Summary of Colorado and Boulder 2008 Ballot Issues
I have now read every single issue on this year's ballot from the City of Boulder, Boulder County, and the State of Colorado, and analyzed the pros and cons of each. You may not agree with any particular recommendation, but you can easily see how I came to my recommendation and come to your own decison based on all of the facts. My biggest goal is to ensure that fewer people vote on issues based on either just the ads or just reading the issue title on the ballot.
Remember, when in doubt, vote no! Here's the list. The most important issues are bold. The ones that arecrossed out have been withdrawn and the votes will not be counted. Click on any specific issue to see my full analysis.
Remember, when in doubt, vote no! Here's the list. The most important issues are bold. The ones that are
| Vote | Issue |
|---|---|
| YES | Issue 1A Clean Energy Options |
| NO | Issue 1B Worthy Cause Tax |
Labels: Boulder, Colorado, election 2008, politics, voting
posted by insomniac | 7:00 AM
1 Comments:
Thank you for your opposition to Amendment 48!
You might be interested to read an issue paper published by the Coalition for Secular Government: "Amendment 48 Is Anti-Life: Why It Matters That a Fertilized Egg Is Not a Person" by Ari Armstrong and myself. It's available at:
http://www.seculargovernment.us/docs/a48.pdf
We discuss some of the serious implications of this proposed amendment, such as:
* Amendment 48 would make abortion first-degree murder, except perhaps to save the woman's life. First-degree murder is defined in Colorado law as deliberately causing the death of a "person," a crime punished by life in prison or the death penalty. So women and their doctors would be punished with the severest possible penalty under law for terminating a pregnancy -- even in cases of rape, incest, and fetal deformity.
* Amendment 48 would ban any form of birth control that might sometimes prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus -- including the birth control pill, morning-after pill, and IUD. The result would be many more unintended pregnancies and unwanted children in Colorado.
* Amendment 48 would ban in vitro fertilization because the process usually creates more fertilized eggs than can be safely implanted in the womb. So every year, hundreds of Colorado couples would be denied the joy of a child of their own.
Our paper also develops a strong defense of abortion rights -- not based on vague appeals to "choice" or "privacy" -- but on the fact that neither an embryo nor fetus qualifies as a person with a right to life.
An embryo or fetus is wholly dependent on the woman for its basic life-functions. It goes where she goes, eats what she eats, and breathes what she breathes. It lives as an extension of her body, contained within and dependent on her for its survival. It is only a potential person, not an actual person.
That situation changes radically at birth. The newborn baby exists as a distinct organism, separate from his mother. Although still very needy, he lives his own life. He is a person, and his life must be protected as a matter of right.
So, we argue, when a woman chooses to terminate a pregnancy she does not violate the rights of any person. Instead, she is properly exercising her own rights over her own body in pursuit of her own happiness. Moreover, in most cases, she is acting morally and responsibly by doing so.
Again, the URL for the paper is:
http://www.seculargovernment.us/docs/a48.pdf
The sad fact is that Amendment 48 is based on sectarian religious dogma, not objective science or philosophy. It is a blatant attempt to impose theocracy in America. That's definitely a scary thought.
Thanks again for speaking up about it -- and sorry for this excessively long comment!
Diana Hsieh
Founder, Coalition for Secular Government
http://www.seculargovernment.us
Post a Comment
<< Home