Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

36
Letters
Monday, November 19, 2007 12:00 AM

Colorado: Human rights for eggs

A measure to extend state constitutional rights to fertilized eggs creeps forward.

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Monday, November 19, 2007 12:12 PM

wow ...what a tax break

Can women take a deduction for each egg?

Monday, November 19, 2007 12:14 PM

Re:What's next?

The next thing you know, the fundies will be pushing for a masturbation police force with no-knock entry privileges to ensure, like Onan, we aren't spilling our seed upon the ground, so to speak.

Monday, November 19, 2007 12:18 PM

Oh how soon you forget Laci Peterson

Her husband was convicted of TWO counts of capital murder, not one.

Monday, November 19, 2007 12:26 PM

Zygotes

The measure would extend "rights" not to eggs but to zygotes, but evidently nobody involved in the media coverage of it knows that word.

It's a heinous, vile proposition in any case, but yes, the distinction does make a difference to the biological and contraceptive principles involved.

Monday, November 19, 2007 12:31 PM

Also Rules Out NFP

They'll also effectively ban Natural Family Planning, since that involves zygote death as well:

http://jme.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/32/6/355

Actually, all normal reproduction carries a high probability of generating some zygotes that for whatever reason don't work out. I guess we'll just have to all stop having sex. Perhaps that IS what they want.

Monday, November 19, 2007 12:37 PM

What about IVF clinics?

What would such a law do to the status of embryos in fertility clinics? Will people be forced to give them to other couples for adoption? Will those who were successful be forced to pass any unused embryos down to their children or grandchildren?

Monday, November 19, 2007 12:42 PM

Laci Peterson

That case was plenty controversial at the time, I doubt anybody's forgotten it:

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2003/04/24/fetal_harm/index.html

Monday, November 19, 2007 12:44 PM

holy crap!

What if zygotes get the right to bear arms? Owie...!

Monday, November 19, 2007 12:50 PM

NARAL needn't worry

Since the passage of this amendment would eliminate virtually all forms of contraception except the condom and the diaphram, I think we can count on Big Pharma to soundly defeat it. Women's groups won't have to lift a finger or spend a dime.

Monday, November 19, 2007 12:50 PM

@ Anonymoust, Re: Laci Peterson

Laci Peterson's foetus was fully formed. Foetuses that late in the pregnancy are already assumed to have some rights. It would be extremely difficult for a woman to have an abortion at the stage of pregnancy, unless the foetus was non-viable or the woman would die without an abortion. There is a huge difference between the death of a fully formed foetus and the death of a zygote, and contrary to what many on the right believe, the law already recognized that difference.

Monday, November 19, 2007 01:11 PM

Well...

That's the stupidest fucking thing I've heard all day (so far)!

If it passes I at least hope Colorado women claim 12 or so exemptions on their taxes every year.

Monday, November 19, 2007 01:37 PM

Clarification?

I believe the measure could really only make some kinds of oral contraceptives illegal. I'm not sure on this, but isn't it true that only one of two kinds of the "morning after" pill actually "abort" the fertilized egg? The other kind sort of "jump-starts" an early period, right?

To be frank, I'm not really clear on this, so I could be completely off. However, your little blurb made it seem as if all oral contraceptives could somehow be "illegal."

Monday, November 19, 2007 01:39 PM

This opens up an even bigger can of worms than just abortion, contraception and IVF

Under this amendment, would women be tried for involuntary manslaughter if they miscarried? Would pregnant women be charged with child endangerment if they smoked or drank? What if they were taking prescription medication that might possibly harm the fetus?

Would women be charged with neglect if they didn't take their prenatal vitamins? What if they ate swordfish and other high-mercury fish? What if they refused to diet themselves down to a "healthy" pre-pregnancy weight? Would Colorado jail women who didn't follow their OB/GYN's orders, so that the fetus would be in protective custody?

Would women have to get their IUDs yanked at the Colorado border? Could they bring oral contraceptives in from out-of-state? What if they're on Depo-provera, which takes time to wear off? Would every woman taking hormonal contraception be pre-emptively charged with feticide?

Monday, November 19, 2007 01:43 PM

Lesbianism might not be such a bad idea...

Presumably, unfertilized eggs have no human rights yet? Do the fundies actually want to turn every woman into a lesbian?

Monday, November 19, 2007 01:56 PM

The Legal Age of Fathers

The percentage of miscarriages, also known as spontaneous abortions, which always involve fertilized eggs at some stage of development, rises the older the fathers are. It therefore become an entirely relevant matter to the rights of zygotes that no man over forty should be allowed to participate in the creation of one. In fact, only men in their mid to late twenties should be granted that privilege, if we want to truly minimize the impact of sire age on the rights of these vested (pre)citizens.

Imagine it: mandatory vasectomies (or castrations, for the more husbandry minded) at age 40. Family planning would take on a whole new meaning...and urgency!

(Anyway, spontaneous abortions may happen in up to a quarter of all conceptions by the end of six weeks. Clearly being a fertilized egg is hardly a guarantee of becoming a viable human being no matter what laws are passed.)

Monday, November 19, 2007 01:58 PM

EVERY fertilized egg???

Well now, what about zygotes of "illegal" immigrants, do they count too? Could be a most interesting conundrum. And who is going to legally represent these diploid cells if someone cares to make an issue?? It's sounding more and more like Ceauşescu's Romania every day. Charming

Monday, November 19, 2007 02:07 PM

What we really need

is egg rights for humans.

Monday, November 19, 2007 02:07 PM

@ Bryan K.

"I believe the measure could really only make some kinds of oral contraceptives illegal."

Precisely why the distinction between "egg" and "zygote" matters.

"I'm not sure on this, but isn't it true that only one of two kinds of the "morning after" pill actually "abort" the fertilized egg? The other kind sort of "jump-starts" an early period, right?"

Not precisely. The "morning after pill," aka Plan B, is thought to work mainly by preventing ovulation. The "abortion pill" or RU-486, is just that--it causes a miscarriage of an established pregnancy. They're two entirely different drugs.

"To be frank, I'm not really clear on this, so I could be completely off. However, your little blurb made it seem as if all oral contraceptives could somehow be 'illegal.'"

And lawmakers like the authors of this legislation LOVE it that you (and a frighteningly large swath of America) are unclear. They count on it, and they exploit it. They know that most people don't have the grounding in science or even critical thinking to ask effective questions about what they're trying to do. This measure could effectively outlaw almost any oral/hormonal contraceptive which is thought to possibly be able to prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg.

So I'm so glad you ask these things, because misinformation about them is spread deliberately for just these kinds of purposes.

Most Active Letters Threads

683

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
389

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
283

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon