Over 55 Percent of Mississippi Voters Agree That Fertilized Eggs Are Not People

Emily Wagster Pettus reports in the AP via Boston Globe:

JACKSON, Miss.— Mississippi voters Tuesday defeated a ballot initiative that would have declared life begins at fertilization, a proposal that supporters sought in the Bible Belt state as a way to prompt a legal challenge to abortion rights nationwide.

The so-called “personhood” initiative was rejected by more than 55 percent of voters, falling far short of the threshold needed for it to be enacted. If it had passed, it was virtually assured of drawing legal challenges because it conflicts with the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that established a legal right to abortion. Supporters of the initiative wanted to provoke a lawsuit to challenge the landmark ruling.

The measure divided the medical and religious communities and caused some of the most ardent abortion opponents, including Republican Gov. Haley Barbour, to waver with their support.

Read More: AP via Boston Globe

30 Comments on "Over 55 Percent of Mississippi Voters Agree That Fertilized Eggs Are Not People"

  1. Not saying I’m unhappy with the way the vote went, because I’m not… but I recall reading in history when a majority of Mississippi voters didn’t think members of a certain race were people either.

  2. Not saying I’m unhappy with the way the vote went, because I’m not… but I recall reading in history when a majority of Mississippi voters didn’t think members of a certain race were people either.

    • sure..cause when I want answers about personal freedoms and biology my litmus test is usually Mississippi .

      plus side the tearing down of stereotypes..

  3. If the phrasing on the ballot was similar to the phrasing of this headline, it’s no wonder. Obviously fertilized chicken eggs aren’t people…

  4. If the phrasing on the ballot was similar to the phrasing of this headline, it’s no wonder. Obviously fertilized chicken eggs aren’t people…

    • Calypso_1 | Nov 10, 2011 at 9:52 am |

      If a state is succesful in defining personhood as beginning at conception will this nullify corporations as people?  When corporations merge is this conception?  Or does life begin upon incorporation?  Is a hostile takeover rape and can the products of said merger be terminated? 

  5. Malgus Khan | Nov 10, 2011 at 5:33 am |

    And so the forces of tyrrany are dealt a setback. 

  6. Malgus Khan | Nov 10, 2011 at 1:33 am |

    And so the forces of tyrrany are dealt a setback. 

  7. If science considers an amoeba a living organism, what to we call a self replicating fertilized egg with human DNA?  If it is a living organism what species does it fall under?  If we call it a living Homosapien how is it not a human being?  

  8. If science considers an amoeba a living organism, what to we call a self replicating fertilized egg with human DNA?  If it is a living organism what species does it fall under?  If we call it a living Homosapien how is it not a human being?  

    • Calypso_1 | Nov 10, 2011 at 7:31 am |

      I believe an interesting aspect of this debate that is not being adequately focused on by right to life proponents is this –  If the concept is going to come down to when a ‘person’ begins and all the rights granted therein you need broaden the legal definition of personage as it exists for all of us.  So much of the counter-debate is that post conception an embryo is not a viable organism.  Forget the nature of the CELLULAR organism at this point.  Focus on your definition of conception – what is this?  A unique GENETIC structure; and NONE of us have legal rights over our genetic structures at this time.  If you want to further the liberation of humanity from that which seeks to control it, focus on these rights and see where it takes you.

    • The difference is that an amoeba is an independent organism, whereas this is not actually a separate organism at this point. It becomes a separate organism later in the process. And it’s not uncommon for a woman to have a fertilized egg that spontaneously aborts before she even knows she’s pregnant — if it didn’t take hold then it gets flushed out at her next menstruation. Under this law, she’d be a murderer. Birth control pills stop eggs from implanting in the womb. This law would make it illegal to take birth control and then have sex because otherwise, it working as intended would be a form of murder. Under this law, a woman could feasibly be charged with involuntary manslaughter or murder if she has a miscarriage. That’s just asinine.

      And all of this is beside the point. The practical ramifications of this are so obtrusive that they knew it would cause legal challenges. This wasn’t an attempt to protect anyone or anything. It was an attempt to create a way to assail Roe v Wade for political purposes.

  9. There were so many possible ramifications of the amendment that led a lot of people to vote no, regardless of how they viewed a fertilized egg.

  10. There were so many possible ramifications of the amendment that led a lot of people to vote no, regardless of how they viewed a fertilized egg.

  11. Anonymous | Nov 10, 2011 at 11:31 am |

    I believe an interesting aspect of this debate that is not being adequately focused on by right to life proponents is this –  If the concept is going to come down to when a ‘person’ begins and all the rights granted therein you need broaden the legal definition of personage as it exists for all of us.  So much of the counter-debate is that at post conception an ‘embryo’ is not a viable organism.  Forget the nature of the CELLULAR organism at this point.  Focus on your definition of conception – what is this?  A unique GENETIC structure; and NONE of us have legal rights over our genetic structures at this time.  If you want to further the liberation of humanity from that which seeks to control it focus on these rights and see where it takes you.

  12. Vigilantius | Nov 10, 2011 at 1:06 pm |

    Well, this is sorta good news.  Now if more of them would treat things like global climate change on the same par with areas of psychic real estate, like Jesusland and Aitch Eee Double-Toothpickville they might be allowed to sit at the adults’ table soon.

  13. Vigilantius | Nov 10, 2011 at 9:06 am |

    Well, this is sorta good news.  Now if more of them would treat things like global climate change on the same par with areas of psychic real estate, like Jesusland and Aitch Eee Double-Toothpickville they might be allowed to sit at the adults’ table soon.

  14. Anonymous | Nov 10, 2011 at 1:52 pm |

    If a state is succesful in defining personhood as beginning at conception will this nullify corporations as people?  When corporations merge is this conception?  Or does life begin upon incorporation?  Is a hostile takeover rape and can the products of said merger be terminated? 

  15. fivetonsofflax | Nov 10, 2011 at 2:31 pm |

    Sorry RP, but as long as you are for abolishing federal student loans in a time when universities are showing zero interest in lowering tuitions, you are just not a viable candidate in my book.

  16. JohnFrancisBittrich | Nov 10, 2011 at 10:31 am |

    Sorry RP, but as long as you are for abolishing federal student loans in a time when universities are showing zero interest in lowering tuitions, you are just not a viable candidate in my book.

    • JohnFrancisBittrich | Nov 10, 2011 at 10:32 am |

      Oh boy, this is what I get for having two disinfo stories open at the same time!!! Ignore the above comment hahaha…

    • Jin The Ninja | Nov 10, 2011 at 2:33 pm |

      i am all for abolishing student debt period, whether loans or tuition costs.

  17. fivetonsofflax | Nov 10, 2011 at 2:32 pm |

    Oh boy, this is what I get for having two disinfo stories open at the same time!!! Ignore the above comment hahaha…

  18. Anonymous | Nov 10, 2011 at 3:58 pm |

    The difference is that an amoeba is an independent organism, whereas this is not actually a separate organism at this point. It becomes a separate organism later in the process. And it’s not uncommon for a woman to have a fertilized egg that spontaneously aborts before she even knows she’s pregnant — if it didn’t take hold then it gets flushed out at her next menstruation. Under this law, she’d be a murderer. Birth control pills stop eggs from implanting in the womb. This law would make it illegal to take birth control and then have sex because otherwise, it working as intended would be a form of murder. Under this law, a woman could feasibly be charged with involuntary manslaughter or murder if she has a miscarriage. That’s just asinine.

    And all of this is beside the point. The practical ramifications of this are so obtrusive that they knew it would cause legal challenges. This wasn’t an attempt to protect anyone or anything. It was an attempt to create a way to assail Roe v Wade for political purposes.

  19. Anonymous | Nov 10, 2011 at 6:33 pm |

    i am all for abolishing student debt period, whether loans or tuition costs.

  20. Anonymous | Nov 10, 2011 at 6:41 pm |

    Wow, I’m speechless…

  21. sure..cause when I want answers about personal freedoms and biology my litmus test is usually Mississippi .

    plus side the tearing down of stereotypes..

  22. Anonymous | Nov 11, 2011 at 10:49 pm |

    Nice try at your ol’ Liberal Media propaganda, Disinfo.

    The true headline should read that “Mississippi Voters Agree That Over 55% of Fertilized Eggs Are Not People”, making the reasonable case that, in fact, most extant eggs relate to species other than human.

    Such as Tyson Farms ™ free range chickens.  Far from addressing the abomination unto the Lord wrought by responsible family planning, this shoddily written bill would have deprived that state of its cherished Southland tradition of a hearty breakfast of Huevos Rancheros with McIlhenny(tm) sauce.

    The problem here was syntax, not sincerity, gramatical composition, not moral conviction.

  23. Liam_McGonagle | Nov 11, 2011 at 6:49 pm |

    Nice try at your ol’ Liberal Media propaganda, Disinfo.

    The true headline should read that “Mississippi Voters Agree That Over 55% of Fertilized Eggs Are Not People”, making the reasonable case that, in fact, most extant eggs relate to species other than human.

    Such as Tyson Farms ™ free range chickens.  Far from addressing the abomination unto the Lord wrought by responsible family planning, this shoddily written bill would have deprived that state of its cherished Southland tradition of a hearty breakfast of Huevos Rancheros with McIlhenny(tm) sauce.

    The problem here was syntax, not sincerity, gramatical composition, not moral conviction.

Comments are closed.