Unborn Babies and Legal Rights: What Do Personhood Bills Really Mean for Women?

Oh so they have rights? Do they get to vote, pay taxes, get an ID, etc? That's kind of a silly idea.

I think this is a good start as far as protecting the rights of the unborn child, but it still has a LONG way to go. I definitely think the government needs to get competent medical authorities to help them with this bill so they can write something that makes sense, since government people don't know all about the development process. Prosecuting a woman for murder because she miscarried? That's silly, especially because there are so many miscarriages. They need to work on the wording of that so she's only prosecuted if competent medical authority can determine the miscarriage was caused by something the woman purposely did (like overdose). Also, it's ridiculous to not protect medical intervention. Just like with adults, they should be allowed to be sued for malpractice, but on more limited terms, since unborn babies are more fragile. Banning contraception is a bad idea, especially for people who can't currently afford children (financially, mentally, or physically), whose health requires a certain amount of time between births, or similar valid situations. I'm all for elective abortion being banned (except in the case of incest or rape, but even then it's a hard decision and should be made carefully). If you choose to have sex (unprotected or not), you by default are choosing to accept whatever consequences happen as a result (pregnancy, STD, etc).

Once more, politicians are running around playing "scientist". This is embarrassing.

This is truly outrageous, and yet we voted these people in office to make these decisions in our states over what they "believe" a woman's pregnancy is. I don't know if I want to move out of this country or get my tubes tied for good, unless they want to outlaw that. These idiots are not experts, nor should they have any right telling what a woman should do to her body. Yet as long as lobbyists are still around (legally), whatever money says they will do. So either get in touch and vote them out period or face reality. I want to have kids one day, but now I'm starting to reconsider...and it makes me sad cause I want to have a family in the future.....not under these laws.

What year is it again?

I really don't know how I feel about this... As someone who is pro-life, I am even afraid that if a woman miscarries naturally, under these laws, she could be held liable for something she can't control...

I keep reading these kinds of articles and I am actually scared. I want to move; go somewhere where people aren't completely brain dead, somewhere where they actually beleive in science and personal right, but then I think about all the people that can't leave. It makes me very sad.

I also think it's interesting how the "sperm as people" bills didn't pass. Hypocrites!

Let's take all of the unwanted children sitting in orphanages and foster homes, bring them to these politicians houses and ask them to raise them since they are so concerned about their well being, I'm sure they can find a place in their hearts and homes for them... What? They won't take them? Then they need to shut the hell up!

Ok I think this covers all of Mark H's comments... Men should have rights to the fetus. If he wants to keep it and the woman doesn't, he can pay for the surgery and the incubator to keep it alive outside of her body. If he doesn't want it but she does, there should be a legal process by which he can cut all ties with the child. He can have rights to the fetus, but he doesn't have rights to the woman's body. He get's no say in what stays in or what comes out.

It is my business and mine alone what I do with my body. If I become pregnant that is between me and my dr and the father and that is it. Politicians have no business being in my pants!

This legislation frightens me to my very core. Rape and incest happen every day. If these laws pass, GIRLS AND WOMEN WILL BE PUNISHED FOR BEING VICTIMS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE!

Sigh, just because the US doesn't allow abortions, doesn't mean people won't stop getting them. People could still get them illegally (back-alley abortions) or go to another country, like Canada, that allows them. You can outlaw murder, but people still do it. You can outlaw theft, but people still do it. The fact of the matter is. Even if you are trying to protect the fetus, desperate people will still seek out abortions and/ or plan B contraceptives.

Government mandated incubators? Is this the new role of women int he Republican Party?

I get the sense that a subset of men (in this case Republican men) are working hard to put women back in their place. And I believe that they may think our primary place is as "child bearers". While physically true the above article and actions of a few are terrifying to most women who have worked hard throughout the years to be on equal footing with men (something we have still not 100% succeeded in). It continues to amaze me that there are people that plot in a backroom to create bills that would NEVER be considered against the male portion of our population. Maybe the question we all have to ask ourselves is why a portion of his political party (the portion that pushes this type of legislation) think women are LESS THAN men. That we need to be regulated as to what we can/cannot grow within our bodies? That before making a medical choice with our doctor that we do not have the emotional, mental, physical and/or financial support to carry a child and so choose not to must be forced to watch a film of our ultrasound because apparently we are all too dim-witted to understand (without pictures) the consequences or our actions.

I don't care what your political party is, Ladies. Wake the heck up. This is backlash against women and we need to make it clear that we are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.

And before this article I had never heard of Constance Johnson but I've decided this is one wickedly, awesome woman who feels very comfortable fighting fire with fire. I would love to have been there the first time her male peers read her proposed legislation. I'm sure they were as appalled as I was in reading this one. (see article paragraph below).

Calling the personhood bills absurd and sexist, Democratic state senator Constance Johnson of Oklahoma City introduced a bill of her own in early February, granting similar rights and benefits to sperm. Her bill stated: "Any action in which a man ejaculates or otherwise deposits semen anywhere but in a woman's vagina shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child." It failed, as did one proposed by Democratic state senator Jim Wilson of Oklahoma that would have required the father of the unborn child to be financially responsible for the mother-to-be's housing, healthcare, transportation, and food while pregnant.

They try to pass in in Colorado every 2 years. What these ignorant people don't get is that if you're a girl of childbearing age, this bill will prevent doctors from treating you due to fear of being sued for harming the possible fetus, regardless of whether or not it's there.

There are many medications and medical procedures that can cause severe congenital disorders and miscarriages if given in the first trimester. Hospital doctors and family practitioners will play it safe and may not give life-saving medications or do surgical procedures on anyone that "could" be pregnant.

By passing these types of personhood bills, they are virtually putting the health of a microscopic multicellular organism above that of a human being and that is ignorant.

On making birth control illegal... that would just result in more unwanted pregnancies, which would result in more money being spent on welfare and children growing up in bad conditions. Plus, the world is overpopulated as it is. Banning birth control won't make us stop having sex. We'll just end up relying on methods that are not nearly as effective.

Also, if abortions are made illegal, women are still going to have them, but they're going to be unsafe back-alley procedures that put the women at risk. Or they'll go to another country where it is legal.

Oppression and harassment. 95% of Catholics use birth control. 15% of them attend church each Sunday. Tell me what they want more. Anyway, I am a firm believer that birth control is mandatory for any woman that desires it. Period.

What it comes down to it most pro-lifers aren't really interested in the children after the birth. Otherwise those same folks would be for policies that help poor women to raise their kids - feed clothe and house them properly. They'd be for reform of adoption laws so not only "Rick and Susie RichPerson" can adopt (my fiance and I can't afford a home yet so I doubt any place would allow us to adopt. Not to mention adoption costs aren't covered by any insurance so we couldn't afford adoption fees even if we wanted to). They'd be for comprehensive sex-ed and readily available birth control. But they're not. It's all about punishing women for being sexually active and in control of their sexuality. They liked it better in the good ole days when women were little more than indentured servants, completely dependent on men, and unable to make any decisions with regards to their bodies or their lives. They are not pro-life they are pro-patriarchy. Laws like this are the proof of that.

Men need to stay out of women's bodies

Question to conservatives out there: If the fetus you saved was gay, would you continue to support its rights?

Republicans want less government, except when it comes to what adults do with their own personal lives. Then the government wants to butt itself right in there.