e-mail:
password:
register
|
login
› DENVER
SEARCH YOUR HUB:
GO
advanced search
Loading Ad
STORIES
EVENTS
BLOGS
FOR SALE
YELLOW PAGES
PHOTOS
Local Info ›
Home ›
Help ›
Visit Other Hubs:
YourHub.com
Arvada
Aurora
Boulder
Brighton
Broomfield
Castle Pines
Castle Rock
Centennial
Cherry Hills Village
Commerce City
Conifer
Denver
Denver North
Denver South
Edgewater
Englewood
Erie
Evergreen
Federal Heights
Franktown
Glendale
Golden
Green Valley Ranch
Greenwood Village
Highlands Ranch
Lafayette
Lakewood
Littleton
Lone Tree
Longmont
Louisville and Superior
Montbello
Morrison
nights
Niwot
Northglenn
Parker
Roxborough
Sheridan
Thornton
TriTowns
Westminster
Wheat Ridge
ADVERTISEMENT
Loading Tower
RECENT STORIES
PS1 Charter School: meaningful education
(
Mary Pierce
)
The Other Side Arts: nonprofit goes above & beyond
(
Christine Zipps
)
Join Machebeuf High School for 500 miles
(
Machebeuf High School
)
Lowry Energy Fair Sept. 6 and 7
(
Chuck Woodward
)
Police blotter: 87-year-old stabbed in robbery
(
YourHub.com
)
share a story
|
more postings
»
YourHub.com
\\
Denver
\\
Stories
\\
Sound Off
\\
I'm Mad About...
Brad Side of Things - The Problems of Personhood
e-mail to a friend
|
print this
|
link to this
NEXT ›
‹ PREVIOUS
Contributed by:
Brad Bettag
on 5/29/2008
The Brad Side of Things - The Problems of Personhood
As of today, Colorado voters will have the opportunity to vote on the legal status of a fetus in the upcoming election in November. As rational thinking citizens we all should be horrified.
20-year-old Kristi Burton of Peyton in her infinite wisdom and political science background has drummed up potential legislation that would wreck havoc on the court system in ways we have never seen before. I guess if Muskogee Oklahoma can elect a 19 year-old freshman student town mayor, Colorado just has to out do them.
I really liked the acronym a user posted in the Denver Post story with regards to the support behind this ballot measure:
(C)onservative
(R)epublicans
(A)dvocating
(P)ersonhood
I wonder who I would make my check out to...
But seriously who is funding this bill?
Christian Family Alliance of Colorado
Colorado Christian Coalition
Colorado for Family Values
Night Light Christian Adoptions
Rocky Mountain Family Council and Jim Chapman
Western Slope Lutherans for Life
Focus on the Family
Looks like a wide diverse range of agencies, now we should look and see who the biggest opponents of civil unions and gay marriages are. I bet you don't even have to look. But according to Ms. Burton's own quote "All humans should be protected by love and law, and this amendment is a historic effort to ensure equal rights for every person," I guess if you are gay you still don't qualify as a person... Apparently that is what Jesus wanted. The next question becomes what happens if the fetus turns out to be gay?
Moving on, Ms. Burton's bill looks to define personhood as "any human being from the moment of fertilization." If you cannot see the problems with this law, first off don't vote and please move to Florida, or else read on and educate yourself.
Ms. Burton clearly missed some of the far reaching ramifications of her bill, maybe she was too busy texting or calling her friends or being a typical young adult to really think about what affect her bill would have on Colorado:
My ten problems with Amendment 48:
1. A mother's miscarriage would have to be charged as manslaughter.
2. The umbilical cord wrapped around the baby's neck would have to be assault or attempted murder
3. Any other medical complications during would have to be tried as assault or even attempted murder.
4. Conjoined twins would have to be given special status and if one twin ends up killing the other twin (fighting for organs, etc) the unborn child would have to be charged with murder.
5. Mothers who smoke, drink, perform dangerous acts while pregnant (skydive, ride roller coasters, etc), will have to be charged with reckless endangerment.
6. A mother who has triplets or more could be in violation of section 8 housing laws because there are too many people living under 1 roof.
7. A mother who plays or is exposed to loud music could be charged with disturbing the peace if the baby is sleeping.
This is only the legal aspect. Do we really want to spend more taxpayer money or have a tax increase to fund the trying of all these new cases? I am sure we would need at least 1 or two more district attorneys, a few more judges, and probably a new courthouse or two around the state to allow ample room to try all these cases, and the list goes on.
8. Pregnant women would have to be able to use the HOV lanes because they are carpooling.
9. Pregnant women entering a club or bar would have to pay cover twice, or in fact may be banned from entering because a person in their group is not over the legal age to enter the club/bar.
10. I am not even going to go into the tax problems this would cause, because they are too numerous to list here.
You may say that some of my claims are outrageous and without merit, but they are just as outrageous as this ballot measure and based on simple logic would have to go into affect if this measure is passed. I mean there are monkies that show more human traits than a fetus. Are we going to pass a measure that gives Curious George the same protections under the law, are we going to allow Coco the sign language capable gorilla to vote?
Interestingly enough, this is nothing new; it has already been tried in Austria where Matthew Hiasl Pan, a chimpanzee, had been trying to get his personhood status late last year. The case was dismissed in October 2007 but lawyers for Mr. (Monkey Royal) Pan say they will appeal.
Jane Goodall and others have been trying for these rights for a long time and get labeled as crazy tree-hugging liberals and yet here we are with all the crazies from the conservative right, trying to do the same thing. Maybe I should start my own personhood campaign and go out and collect signatures to allow all the primates in the Denver Zoo to be given equal rights and demand that they be released from their cages. At least that can raise the median level of human intelligence in this state because the people who support this bill are clearly below the average.
So please, in November act like a person, use your brain and vote NO on Amendment 48. Colorado can't afford to have 20 year olds writing open ended feel-good legislation to waste the taxpayer's time and money and take away the rights of Americans, especially women; the Republicans in congress are good enough at that already.
[Report this as objectionable content.]
SUBMIT COMMENT
Rate the above story
Current Rating
Based on 2 user ratings.
Talk Back :
submit comments to the story
*Note: you need to
log-in
to add a comment or rating.
Thank you! Your comment has been updated.
*A comment must be between 1 and 1000 characters.
*Please refrain from using explicit language.
Showing 1-9 of 9 comments
Submitted By: Brad Bettag
posted on 6/4/2008 @ 10:55:24 AM
(Not Rated)
Good advice, I will that into account for my future articles.
[Report as objectionable]
Submitted By: Gail Kirkegaard
posted on 6/4/2008 @ 9:50:24 AM
Rated Story
When you open with an offensive acronym, you put readers on the defensive early in your article. Leave that sort of thing for the end, and some might read more thoroughly. I was caught up in your ten points, and ignored the paragraph about the gorilla. People who believe humans are created in God's image will not take that seriously.
[Report as objectionable]
Submitted By: Brad Bettag
posted on 6/4/2008 @ 9:09:40 AM
(Not Rated)
I'm not trying to silence anyone. I respect your view point and just wish that you felt the same way. I never once said anything about de-classifying old people or anyone for that matter? I believe debate is one of the most powerful tools American society has to offer. All I ask is that if you are going to take the time to post a comment against my opinion, at least read my opinion and understand my point of view. Honestly I have seen you post nothing about your opinion on the matter, and have just been lambasting points that you believe I have said or meant when that is truely not the case and I would like to clear up that confusion.
[Report as objectionable]
Submitted By: Gail Kirkegaard
posted on 6/3/2008 @ 3:12:27 PM
Rated Story
I did read your points, and they just aren't worth getting any further into an argument. Many people in this age have successfully used intimidation to coerce others into silence about their beliefs, to publicly submit to social trends, or to appear agreeable. Al it does is create a bunch of chameleons. I recognize it and don’t succumb. It’s best to respect one another and walk away.
[Report as objectionable]
Submitted By: Brad Bettag
posted on 6/3/2008 @ 12:11:22 PM
(Not Rated)
So wait, you first claim that I have absurd reasoning and then you just come out and say that gays "decide to be gay" in adulthood. I am not even going to try to fight through that wall of prejudice, you can fight those demons on your own. When did I ever say I was going to de-classify people? Did you even bother to read my full article? I was trying to classify more people actually, like monkeys and gorillas. Please go back and read my article before you put words in my mouth and make assumptions as to things I never wrote. You might actually learn something from a different point of view than your own. And maybe take the time to sit down and talk with someone who is gay and get their side of the story before unleashing your hate speech as to assume that they "chose to be that way".
[Report as objectionable]
Submitted By: Gail Kirkegaard
posted on 6/3/2008 @ 8:27:55 AM
Rated Story
With all due respect to your lengthy diatribe Brad, the personhood initiative is about all pre-born human life, including those who might in their adulthood decide they are gay. There are naturally an increased number of complications any time more than one person is involved in anything. Does that mean we should pursue your theory and begin to declare some living people as non-persons, so we can simplify life? Let's say, anybody over age 90 no longer counts. We can do away with them. Problem solved.
[Report as objectionable]
Submitted By: Brad Bettag
posted on 6/2/2008 @ 12:22:59 PM
(Not Rated)
Gail would you care to elaborate? I believe I have sound reasoning, what do you not get? If a fetus becomes a person, that all COULD potentially happen and be covered under the law.
[Report as objectionable]
Submitted By: Charmaine Robledo
posted on 6/2/2008 @ 9:39:28 AM
Rated Story
Interesting points, Brad. Yeah, this seems to be a very touchy and complicated subject.
[Report as objectionable]
Submitted By: Gail Kirkegaard
posted on 5/30/2008 @ 8:05:20 PM
Rated Story
Absurd reasoning.
[Report as objectionable]
Showing 1-9 of 9 comments
CONTRIBUTOR INFORMATION
Brad Bettag
Lakewood
, CO
Brad Bettag has posted
40
stories and
46
comments since joining on
3/22/2006
. Brad Bettag 's average story rating is
3.72
.
view profile »
view other postings from Brad Bettag »
SAVE AND SHARE THIS STORY
digg
Google
del.icio.us
Yahoo!
reddit
Newsvine
What is this?
STORY RSS FEEDS
All stories
All stories in Denver
All stories by Brad Bettag
WANT TO WRITE FOR YOURHUB.COM?
Want to see the stories you write and the photos you shoot featured in the YourHub.com Thursday print section available
all over the Front Range
and with home subscriptions of the
Rocky Mountain News
and
The Denver Post?
All you have to do is
register
, then post a
story or column
,
start a blog
or
tell everyone
what events are happening in town. We will print the best stories, columns, event listings, photos and blog entries in our print sections.
ADVERTISEMENT
Loading Ad
Loading Ad
ADVERTISEMENT
Loading Ad