Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, Jan. 8, 2010 | 11:46 a.m.
Sun Archives
CARSON CITY -- A district judge ruled today that the "personhood" petition, which sought to override Nevada's abortion laws, not be circulated or placed on the November ballot because it's "too general in nature."
District Judge James Russell ruled that the initiative's language was too general and the voters would not understand the impact. "There is no way anybody can really understand the effect," the judge said after 75 minutes of arguments.
The initiative sought to amend the state constitution by defining a person and extending due process rights to "everyone possessing a human genome" from before birth to death. "In the great state of Nevada, the term 'person' applies to every human being," the initiative states.
Olaf Vancura of Personhood Nevada, which is pushing the abortion amendment, said the ruling by Russell would be appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.
Personhood Nevada sought to gather 97,200 signatures of voters to place the question on the ballot.
Lee Rowland, an attorney for the ACLU, told the judge the proposed amendment is too vague and does not contain the words "abortion" "birth control" or "fertilization." If enacted, she argued it would change thousands of laws in Nevada.
Michael Brooks, a Las Vegas lawyer representing Personhood Nevada, said the amendment is about abortion but he argued it is also to protect the rights of the disabled and elderly. "Human beings are entitled to protection," he said.
Brooks said that once the constitutional amendment was approved twice by the voters, there would be court cases to define what would be permitted. This proposed amendment, Brooks said, has "the broader purpose of civil rights. We're trying to protect the unborn."
Attached to the amendment is a description of the intended effects. It says, "This amendment codifies the inalienable right to life for everyone, young or old, healthy or ill, conscious or unconscious, born or unborn. It assures protection and dignity to our children, our infirm and our seniors."
The ACLU filed suit last November to prevent the initiative from going forward.
Russell agreed with Rowland that the petition was invalid and should not be placed on the ballot
The judge said he is not taking a position on the subject of the initiative but only whether it meets the test of the law. This proposal, said Russell, "has complex implications."
He gave Rowland seven days to draw up an order for him to sign.
At the beginning of the oral arguments, the judge said this issue would probably go to the Supreme Court and he wanted as complete a record as possible.
You take a breath, you are a person. Period. Prior to that, you're a bunch of cells. Case over, dismissed.
While I dont agree that abortion is a form of birth control, I do however feel that some women should not have any more children while sitting at home living off my tax dollars while I'm forced to work, or for certain medical reasons a pregnancy might have its advantages to be terminated. But I get tired of hearing from all these Planned Parenthood/Personhood supporters about how they can provide all the help a woman needs to continue her pregnancy and keep the child or put it up for adoption. How about some of them putting themselves on those adoption lists and taking these children so once again....I'm not paying for someone else's kid. I dont have any of my own for a reason....I CANT AFFORD IT!.
Thank you ACLU - way to kick ass!
My baby was a BABY from the beginning of my pregnancy. Shame on you who kill innocent children for your own selfish reasons.
I am 22 years old and know that im not ready to have a baby, just the other week i found out that i am pregnant. and you know what, as a woman, i was able to accept it as a great thing in my life. people should use protection if they can not cope with the responsibilities of having children. lucky for me i am going to be able to stay in college and work full time, during this new addition to my household. i feel so excited to be having a lil' version of me and my man. its gonna be the best!
Good.
Good, joost.
Just hope the man hangs around. In the minority community, 70% of the men don't.
Best of luck. You made the choice to mess around, now you'll learn the results. Hope it's not the hard way...
I said this when it first came into the news, end of life, beginning of life. The Ziser is the nut-bar that got together with Alan Stock of kxnt to push through the gay marriage ban.
If Nevada was first with gay marriage, we could have made a lot of money, like we did in the 30's with quickie marriages and divorces. This is another defeat for right wing talk radio. Other newspapers in town and talk radio censors peoples input, unlike the Sun.
So, will the IRS allow me to use this "person" as a tax exemption prior to its birth? Will I now be able to drive in the commuter lane if pregnant? And for those of you arguing against keeping abortion legal, please share with us your heroic stories of adopting all of those crack-addicted lives you so cherish. There are over half a million children in this country in need of adoption. Why haven't all of you stepped forward and taken them into your homes? If you want to be on a crusade, walk the freaking walk.
Alan Stock also went on a rant against Rosie O'Donnell, who I could care less about, but it shows what kind a guy he is to attack someone on the air over their private sex life.
Ziser, Stock and the station manager out there, they are all birds of a feather, public figures and bigots in my personal opinion, we have other more important issues than government getting involved in abortion, and marriage issues.
What was Lowden's, Gibbones and Enswign's opinion on this? I bet they wanted it to go away.
More pious and sanctimonius jackasses lacking good judgement. Just what this state needs right now.
What I find interesting is that the talk show nuts complain that their should be less government interference in our daily lives, but then turn around and want to put all these laws in-place that probe into the most personal aspects of our lives. I personally don't like the idea of someone having an abortion because they were too careless to take precautions against getting pregnant, but it's not up to me to decide a matter like this for another adult and it's not my place to do the "Holier then Thou" dance.
Make up your mind Stocko! More government interference or Less? Hmmmm? Were waiting!
In what is another " slam against the creation of mankind " the court has decided to rescind the creation story. This can only go for so long before God's " protection " slowly removes itself regarding the affairs of this country. Actually, we are seeing the ramifications of this right now, high unemployment, natural disasters, ( i.e; swine flu, weather calamities, etc. ). The U.S. as we know it is sinking fast, no thanks to the policies in Washington, D.C. namely, the man who currently occupies the Oval Office!
Actual story.
Girl goes out, gets lucky with a sailor, she's knocked up, he's long gone.
Wants an abortion, doesn't even know the guys name. In the 70's, no way to help her. A doctor gives her some pills to induce abortion, nope, nothing works. Her Irish Catholic parents kick her out of the house. She has the kid, gave it up like all the sick Baptists want you to do.
15 years later, she decides to find her child. The child she finds is developmentally disabled, unable to talk, basically lost. The first question they asked the mother is "Do you know where her father is?"
It almost killed her. All you anti-abortion zealots need to move to Georgia, where you will be comfortable with your ilk....
The proposed amendment was written to address the sad progression we have seen in denying the dignity of human beings from conception to natural death. As is, the lack of a definition of Person has resulted in the unintended consequence of lack of protection for the unborn. Now, there are those who would like to see those who are developmentally disabled or seriously injured be "put out of their misery."
But life, while sometimes difficult, is not something from which a human being should be put down, like a dog who has finished his course or ended before birth for the simple fact of being inconvenient or unplanned.
This amendment is necessary to stop the unintended progression that is taking place in its absence.
If the people so concerned about what goes on in other people's wombs actually cared about the 'children', they'd go out and adopt or foster the children who are already here. Bunch of pious, sanctimonious motherf-ers. By the way, quit using your bible as a defense, since you obviously haven't read the parts where 'god' orders the bellies of pregnant women to be ripped open and their children to be dashed against the rocks. Yeah..that always escapes you. If abortion was such a no-no, why does your God command it time and time again. How about the spontaneous abortions 'he' brings about. F-ing hippocrites. Quit standing outside Ob-Gyn clinics and creating a disturbance. You don't even know what it is you're protesting about. Seek therapy...and for the love of the flying spaghetti monster...get yourselves sterilized so as not to pollute and corrupt the mind of some innocent child you might possibly bring into this world.
I am against using abortion for birth control.
But not as much as I'm against welfare idiots with three kids already popping out more so I have to pay for their upbringing and incarceration.
We are not talking about planned or even unplanned kids of responsible parents. We spay and neuter dogs and cats because they can't control themselves. I hate to say it but eventually we will have to do the same with crackheads and welfare idiots. Not because we want to, but because we can't afford more stupid people on the planet.
By allowing people to have kids on the dole and not forcing the biological fathers to pay for their kids, we were kind when we should have been cruel. Not now, but eventually. Maybe ten years.
Where does one get protection from "personhood" organizations?
: {
"In what is another "slam against the creation of mankind" the court has decided to rescind the creation story. This can only go for so long before God's "protection" slowly removes itself regarding the affairs of this country."
jlykins -- you ever hear of that old maxim "exaggeration is just another branch of lying"? Or the First Amendment? The court made a narrow technical ruling on petition laws. That's all. It didn't say anything close to what you suggested here.
Oh, and your "God" is irrelevant here.
"This amendment is necessary to stop the unintended progression that is taking place in its absence."
CarolMarie & ilk -- regardless of your opinion, or agenda, the amendment is NOT necessary. It would be redundant to Nevada's original Article, Section 1: "Inalienable rights. All men are by Nature free and equal and have certain inalienable rights among which are those of enjoying and defending life ..." You all should do your homework -- it's only been there for a century and a half.
The debate over whether or not a fetus is entitled to that protection is for the legislature and courts to decide, not you, and morality has no place there. In the meantime the penumbra of privacy as explained in Roe v. Wade must be protected from you and your ilk.
"The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion." -- Arthur C. Clarke
As sad as life can be for those who survived their mother's choice of life over murder of their child, only those who live can make choices about how to live. There is plenty of evidence of life and personality in the womb. Who is more helpless? Who should be most protected?
Judge a society by it's treatment of the most helpless. Shall we walk softly in the shadow of death? Why has our society grown so ugly and violent--after all, troubled pregnancies are not new. The US murdered 50 million citizens and replaced them with illegal immigrants. Where is the wisdom in that? Could we change our choice to promote sex--any sexual act-- as the greatest good; the highest right of the living? I deeply regret my abortion. Belatedly does a woman have the wisdom to reflect on her choices.
retrodoc -- unless you have a womb, or have something cooking in one, your opinion is irrelevant.