Link to article
Link to text of HJR 98

What was that about Republican lawmakers not “really” being pro-life?


#2

Yes, and where are all those “prolife Democrats” we keep hearing about?


#3

How does it put a woman in danger to recognize the HUMANITY of an unborn human being? oh wait…pregnancy kills women and suctioning out a living human is the only way to prevent her from dying </end sarcasm>


#4

Such legislation will very likely be held to be unconstitutional in view of Roe v. Wade and related Supreme Court decisions. Of course, state legislatures don’t let a little think like the Constitution ruin their attempts to rein in abortion.


#5

Oh God, oh God, please, let this bill pass…Jesus, I trust in You. Also, the “will put many women in danger” part? :banghead: Many?! Really?! Probably 1 out of a good 200, if not smaller odds. I understand there IS danger, but it’s not as rampant as it sounds from that quote!


#6

The proper response to that would be for the state of Missouri to tell the feds to go pound sand, as they have no authority over the matter.


#7

If nothing else, it’s a chance to bring a case with the potential to overturn Roe before the court.

For everyone who claims that Republican-nominated justices did nothing to overturn Roe, they’re ignoring the way the court operates: They can’t simply put out a statement saying, “By the way, we decided to overturn an earlier decision today. Thanks!”. There has to be a case presented to them which relates to the prior decision in such a way that overturning it can be reasonably done.


#8

So…have you ever been pregnant and in risk of dying?

Just a honest question. :confused:
You seem to trivialize the pain involved in that.


#9

Does someone require a personal experience to have an opinion?


#10

I am very happy about this. We need to protect the unborn in this nation. Abortion is an injustice! God bless the state of Missouri for taking this measure to end abortion. I hope it becomes law in the state.


#11

If the bill becomes law, I am sure it will be challenged.

But the opposition would then have to prove the unborn is not a human being.

I doubt they are prepared for that.


#12

Perhaps you can answer this question, then: What medical condition requires the destruction of a healthy, normal unborn child that would otherwise live to term, guaranteeing the death of the mother if the child is not killed?

Good luck. So far, I haven’t gotten an answer to this.


#13

You may want to do some research on the topic. In reality, it is extremely rare, if ever, needed to save a mother.

That said, politically speaking, they should keep the option for Rape, Incest and possible death of the mother in there. It would make it passable. Financially speaking, once passed into law the clinics who provide abortions would have to shut down due to lack of business.

This is one more case where Republicans will grab defeat out of the jaws of victory because their unwillingness to accept 99.5% of a victory…

IMO. YMMV.


#14

“You seem to trivialize the pain involved in that.”
Anything too hard to understand in this sentence?

This is for the others who replied to my post too.


#15

I was never interred in Dachau - should I not rail against the treatment of those poor souls?

Yes, its better to let your ire at state legislatures ignoring the constitution, something Presidents and Congressman do all the time, overwhelm what should be your joy and people taking steps to recognize the abhorrence of something our faith finds diabolic.


#16

Yes, its better to let your ire at state legislatures ignoring the constitution, something Presidents and Congressman do all the time, overwhelm what should be your joy and people taking steps to recognize the abhorrence of something our faith finds diabolic.


#17

The bill, House Joint Resolution 98, was amended Tuesday to remove any exemptions for rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

Hypocrites. Rape and incest is tragic, but it doesn’t justify murdering the unborn.

Either way, it is a good first step. :frowning:


#18

We can’t ignore the heart, but we can’t allow sentimentality justify evil. For example, reading a biography of Adolf Hitler, I can feel sympathetic to his pains, but this doesn’t mean he is justified. Good intentions are not always good.

Christi pax,

Lucretius


#19

What exactly is ‘that’?

Am I required to know it to have a pro-life view?


#20

The mass majority of abortions are not such, either.

Christi pax,

Lucretius


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.