It seems as though our brothers and sisters who pushed the personhood amendment unsuccessfully in the 2011 MS statewide elections are up to it again. Yesterday, another constitutional amendment was filed with Secretary of State Dingleberry Hosejob. It, like its predecessor, defines life as beginning at conception. On the surface, it looks like a great way to stop the hoards of women from aborting the painful reminders of their sinful Saturday night fornications. The trouble is that the wording is so broad that it provides no exceptions for abortions in cases where the woman's life is endangered, for in vitro fertilization where an embryo is not implanted and must be discarded, and for certain types of birth control for just a few examples.
Their reasoning for resubmitting it is that obviously the people of MS were too stupid to understand it the first time. Nearly 60% of the population was simply confused. There was apparently a campaign to make up all these scenarios that could never happen to scare nearly 60% of the voting population into voting against it. Yeah...
The problem is that their amendment was and is so poorly worded that the same arguments against it the first time still hold true. The best ideas when legislated poorly become extremely dangerous. I know many people who identify as very conservative, Christian, and pro life, who are educated, intelligent people who were not able to vote for the amendment the first time. I don't see why it should be different this time.
The same people who are fighting voraciously to keep the government out of their gun cabinet, out of their check book, and out of their healthcare insurance are fighting equally hard to get government into the reproductive process. Either you want liberty or you don't. Nobody is forcing anybody to have an abortion.
I don't think I could ever support an abortion for birth control purposes. I do know that it is necessary in some situations and its not my place to make that decision for someone else. I'll pray for anyone faced with that situation. I'll share my beliefs if the opportunity presents itself. I'll not force my values on someone else by criminalizing a decision to be made between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her God, especially when the law that criminalizes it intentionally or unintentionally affects so many other area of life.
No. I wasn't confused the first time, and I'm not confused this time. Bad legislation with good intent is still bad legislation. I can't believe the authors were so bold as to not fix the amendment to reflect the qualms voters had before resubmitting it.
The first time a petition is submitted on almost any issue, I'll sign it just to give voters a chance to weigh in on the issue. The voters have spoken. There's no reason to sign this one to beat the same dead horse.
No comments:
Post a Comment