Will this result in investigation by speculum? What is the problem with these pre-fetus worshippers?
In any practical application of this initiative, if it passed and was signed into law, would be impossible to consistently enforce. Should Initiative 25 pass, it would have negative consequences for those involved in embryonic stem cell research as well as for individuals looking to participate in conception assistance treatments such as in-vitro fertilization. And this legislation would not only criminalize abortion - including in cases of rape, incest, or maternal danger - but also many forms of birth control. (Colorado Independent):
Colorado Right to Life and Personhood USA, the groups behind proposed Initiative 25, are undeterred by the fact that Coloradans voted against the test-run amendment last year by a margin of three to one. The new amendment is even farther reaching, moving the initial marker for the beginning of life from "fertilization" to "the beginning of the biological development of a human being."
Personhood Colorado Director and the initiative proponent Gualberto Garcia Jones told The Colorado Independent that the change was made "to be more comprehensive in our definition of a person" and was not done to make it more appealing to voters.
"It's intended to account for human beings who may be created through asexual reproduction in laboratories and used as raw material for research, organs, or stem cells. Fertilization would not have properly applied to asexually reproduced humans, but even asexually reproduced human beings have a definite biological beginning," Jones explained.
"Over half-a-million Coloradans voted for the perso nhood initiative in 2008," Jones said in a press conference announcing the campaign. "Their votes acknowledging the God-given right to life of the pre-born revolutionizes the pro-life movement and encourage us toward victory. "
AN IMPORTANT REQUEST/ NOTE TO ALL PLANNING TO ATTEND THIS EVENT:
Just like at the Augusta Civic Center Public Hearing in April, PLEASE WEAR RED TO SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR MARRIAGE EQUALITY- let's have another "Sea Of Red"! :)
Oh man; do I like this match-up of GLAD/ No On 1's Mary Bonauto versus SFMM's Marc Mutty (the link is to a prior televised discussion they had earlier this month).
Video for tomorrow's USM debate with be livestreaming at WMTW.com.
Debate at USM Hannaford HallHost: Protect Maine Equality
Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Time: 5:00pm - 6:00pm
Where: Hannaford Hall, Abromson Community Education Center, PortlandSeating will be on a first come, first-served basis. 100 seats are set aside on the main floor for USM students, faculty and staff. Those 100 free tickets can be picked up at the info desk in the Abromson Community Education Center between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., this Monday and Tuesday, October 26-27, or between 9 and 4 p.m. on the day of the debate, October 28.
Members of the public will be invited to pick up free tickets for the remaining seats on the main floor between 9 and 4 p.m. on the day of the event, October 28.
PLEASE NOTE that if the USM seats are gone, students, faculty and staff can request public seats on the 28th.
There also will be a remote video broadcast available in Rooms 214-215 of the Abromson Center, which will accommodate 100 viewers. Those seats also will be available on a first come, first-served basis.
The debaters, who were selected by the campaigns, will be Marc Mutty (Yes on 1 - Stand for Marriage) and Mary Bonauto (No on 1 - Protect Maine Equality).
WMTW anchor Shannon Moss will moderate.
The panelists will include reporters Matt Wickenheiser of the Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram and Susan Cover of the Kennebec Journal and Central Maine Morning Sentinel. Dan MacLeod of the Free Press also will be asking a question.
President Botman will give a brief welcome.
Questions also will be taken from the floor and can be submitted via e-mail on the 28th by going to pressherald.com.
If you have any questions, please e-mail or call USM Public Affairs at 780-4200.
"Sea of Red", kids! Don't forget it!
Be active now!
The Colbert Report gave Protect Marriage Washington some love last night. Videos and transcripts below the fold.
Did anyone catch Colbert's own truthiness misspeak about married same-sex couples filing joint tax returns? Washington state registered domestic partners can't file joint tax returns because a) Washington state has no income tax, and b) the federal government considers them "legal strangers". With that bit o' sober fact-checking out of the way, let the games begin...
The Colbert Report Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c The Word - Don't Ask Don't Tell
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Michael Moore Colbert: Luckily a group called Protect Marriage Washington led a petition drive to put Referendum 71 on the ballot to overturn "everything but marriage". And they backed it up with some chilling ads.
Terrifying! And that ad is no less terrifying just because there is no country called Scandinavia. None of the countries in Scandinavia passed gay marriage laws in 2004, and the statistics on suicide and drug use are made up. I say it just proves the terrible toll gay marriage has on fact-checking.
Well of course the gaystapo has asked the State of Washington to disclose the names of everyone who signed the petition. But the conservative group that organized it wants to keep the names secret. I assume they'll just hid the list in a place that gay people would never look, like JC Penney.
This week the United States Supreme Court stopped the release of the petitioners' names, but it is only a temporary reprieve folks, and it brings us to tonight's Word: Don't Ask Don't Tell.
Folks, this case involves Americans' most precious right, the freedom of speech. Now sure, this petition affects legislation, is part of the public record and the law says voters have the right to know who signed it. But, the lawyer for Protect Marriage Washington, James Bopp says "The First Amendment protects citizens from government compelled disclosure of their identity when they are engaged in political speech."
Exactly! Signing a petition is a sacred trust between you and a stranger at a folding table outside the mall. Just imagine what would happen if those signatures were released. I'll let a man with a strange name explain.
Eddie Spaghetti: Who knows where these digital copies of our personal identifiers end up. They could end up in China.
Colbert: God knows what would happen if our names ended up in China. (sold back to us ask toothpaste?)
Folks, this is a terrible invasion of the petitioners' privacy. If those names are released, we would all then know the signers' sexual orientation orientation. By which I mean their orientation about other peoples' sexual orientation. And that's a very personal thing (The Hate That Dare Not Speak Its Name)
Now some say "hey too bad, they chose to sign this petition". But folks I don't believe it is a choice. I believe you're born thinking gays don't have the right to get married. Or even be joined in union.
And folks, the gays have no right to out those people. (Yet Another Right They Don't Have)
Now, my personal sexual orientation orientation is a matter of public record. I've said countless times that I don't believe gays should be allowed to marry. Or get drivers' licenses. Or join the Subway Sub Club.
But some of these petition signers may have open-minded parents who aren't ready to accept that their child is intolerant. They also may not be ready to tell their coworkers that their friend Phillip isn't just a "roommate", but a very special someone who helps them make up facts about Scandinavia.
Folks, we need to protect this persecuting minority. And the only way I can see to do that is for Washington residents to vote in favor of gay domestic partnerships. Because then, no one will care who signed the petition, and these people can stay in the closet that the gay people have abandoned.
Here's the "Ourhe "Our position is not about hate" ad Colbert was referencing. "The terrible toll gay marriage has on fact-checking..."
Vote NO on November 3rd - Reject Referendum-71
Our position is not about hate, its about love. Its about having a true consideration for the next generations future; its about keeping the teaching of morals and preserving the most fundamental part of human relations, the original intent of marriage, ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN, no other way. Were not denying rights; we are rejecting an attempt to redefine marriage... In May of 2004, Gay marriage was legalized in Scandinavia..What Happened..? Did you know... That year alone suicide rates doubledThe illegal drug rate increased 19 timesAnd to say the least the traditional picture of Marriage being One Man One Women was completely shattered.What about our country? Did you know..77% of ALL aids cases in the United States are related to homosexuality Also, recent news reports indicate that the legalization of gay marriage will start a movement that will result in YOUR CHILDREN being taught about gay marriage as a normal form of life. Are we willing to let this happen? Whose future is really at stake?
"It's my future."
"It's our future."
No comments:
Post a Comment