DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Mississippi amendment on 'personhood' divides Christians

**Toscoropreark** · 11-08-2011, 06:29 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/08/us/mis...html?hpt=hp_c1

In the Carpenter home, every meal begins with a prayer. Robin and his wife, Emily, are devout Christians. But they part ways with many other Christians over a measure that would expand the legal definition of human life.

Their son, Luke, now 4 years old, was born through in vitro fertilization.

The anti-abortion amendment being voted on this week in the state could restrict in vitro procedures, and the Carpenters are worried that if they wait too long to add to their family, they may end up breaking the law.

"I don't really want or need anybody else getting involved in trying to limit how that works for us, or stopping it," said Robin Carpenter. "We need to have the same rights to have a family as anybody else does."

Gov. Barbour: Life begins at conception The Carpenters fear that if Mississippi Amendment 26 passes on Tuesday, their whole future will change.

The controversial measure, known as "Personhood," will ask Mississippians to amend the state constitution to define life as beginning at conception, which would eliminate abortion, including in the cases of women who are the victims of rape and incest. The law would also outlaw certain forms of birth control and the destruction of embryos in laboratories -- which puts in vitro fertilization procedures in question because it results in unused fertilized eggs.

I agree with the woman in the article - what right does someone have to tell a person they can't have a family the way hers has? I hope for the sake of people in Mississippi that doesn't pass. Now you're telling someone who is raped or pregnant due to incest they can't have an abortion? Or they can't use birth control or use IVF because as soon as that egg is implanted with sperm - not knowing exactly when the conception is though - that is now a "person" that has "rights."

They need to re-word the law. I think the only time abortion should be banned is late-term abortions - except when the life of the mother is at risk. Otherwise, it's not my business if someone has an abortion and not anyone's business if I were to make that choice.

And especially when the law could affect choices such as this:

But for the Carpenter family -- despite their pro-life beliefs -- voting for this amendment is just not something they can live with. Their in vitro fertilization attempts to have a brother or sister for their son, Luke, will soon begin. They fear that under the amendment, they could be labeled as murderers if their fertilized eggs die.

THAT is just ridiculous.

11-08-2011, 06:29 PM	#1
Toscoropreark Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 474 Senior Member	Mississippi amendment on 'personhood' divides Christians http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/08/us/mis...html?hpt=hp_c1 In the Carpenter home, every meal begins with a prayer. Robin and his wife, Emily, are devout Christians. But they part ways with many other Christians over a measure that would expand the legal definition of human life. Their son, Luke, now 4 years old, was born through in vitro fertilization. The anti-abortion amendment being voted on this week in the state could restrict in vitro procedures, and the Carpenters are worried that if they wait too long to add to their family, they may end up breaking the law. "I don't really want or need anybody else getting involved in trying to limit how that works for us, or stopping it," said Robin Carpenter. "We need to have the same rights to have a family as anybody else does." Gov. Barbour: Life begins at conception The Carpenters fear that if Mississippi Amendment 26 passes on Tuesday, their whole future will change. The controversial measure, known as "Personhood," will ask Mississippians to amend the state constitution to define life as beginning at conception, which would eliminate abortion, including in the cases of women who are the victims of rape and incest. The law would also outlaw certain forms of birth control and the destruction of embryos in laboratories -- which puts in vitro fertilization procedures in question because it results in unused fertilized eggs. I agree with the woman in the article - what right does someone have to tell a person they can't have a family the way hers has? I hope for the sake of people in Mississippi that doesn't pass. Now you're telling someone who is raped or pregnant due to incest they can't have an abortion? Or they can't use birth control or use IVF because as soon as that egg is implanted with sperm - not knowing exactly when the conception is though - that is now a "person" that has "rights." They need to re-word the law. I think the only time abortion should be banned is late-term abortions - except when the life of the mother is at risk. Otherwise, it's not my business if someone has an abortion and not anyone's business if I were to make that choice. And especially when the law could affect choices such as this: But for the Carpenter family -- despite their pro-life beliefs -- voting for this amendment is just not something they can live with. Their in vitro fertilization attempts to have a brother or sister for their son, Luke, will soon begin. They fear that under the amendment, they could be labeled as murderers if their fertilized eggs die. THAT is just ridiculous.
	Quote