[clue-talk] Obama, McCain, and the American flag

[Brian Gibson]

It's not a smoke screen and if anyone needs to be honest, it's the authors and supporters of 48.  It is an end-around Roe v Wade and an attempt to trump Federal law and to put the state above the Federal government.  You can't pick and choose when to be sovereign and when not to be when you're part of a republic.  You secede if you're tired of playing by the rules.

Legal personhood is not the same as "human beinghood".  As the author from that web site points out, they are "not the same thing in law or tradition".  Corporations have limited but significant personhood status, which has been a controversial and contentious subject for over a century.  It is the treatment of corporations as a(n artificial) person by which corporations are granted the right to own property and enter into contracts but also be sued and taxed.  Yet the whole concept of corporate personhood implies that corporations are granted constitutional protections, of which historically the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights have been upheld in favor of corporations.  This has the implication of enourmous influence that corporations have over government and not necessarily good for the people.  Yet, even though corporations are treated as persons, no one is going to regard them as human beings (in fact there are those that think some
 companies are not just inhuman but inhumane).  

Moving on to personhood of a fertilized egg.  Some things that immediately come to mind.  Can parents claim their unborn child as a dependent for a tax deduction?  In the US, all rules require a child being born first before citizenship can be bestowed.  So is a fertilized egg with legal personhood status a non-US citizen and is therefore not entitled to protection under the Constitution?  What is to become of unused fertilized eggs which is a bi-product of invitro fertilization?  Keep them on ice which could be regarded as false imprisonment?  Dispose of them which would somehow make it murder and who would be liable?   The parents?  The doctor?  The clinic?  The actual technician?  Does someone take "custody" or are they orphaned and become "wards" of the state?  Can they be sold?  If so, isn't that human traficking?  Do you force the parents to bring them all to term?  Is the accidental termination of an unknown pregnancy involuntary manslaughter? 
 Why stop at a fertilized cell?  Looking forward into the future, scientists will eventually be able to have the ability to design and program life forms as we do computers today.  Then a collection of 46 human chromosomes would be enough to define a human being; biologically that's all you need now.  Besides, assuming 48 passes (not likely) it would be found unconsititutional (perhaps that's the strategy to force RvW in front of SCOTUS), it would only be effective in CO.  You do nothing to reduce the demand for abortions at which point you go back to the dark ages or people seek them outside of Colorado.

I'm not saying all these things would or could even come to pass, but the law of unintended consequences implies that you don't know what's going to happen as a result of a decision.  Some of these things are plausible while others obviously border on the absurd, but given the creativity and zeal of lawyers, if there's something they can litigate they will.  Most of this stuff I didn't even realize until I looked closely at the legal implications.

No one is pro-abortion even among those who are pro-choice, but rather than address the reasons people seek abortions in a sensible and mature manner, you would rather enshrine your religious beliefs into law at the expense of other religions (Jews believe "at first breath") and non-religious citizens.  That makes many of you hypocrits for standing against other theocratic societies.  What's next?  Outlaw divorce?  Ban same-sex couples from marrying? (It's just a matter of time.)  A handbook of authorized sexual acts? (Blue laws are BS)  Talk about giving lip service to freedom and liberty.



----- Original Message ----
From: David L. Willson <DLWillson at TheGeek.NU>
To: CLUE talk <clue-talk at cluedenver.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 1, 2008 11:57:08 PM
Subject: Re: [clue-talk] Obama, McCain, and the American flag

Honestly, I meant to express a sincerely-held belief, not open a debate, but I'm sure you're all aware that I'm not unwilling to discuss this issue with the opposition, no matter how many or how well prepared.  With that said:

Brian, how do you suppose that it might come about that a second round of what I might call "normal thinking" will result in situations that are ... let's agree on this ... ridiculous?  You sincerely believe that this, or something like it, would happen, right?  Or you wouldn't have brought it up.  You know that it would be unethical to raise an improbable FUD-spectre just to stymie a rational codification of simple biological fact.  I say "second round" because that's the way we used to think.  We understood, in the old days, that human life began in the womb, and any innocent kid, without an understanding of the political issues at stake, armed only with an 8th grade education, might follow the thread of life back to it's beginning, and ... well, they might reach what I think of as a logical conclusion as to the location in time of that beginning.  Codification of that logic seems like a good idea to me.

But you raised the spectre, so I'll let you knit flesh to bone, and describe how you see it happening.  Describe the ditch we'll find ourselves in if we are so foolish as to ~guess~ when the human person begins, armed with nothing but basic biology and, I'll just speak for myself here, some small amount of faith in our fellows.

I don't normally think of myself as a person with limited imagination, but I just can't imagine the situation you described below, or anything like it, occurring.

You'll pardon my sarcasm as long as I pardon your smoke-screen, I'm sure.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Gibson" <bwg1974 at yahoo.com>
To: "CLUE talk" <clue-talk at cluedenver.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 1, 2008 10:34:06 PM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
Subject: Re: [clue-talk] Obama, McCain, and the American flag

I can only guess you plan to vote Yes on 48.  Beware the law of unintended consequences when doing so.  Regardless of where you stand on the issue of abortion, granting personhood with all the legal ramifications that come with it to a fertilized egg will more than likely have a disastrous effect on existing and future laws.  You need to look no further than what granting corporate personhood has done.

And if it helps to hear it from someone on the right, here you go: http://thecoloradoindex.typepad.com/the_colorado_index/2008/09/updated-voters.html

> COLORADO AMENDMENT 48  Definition of person
> Would ban abortion by defining personhood as beginning at fertilization. 
The unintended consequences of this initiative are almost 
> certainly
worse than leaving Roe alone.  All of society's laws and customs would
have to be reworked to accommodate this initiative.  
> For example, could
a woman who has a natural miscarriage on the day after fertilization (a
not infrequent event) be prosecuted for 
> child abuse resulting in death
simply because the egg did not attach to the uterus?  This "definition"
says that she could be. 



----- Original Message ----
From: David L. Willson <DLWillson at TheGeek.NU>
To: clue-talk <clue-talk at cluedenver.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 1, 2008 6:23:01 PM
Subject: [clue-talk] Obama, McCain, and the American flag

Looks like it's not going through, so I'm resending this...  I hope it doesn't show up twice.

-----

All,

Obama never said anything against the American flag, and he's not friends with a terrorist.  The comments that Obama supposedly made were part of a comedian's satirical work, not intended to be taken seriously, but somebody took it seriously, and they sent out a statement of outrage.  That caused others to believe it was true, so they echoed his outrage.  I looked it up on "that site", Snopes, and found this:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/stance.asp

Obama is not the enemy within.  If anything, we all are the enemy within when we hate and fear each other, when we trivialize each other's beliefs, rather than taking the time to understand them.  Let us be willing to listen to one another, to understand one another.  Let us be prepared to say what we believe, and why we believe it.  Let us be prepared to be "wrong", and let us be willing to become right, even if it means the loss of some excess pride.

We can vote on facts, rather than hysteria.  I'm sorry some of our religious leaders believe outrageous things.  It seems that fear passes as faith sometimes in the Christian community, but I believe that fear and faith are opposites.  Neither of the candidates I liked made it onto the Colorado ballot, so I'll choose the best man that ~is~ on the ballot, because we are in a too-militarized world, because he has good experience with military conflict, and yet he is a peaceful and loving man, and because his running mate has good common sense and really ~does~ believe that no child should be deprived of life, no matter it's age, if it can possibly be avoided.  I will somehow get over my belief that privately he is willing to continue to tolerate the offering of horrible choices to our young people.  I will get over my perception he is playing political games with the people's money when he offers tax incentives.  I will get past, somehow, my belief that he
will not reform the government, and will instead hold the line, just barely, even if he wins.  I will vote for John McCain, not because I approve of him entirely or even mostly, but because he's the best man on my ballot, that I know of.

I currently have a President who is willing to fight for the right of an unborn human child to continue to live.  I have a President that is unwilling to offer horrible choices to young people.  I have a President who fights my fight, as best he can, and I'm going to lose that in a few months.  I'll vote to preserve what little I can, but I will lose some of that, and in all likelihood, I will lose it all and watch while a black man works ~against~ human rights.  I will have to watch while a smart man continues to erode our understanding of 8th grade biology, because it's "above his pay grade".  It's not above his pay grade; it's inconsistent with his world-view, and he is willing to dehumanize humans, which is miserable irony when just a hundred or so years ago ~he~ would have been in the dehumanized subclass of humanity.

If you're voting this year, please be aware that the issue of human rights will not stay where it is.  Unborn humans will be more or less human in "our" eyes in two years, and again in four, than they are now, because of what our elected representative do on our behalf.  Please care about that.  Please carefully consider how you regard our unborn young, and vote that perception into your government to the best of your ability.

I am now going to state my own belief, arrived at after careful consideration and some experience of all sides of the issue:  I do care about women's rights, unborn, recently born, and not so recently born.  I love women.  I love men.  Young and old.  I do NOT believe that killing unborn humans is choice that should be offered to anyone as a "remedy" to the natural and known result of sex willingly participated in!  I believe that offering that choice is a sign of a sick community.  I believe that sick people will make that choice no matter what the community does to prevent it, but that, as a community, we can only endorse life and health and sanity and responsibility and accountability.  I believe that no political issue is more important than this one.  I think my big house and your second car can be lost profitably if our respect for our unborn children can be restored.

I submit all this humbly, with sincere respect for and understanding of your beliefs, whether or not they agree with my own.  If you feel that I don't understand or respect your beliefs sufficiently, contact me, I stand ready to listen to you with an open mind and heart.

-- David
_______________________________________________
clue-talk mailing list
clue-talk at cluedenver.org
http://www.cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk



      
_______________________________________________
clue-talk mailing list
clue-talk at cluedenver.org
http://www.cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk
_______________________________________________
clue-talk mailing list
clue-talk at cluedenver.org
http://www.cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk