Friday, 3 July 2009

The definition of insanity

Here they go again (emphasis mine of course).
Colorado voters in 2008 trounced* an amendment that would have defined a fertilized human egg as a person, but supporters of the "personhood" ballot issue are angling for a rematch in 2010.

This time, though, they're avoiding the word "fertilization" in the amendment's language, saying that the term confused voters, who may have visualized chicken eggs.
. . .
The amendment would say that "the term 'person' shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being."

So what is "the beginning of the biological development of that human being"?

That would be up to courts to decide, said Gualberto Garcia Jones of Personhood Colorado.

Denver Post

Oooweee, the good people of Colorado -- at least in the comments to that article -- are some pissed. Not only are the fetus fetishists about to waste ANOTHER thump of time and money, they insult the very voters they hope to woo.

Way to go, fetus fetishists. Keep up the good work.

*Trounced = 3 to 1 against.

1 comment:

deBeauxOs said...

"When we use 'fertilized egg,' it's a pejorative," said Keith Mason, director of Personhood USA ...

A pejorative? No, it's a fact. He just didn't like the outcome of presenting the facts to people and letting them decide. Now Mason and his accolytes are going to obfuscate and spin in the hopes that people won't catch on to what they're doing.

It's why we call them religious fundamentalist pro-lies zealots.

Post a Comment