Spacefem (spacefem) wrote,

kansas personhood amendment

Missisipi and Colorado turned it down, so they'll try it in Kansas: granting constitutional rights to a fertilized egg.

It's the sort of thing that keeps me up at night, because I might want to try to get pregnant again, and what if it's ectopic? Will the hospital say "no sorry, we can't kill this person, it's against the law"? What if they decide my birth control methods interfere with possible fertilized eggs? What if I need medical treatment, but they can't give it to me because there's no test for "fertilized egg"? By the time pregnancy tests are positive, you've blown way past fertilized egg, past zygote, well into embryo.

But no one really takes that into consideration.

I used to call myself "both pro-choice and pro-life" because don't I love life? Then I realized that "pro-life" put me in the basket with the sorts of people who vote for personhood amendments. So I stopped. And this sort of thing makes it very difficult for me to respect anyone on the other side.

It's said that there are always radicals on both sides of every issue and you have to find the middle. I don't see it here. I see one side with radicals pushing dangerous legislation. I cannot act like I'm in the middle of anything, when that's going on.

Anyway, Kari Ann Rinker who is awesome contributed an almost-encouraging writeup where she talks about how there are still moderates in the Kansas senate and this has a good chance of not passing. But I'm nervous. Nervous, and extremely offended.
Tags: kansas, pro-choice
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded