The bill, which backers hoped would provide a path to roll back the constitutional right to an abortion, had sailed through the Oklahoma Senate in February by a 34-8 vote. Many thought the Republican-dominated House would rubber-stamp the bill.
But Republican lawmaker Sally Kern said the measure failed before reaching the floor of the House.
Republicans have a majority in both chambers of the Oklahoma Legislature, and Republican Governor Mary Fallin, who opposes abortion, had been expected to sign the bill into law.
Missouri is the only state so far with such a "personhood" law on its books establishing legal rights for embryos, although similar initiatives have been proposed in a handful of states.
They include last autumn's failed attempt in Mississippi to enact a personhood amendment to the state constitution and a similar proposal in Virginia that was put on hold by the Legislature until next year.
While the Oklahoma personhood bill did not expressly bar abortion, abortion-rights advocates have said there was nothing to stop hospital administrators or local law enforcement agencies from restricting or criminalizing abortions under such a law.
"Personhood proposals are dangerous," said Martha Skeeters, president of the Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice.
She said she was gratified the personhood bill was killed, saying the legislation would threaten commonly used contraceptives, fertility treatments and other medical procedures.
The bill did say that nothing in the law would bar the use of in-vitro fertilization or interfere with the disposal of unused embryos or their use in stem cell research. Nor would the bill have barred contraception measures such as the "morning-after" pill or treatment for ectopic pregnancies, in which the pregnancy occurs outside the womb.
The bill, like personhood measures in other states, has been controversial within the anti-abortion camp, with some fearing the strategy could backfire by provoking the U.S. Supreme Court to strike it down.
CHALLENGING ROE V. WADE
The initiatives were designed to provoke legal challenges from abortion-rights supporters, with the ultimate goal of giving the Supreme Court a vehicle to overturn its landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion, according to Keith Mason, a leader of the movement.
Oklahoma's bill sought to go further than Missouri's in challenging Roe v. Wade by not including language acknowledging that it defers to the court and Constitution.
State Representative Randy Terrill, a conservative Republican, called the announcement of the bill's failure "stunning" and complained the speaker "threw the caucus under the bus."
"There was no vote in the caucus," he complained. Instead, there was a private "whip count" in which party floor leaders polled fellow Republicans on the matter, Terrill said.
Many in the Oklahoma medical community had spoken out against the bill after it passed the Oklahoma Senate, and Terrill said there was a belief among some that business leaders disliked the personhood bill.
24 comments:
This bill is really about at what point we recognize a devolping fetus as a human. The liberal side of the debate can give no real answer to this question and seem to think that the defenition of humman life should be what ever is convenient for the mother. However, this is a dangerouse view because it allows them to use a slippery slope form of reasoning to justify the termination of human life at what ever point they see fit. The only reasonable answer to this question is that life begins at conception.
This is one of those controversies that's never going to be changed by law makers. The fact that both sides of the argument are based off of religious and philosophical beliefs as to when an embryo becomes a human, just goes to show that there's never going to be an absolute solution to this issue.
I don't think the embryo should have a right to life because we don't know what the circumstances are pertaining to it's development. I believe in abortion only if the women has been rapped or if the child is deathly sick but other then that no because when you mess around like that and you get pregnant that child now becomes your responsibility and thats something you have to know when you have sex.
There has been many laws containing to abortion and speaking for the rights of unborn babies. I am a person who does think embryos in their mother's womb are just as much a person as me or any other living and breathing individual. People should not give the bill too much thought, however, the bill is just a proposed law that could begin to give unborn babies the same rights as everyone else in the country. Many people want the mother's to have their rights recognized as well but when it comes to a person and their life should the life in trouble be the one who gets most of the help offered.
I’m really surprised that this bill did not pass Oklahoma’s Republican-dominated legislature. Being pro-life, I like the idea of the ‘personhood’ law. I think it’s ridiculous that embryos are not considered humans. What else would conception lead to?? A baby’s heart starts to beat 18 days after conception; how do you argue that a life has not started?
I understand that from a legal perspective the personhood bill is tricky with regard to contraception, in-vitro fertilization, stem cell research, etc., but I hope that after more consideration this bill will pass through several states’ legislatures.
In my opinion I would like the personhood bill to be pass. It would stop one of the main problems we have, witch is abortion. This bill will still allow the use of birth control, plus it will save innocent lives. In my way of seen things this bill will be good for our country. It will help people see life in a different perspective. Hopefully this will make people see, and understand what we are doing wrong. By doing so we can help our country solve many problems, mainly abortion.
Some people just never give up. I'm not saying that people should go around getting abortions, but if they present the need for abortion, it should be an option. Now if this bill had passed, abortion would have been equivalent of murder, and that's ridiculous. Stem cell research is fueled by abortion. And honesty, do taxpayers really want to pour their tax money into couples who can't afford to have a kid? I didn't think so.
The personhood bill that was proposed in Oklahoma was rightfully killed. The main argument against abortion is that the fetus has brainwaves at a certain time and feels pain at certain times. The personhood bill would cover embryos from the moment of contraception, before brainwaves or any other human or advanced life traits are formed. The main argument is that it is inhumane to kill something that has brainwaves or can feel pain. The parenthood bill starts before any of the traits that are used as the main argument against abortion are formed. The bill also does not have any exceptions for cases of rape or incest, which is one of the reasons some people are pro-abortion.
I think it's pretty ridiculous how this is still a problem. I understand the other side, but when it comes to a woman's body, the woman herself should have the right to abort or not abort. I think we should listen to the scientists when they say that a fetus is living and breathing after a set amount of weeks, and before then, it's just a ball of differentiating cells.
I think the abortion debate all comes down to "your body, your business". It seems like an overextension of one's own views to legislate what others are allowed to do when the issue is very morally subjective. The argument has certainly been made that a fetus' body is not the same as its mother's body, which is technically true, but because the fetus cannot survive outside of its mother, it is more so an extension of her. If pro-life advocates don't like abortion, they can choose not to have one, but they shouldn't try to push their views into law by taking a backdoor in Congress with this personhood bill.
Common sense is gone, if we applied common sense why would be wasting millions or billions on stupid bills by politicians all over the country? I think it's time we hold politicians accountable to do the job that the constituents pay them to do, not just special interest groups
All these types of bills and complaints from Republicans and Democrats primarily in the states and the congress is just simply trying to shuffle attention away from their own failure to bring us back from recession due to a failed leadership in congress. If they can't fix the economy lets just complain about abortion. That gets people fired up and they stop noticing the important stuff.
PRO LIFE! It really does bother me to hear that people really want to kill someone because you couldnt control yourself and now have to take responsability and just cause thats the easy way out doesnt mean you should do it. Now rape is different,but even then i believe that you should have the baby and honsetly just put it up for adoption,i would rather have that then kill the person and not know what they could have done. :D
The "personhood" bill in my opinion is a really good idea. If they were to pass this bill, a lot of people would actually stop and think that by having an abortion their actually killing a baby, there for their commuting murder!!! To me an embryo is a baby, simply because It's in a women's womb. I am for this bill, I hope they actually consider it becuause if they do people that are having intercourse can stop and think that if they don't take care of themselfs and wear a condom they can have a baby and if they get an abortion they are killing an innocent baby.
I feel as though many people want to treat this issue with care and delicacy, simply because if it fails catastrophically, then there would be no chance of reviving it. Even house republicans want to know that the bill is crystal clear, and obviously too many issues were raised for Oklahoma. The evaluation of the bill may have left too many loose ends to tie up, but I'm sure that the issue will be proposed again relatively soon, and probably with more focus and clarity than this last attempt.
Abortion is a tricky and controversial topic. If the bill had passed, an uproar would have started leaving those who are for abortion at the front with picket signs. I think one of the most important questions concerning abortion is whether the mother would have the right to abort the child in a rape situation. If a thirteen year old child was raped, should she be forced to go through with the birth of the child? Unfortunately, this is not an easy question and I think that is exactly what Oklahoma legislators were thinking. For now the "personhood" law remains in limbo, but who knows what states will come up with in the future to make the law become a reality.
Abortion is always a hard topic to talk about.It all comes down to free-will. With me being religious, I don't like the idea of abortion, but I can understand it. It's the woman's body and she does have the right to decide if she wants a child or not. Also in the cases of rape, I can understand if they want an abortion. And I'm kind of surprised that Republicans dropped the bill, being as though they are conservative. But it all comes back to free-will, and women should have the right to handle their pregnancy situation the way they want to.
I am not surprised that it didn't pass because from what I understood from your article is it didn't define certain things of it. I for one am Pro-Life but its not that simple. I for one would be okay with the bill if they layed out some exceptions like rape, insest, and medical necessities. But this was for all and I didn't tihnk it should have passed like this, but whatever.
I am not surprised that it didn't pass because from what I understood from your article is it didn't define certain things of it. I for one am Pro-Life but its not that simple. I for one would be okay with the bill if they layed out some exceptions like rape, insest, and medical necessities. But this was for all and I didn't tihnk it should have passed like this, but whatever.
Abortions and the matter of when a person has become a person have been debated for the past decades. In Roe v. Wade, abortion was decided legal in the first trimester as a right to privacy between female citizens and their doctors. This Oklahoma bill would counter the decision made in Roe V. Wade presenting embryos with the rights of any human. Although the bill failed, it shows the conflict America has on the topic of abortion
I am suprised the "personhood" law failed in Oklahoma's legislature. Yet, there are many potential issues with it. If it were to be passed, the birth control bill could potentially be consired taking the life of the human. A more effective way to reduce the number of abortions in America is through sex eduaction and ontraceptions. I would not support the Personhood legislation because it promotes a lack of responsibility in procreation for males. By supporting this legislation you tell your daughters they are simply vessels for another human being. You remove any, control they have over their bodies. If you are raped, it will be her attacker who chooses whether or not you becomes pregnant.
I dont think that an embryo should have rights as people. Yes they will soon be living breathing people but I think that it should be the mothers choice to keep the baby or not.
Bills like this are a good idea to help turn around the supreme court case of Roe v Wade, but they have to be done just right. If the bill is not done right then it can turn out to do more harm than good.
Bills like this are a good idea to help turn around the supreme court case of Roe v Wade, but they have to be done just right. If the bill is not done right then it can turn out to do more harm than good.
Post a Comment