Personhood is a new and rapidly growing movement within the Pro-Life
Community that seeks to establish a legal definition of a person that
includes unborn children, thus making killing an unborn child a crime
punishable under existing murder laws.
www.Personhood.INFO
What Is Personhood?
Personhood Amendment? Can it END Abortion? In Almost 40 Years, Why
Has Abortion Not Ended Yet?
"...if
the
suggestion of personhood
for the unborn
is established, the
Roe v. Wade abortion rights
case, of course, collapses..." -
from the 1973 Roe v. Wade, U.S. Supreme Court Decision
What has this
person done wrong to deserve the death penalty?
Remember me.
INTRODUCTION TO
PERSONHOOD
"Many
pro-life groups and lawmakers in the past 40 years
have bobbed, weaved and swerved around the abortion
crisis instead of confronting it head-on. Now
overcoming the Roe decision by legally
declaring that human beings are persons from the
moment of fertilization is a real possibility."
"If the suggestion of personhood for
the unborn is established, the
Roe
v. Wade abortion rights case, of course,
collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically
by the 14th Amendment."
From the
1973 Roe v. Wade Decision (Justice Blackmun Writing
for the Majority Opinion)
What IS and
IS NOT a Personhood Amendment. Also know as Human Life Amendments.
While some think it is
any
type of constitutional amendment dealing with abortion
that is not the case.
A Personhood Amendment IS a constitutional amendment that establishes a legal
definition of a person that includes unborn children,
thus making killing an unborn child a crime punishable
under existing murder laws.
A Personhood Amendment IS NOT
a 'ban' on abortion (a 'medical procedure' as the courts
view it).
How a Personhood Amendment Works.
To understand the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Courts better,
let's take a look at this question: Does a person have the right to make
their own medical decisions? The common sense answer is obviously YES. This is
a fundamental right.
At present, all courts consider abortion a medical decision,
so any legislative or constitutional approach that is worded
to heavily restrict or outlaw abortion (the medical
procedure) will fail because the
courts view it as ‘taking away’
from a woman's rights, a legal
'negative'.
The only way to protect unborn childrenis through a
constitutional amendment that legally recognizes unborn
children as persons, a legal
'positive'. This grants or recognizes
the human rights of unborn children and would automatically
legally maneuver Federal courts into doing the same.
This approach frames the question properly: Should we protect unborn children from being killed
since they are human beings? The common
sense answer is obviously YES.
When both the unborn child and mother are recognized as persons
legally in the courts, a baby's Right to Life outweighs the mother's fundamental
right to make her own medical decisions, except when saving
her own life.
Any attempt to establish personhood
for the unborn will have to meet and overcome Federal
Court challenges to end abortion.
Roe v. Wade is the
1973 U.S. Supreme Court case that legalized abortion in the
U.S. Either
Roe v. Wade will prevail or the
Personhood Amendment will. Only ONE can survive!
Only a properly worded State
Personhood Amendment has the
pure raw power to overturn Roe and end abortion
throughout the entire United States.
WHY HAS ABORTION NOT ENDED?
In Almost 40 Years, Why Has Abortion Not Ended Yet?
A Quick History of the Pro-Life Movement and Personhood, the
Original Pro-Life Strategy.
From the 1970s thru 1980s, the original
strategy and main goal of the Pro-Life Movement was to enact
a Human Life Amendment (aka Personhood Amendment) to the
U.S. Constitution which would establish personhood protection for unborn
children.
Pro-Life leaders
knew that enacting such an
amendment would easily overturn "Roe v. Wade" and end
abortion throughout the entire United States and
territories. Major Pro-Life organizations
including
Americans United for Life and
National Right to Life were heavily involved
in advancing such amendments. A lesser known part of
the same strategy was to introduce similar amendments in the states. They never did. They dropped the
ball.
In 2005, over 30 years later, the first ever
state Human Life Amendment (aka Personhood Amendment) was
introduced in Mississippi by
Pro-Life Dave.
As of the end of 2011, NO State Personhood Amendment has yet to
be enacted. This is what the Personhood
Movement is trying to accomplish: To enact a State
Personhood Amendment in order to make the first serious
head-on attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade, which
many believe will succeed - and do so easily.
Since the early 1970s, over
300 Federal amendments were introduced into a divisive Congress, all of
them getting nowhere. Since the 1990s, most national
Pro-Life organizations have abandoned Human Life (aka
Personhood) Amendments and any hope of a direct challenge to Roe
v. Wade. Their strategy changed to a 'long term' focus
of slowly "chipping away"
at Roe instead of confronting it head-on. Over the
years, mainline
Pro-Life groups have focused primarily on enacting
hundreds of state laws that only 'LIMIT ABORTION' but yet
end with
Where they have dropped the
ball, a new and growing movement of Pro-Life citizens are
taking up
The Original Pro-Life
Strategy:PERSONHOOD. Establishing the Right to Life of
unborn children through a State
Personhood Amendment has now become the explosive answer to
ending abortion and is taking the Pro-Life Movement by
storm.
"the
first real movement in 37 years since Roe" Shaun Kenney, Exec Dir
American
Life League
The once dead and unreachable goal of
establishing personhood in the U.S. Constitution has now gained new life
in the states. Personhood once again is breathing new
life into the Pro-Life Movement by returning to its founding
principles and strategies. The Personhood Movement is
a dynamic and rapidly growing segment of the Pro-Life
Community focused on the enactment of State Personhood Amendments.
Below you will see why
Personhood IS
THE KEY to Ending Abortion, Once and For All!
"… this
would be the equivalent-after the child was born, if the mother thought it
bothered her health any having the child around, she could have it killed.
Isn't that correct?"
"If the suggestion of personhood for
the unborn is established, the
Roe
v. Wade abortion rights case, of course,
collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically
by the 14th Amendment." -
From the
1973 Roe v. Wade Decision
RAPE & INCEST
Why No Exception for Rape & Incest?
People and politicians
might think twice if they understood the real impact of
justifying abortion for rape and incest.
FIRST
Anyone who supports abortion for rape and incest is
effectively endorsing the killing of
ALL unborn children, at
any time, for any reason. Why?
Justifying abortions for Rape & Incest is what OPENED THE
DOOR for ALL
UNBORN CHILDREN to be killed today.This what started the slippery slope to
Roe v. Wade and legalized abortion in the first place.
It was these first exception laws that unleashed the
slaughter on all innocent unborn babies. First passed
in Mississippi in 1966, then in 1967 in Colorado, California,
and North Carolina, then in 1968 in Georgia and Maryland.
These laws undermined the foundation of personhood for all
unborn children. Because you cannot just legally
kill a person -- these states were declaring in their laws
that an unborn child was not a person. This led to
ALL unborn
children being killed at any time, for any reason, not just
for rape and incest.
More info.
SECOND
Anyone who supports abortion for rape and incest is effectively
endorsing the legalized torture and violent killing of unborn
children for
the crimes of their father.
No child should get the
Death Penalty for the crimes of their father.
It is against all
concepts of justice to punish one person for the crimes of another. The
Bible declares in Deuteronomy 24:16 that children shall not be but
to death for the crimes of their father, and the same is outlined in
the U.S. Constitution Article III, Section 3.
Endorsing abortion for rape and incest
clearly punishes the innocent baby for the crimes of the father.
A punishment that goes well beyond any established forms of
punishment reserved for the worst of criminals, enemies, and
terrorists. It goes to a level beyond the worst brutal torture
tactics known to mankind to include agonizing pain as one's body is
torn apart piece by piece. A punishment that no one should ever
endorse or have to go through!
THIRDAbortion for Incest & Rape
Covers Up the Crime and Promotes the Abuse of Women.
This is what many will not tell you. It is the one of many
dark sides of the reality of abortion. Abortion clinics do not
report the crimes of incest and statutory rape of minors, and
typically sends the incest victim back home to her rapist.
Even worse, they often send her home with
her rapist, the same criminal who brought her and forced her to have
the abortion. Abortion for incest and statutory rape of
minors easily traps young women into a continued cycle of abuse by:
emboldening the criminal to rape his young victim;
helping the criminal escape being caught;
tempts the criminal to repeat his crime; and,
while under the control of her abuser, forces the woman to
kill her baby thus increasing her trauma and suffering.
Will establishing personhood for unborn children ban all
contraceptive use? The fact is that SOME
contraceptives or birth control cause the baby to be aborted
and SOME don't. If you hear someone claim that a
Personhood Amendment would 'ban' a specific contraceptive,
you should be asking: "Does that contraceptive actually
abort a baby?"
A Personhood Amendment would only ban contraceptives that cause a
baby, after
he or she is created, to be flushed out, to not implant
naturally in the womb.
You'd be surprised at how many people, who consider themself
to be Pro-Life, who are ignorant of the fact of whether or
not their contraceptives are causing their created babies to
be aborted. You need to ask your doctor this important
question to be sure. See Also: "Dispelling
The Myths" behind conception, contraception and
abortifacient drugs.
Roe v. Wade was the 1973
U.S. Supreme Court
decision overturning a Texas anti-abortion law, which had
the effect of legalizing abortion throughout the United
States. Several Human Life Amendments (aka Personhood
Amendments) were drafted and proposed in Congress in the
early 1970s. One main version1
became popular in the early 70s with two other popular
versions, the Paramount1
and the Unity Human Life Amendment1
being drafted over the next decade. The target of these
amendments were the United States Constitution. (view
early amendments)
The
beginning of the modern Pro-Life Movement we know today was
started in the early 1980s and gained a great ally in
President Ronald Reagan (see Reagan's
Personhood Proclamation). During this time the
main focus of the Pro-Life Movement was the passage of a
Federal
Personhood Amendment to the U.S Constitution. It was common
knowledge that the Federal
Personhood Amendment was the key to overturning Roe v. Wade
and abortion in America. The reason is that once you legally
recognize unborn children as persons they have rights.
A Right to Life has more weight than a woman's right to make
her own medical decisions (i.e. to have an Abortion, which
is how the courts view it).
Because this was so important, the Pro-Life Movement lobbied
every person running for Congress and in other top
leadership positions around the country to make a public
stand in support of the Federal Human Life Amendment.
Over the years more than 330 different proposals being
called a Human Life Amendment have been introduced in
Congress. In over 35 years not one Human Life
Amendment has gotten anywhere.
The end of the Federal Personhood Movement was over.
The Federal
Personhood Amendment
The Death of a Vision
Unfortunately, since the 1980s the Federal
Personhood Amendment was dropped as a viable project by the
Pro-Life Movement due to the difficulty in getting it passed
through a very diverse and partisan Congress. The
Pro-Life Movement, disheartened, took up projects not to
overturn Roe and abortion but to only scale back abortion as
much as they could legally through state and federal
legislation. The Pro-Life Movement, for the most part, had given up on
overturning Roe v. Wade.
It was now only spoken of as a vague ideal or a 'long term
strategy' and left the Pro-Life Movement seeking alternative
strategies.
VIDEO PRESENTATION
A Must See!
A Very Powerful 50
Minute Presentation on Personhood for the Unborn and
also Pro-Life Strategies That Kill.
One early adopted
strategy was to focus on electing
Republican Presidents so they would nominate
Pro-Life judges to the Federal Courts and the U.S.
Supreme Court.
This strategy has yet to
yield any success and had
seriously backfired
because it effectively made
murders of our Pro-Life judges.
We'll explain as you read on.
The main reason this strategy has failed so
miserably, was in the way it was implemented.
National Pro-Life organizations and leaders taught a 'legal positivist' position --
that our government officials
should always obey the government's and courts' view
of what was right and wrong instead of God's.
This meant that no lower court Pro-Life judges
should ever issue a ruling that challenged higher
courts and established rulings like Roe. Even
though by doing so they issued unjust rulings that
allowed for the murder of unborn children.
The correct
implementation would be to promote the appointment
of Pro-Life judges who would never issue rulings
that allowed innocent human beings to be killed no
matter what. This promotes basic justice
("Self-evident truths") and God's standard "Do
Not Murder!" Also, if lower court judges don't
issue rulings in opposition to Roe then it will
never be overturned because that is how the system
works. Some say that these judges would just
get kicked out of their position. Maybe so,
but it is better than becoming accomplices to
murder. After World War II, Nazi Germany
Judges were convicted of murder for that same thing,
allowing the innocent to be killed. The German
judges justified themselves by saying they were just
doing their job in upholding the law or a higher
court ruling.
Our Pro-Life judges have now
become active participants by ruling in favor of the
unjust killing of innocent children. They were
now corrupted by the system because they did not
stand up against murder of the innocent.
Those Republican appointed
pro-life judges have now done more to hurt the Pro-Life
Movement and keep Roe v. Wade alive than Democrat
appointed judges.
ALTERNATE PRO-LIFE STRATEGIES
Laws Only Limiting Abortion
The now faded goal of ending abortion was
replaced by what is called the 'Limited Abortion'
coalition
or
'Incremental'
Pro-Lifers.
If you try to remember recent Pro-Life
activities since the early 1990s you will find
one shocking fact. Most, if not all,
legislative/political activity has centered
around not ending abortion once and for all but
in only 'limiting abortion.' This
strategy led the Pro-Life Movement in getting
bogged down in a "Nazi Germany" type debate:
while accepting the killing of Jews, they
focused on banning Poison A for the more humane
Poison B. Laws based upon this strategy,
to 'regulate' abortion, still ended with:
The
"Limited Abortion" coalition's concept was to focus on
'chipping away' at Roe v. Wade through promoting
hundreds of laws mostly in the states - all in an attempt to limit abortion, with some
unexplainable reason that it would "eventually" overturn
Roe v. Wade. Because these laws were never meant
to actually overturn Roe but to only limit abortion,
they continually tested the limits of the Roe v. Wade
case in the courts. As a result they ended up
reaffirming that abortion was just and legal in the eyes
of society and helped established Roe v. Wade more in
government and the courts. In over 15 years this
strategy has not gotten anywhere close to overturning
Roe v. Wade. Their response to the strategy's
failure is to give it more time. When we look at
the great loss of life in allowing 10, 20, or 30 more
years waiting for this strategy to possibly work, it
just is not a viable option. Pro-Life activist who
have focused on this strategy had now
become the 'enemy' of unborn children they once fought against.
This cancerous idea,
promoted by key national Pro-Life & Pro-Family leaders
and organizations, had been adopted by many other
Pro-Life leaders and organizations across America as
their main focus also. Anyone who now promotes
other Pro-Life projects, like Personhood, and/or
contradicts the 'Limited Abortion" strategy is dismissed
as unwise and classified as a 'danger' to the Pro-Life
Movement. While this is changing, many older, well
established organizations still view this as the only
way. It's interesting to note that those same
organizations who are against state Personhood
Amendments (aka Human Life Amendments) once rallied the
Pro-Life Movement in the 1970s and 80s for a Federal
Human Life Amendment.
While some of the
legislation has done some immediate good
it also did a very
dangerous thing,
it took the Pro-Life Movement's attention, focus, and
resources away from establishing Personhood through a
Personhood Amendment, the only way to end abortion once
and for all. A true
Personhood Amendment would in one precise action
accomplish all of the goals of those 'limiting abortion'
laws and more. It would end abortion once and for
all throughout the United States. It would
overturn Roe v. Wade.
"If the suggestion of personhood for
the unborn is established, the
Roe v. Wade abortion rights case, of course,
collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically
by the 14th Amendment."
From the
1973 Roe v. Wade Decision (Justice Blackmun Writing
for the Majority Opinion)
15
YEARS WAISTED
(PBA) Partial-Birth
Abortion Ban:
A Publicity Stunt
One of the most major moves in the Pro-Life
Movement was the 15 year long struggle to get a
Federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban (PBA) passed
and through the Courts. This series of
national and state campaigns run by major
Pro-Life and Pro-Family organizations was
to-date the most empty of all Pro-Life efforts
because it never was capable of saving one life.
It just outlawed one abortion procedure.
The PBA led The Pro-Life Movement astray for 15 Years,
created a $250 million dollar "Cash Cow"
in fundraising, and
the 15 year delay allowed over 18 million more
unborn babies to be killed.
"Ending
partial-birth abortion… does not save a single
human life."
-
Dr. James Dobson
"The PBA ban fiasco raised a quarter of a
billion dollars for the pro-life industry, yet
never had the ability to prevent a single
abortion." -
American Right to Life
In 2006, Focus on the Family leaders admitted (see video) that they knew the Partial Birth Abortion Ban would not save one child, and
that they chose not to made that clear to their
listeners and readers, but felt they needed
something to keep abortion in front of the
public's eyes.
The Partial
Birth Abortion Ban (PBA) took away 15 years from the
Pro-Life Movement's time, efforts, and
hundreds of millions in resources. What we should
have been focusing on all along is the correct,
true, and just strategy, a strategy that would
end abortion once and for all,
The Original Pro-Life
Strategy:PERSONHOOD.
2005: Coming Full Circle Introduction of the
First
State Personhood Amendment
RETURNING TO...
The Only Way to END Abortion:
a
State Personhood
Amendment!
Studies in the areas of early
American history, the founding fathers, and our system of
government reveal that our
state governments
have always been the primary sources of politically
protecting our God-given rights2,
not the Federal Government. (What
are God-given Rights?) The Pro-Life
Movement’s Personhood Strategy through a Federal
Personhood Amendment
was on target but unfortunately impassable in
Congress. The answer is a State
Personhood Amendment. Up until 2005, one had never
been introduced or tried in U.S. History. Legal
studies show that it would have the same effect of
overturning Roe v. Wade.
All previous
legal and legislative challenges and strategies by the
Pro-Life Movement were viewed in the courts as attempting to
“TAKE AWAY”
(“a
negative”)
from the rights of a woman. The recognition of unborn
children as persons does not “TAKE AWAY" from the mother but
“RECOGNIZES”
unborn children
(“a positive”)
with all
legal rights and standing as persons in all courts.
Once a state recognizes unborn children in their
constitution (not laws), all federal courts will be legally
maneuvered to recognize unborn children as persons also,
forcing the overturn of Roe v. Wade.
In the oral arguments in Roe, both
the abortion lawyer and the Supreme Court Justices clearly
admitted that IF it was established that an unborn child is
a person then they would not have a case.
Pro-Life
Dave from Mississippi introduced the
Ultimate Human Life Amendment (UHLA), the first State
Personhood Amendment in U.S. History. The
UHLA's carefully constructed wording was designed to
specifically overcome key issues the U.S. Supreme Court had
in Roe v. Wade. (see How to
Overturn Roe) Remember the Roe v. Wade decision
was an issue that came up from the State of Texas and
eventually led to the U.S. Supreme Court's making abortion
legal in all states.
A State Personhood
Amendment is the answer to ending abortion!
AND one State's Personhood
Amendment just might be capable overturning Roe v.
Wade and knocking it out in all
states! See More on: State Personhood Amendments.
NO State
Personhood Amendment has EVER been enacted
yet...
Learn about the History, Strategies, and Background
of behind Personhood Amendments and the Personhood
Movement.
”
God-given and
Politically Protected Rights….
All
Rights in our system of government originally go back to
the Bible and God, called "God-given Rights" and
"Inalienable Rights". You would be correct to say
that all people should have a Right to political and
religious speech without being jailed. In America
this “God-given” Right is “Politically Protected” in our
state and federal constitutions. But if you go to Saudi
Arabia and try to exercise that God-given Right then you
most likely will be arrested, jailed, and may be stoned
to death or lose your head at the chopping block because
that God-given Right is not “Politically Protected” by
the Saudi Arabian government. So the idea in
general is to identify and understand our God-given
Rights and make sure that they are protected in our
state constitutions. [
return back ]
This approach frames the question properly: 
The
"Limited Abortion" coalition's concept was to focus on
'chipping away' at Roe v. Wade through promoting
hundreds of laws mostly in the states - all in an attempt to limit abortion, with some
unexplainable reason that it would "eventually" overturn
Roe v. Wade. Because these laws were never meant
to actually overturn Roe but to only limit abortion,
they continually tested the limits of the Roe v. Wade
case in the courts. As a result they ended up
reaffirming that abortion was just and legal in the eyes
of society and helped established Roe v. Wade more in
government and the courts. In over 15 years this
strategy has not gotten anywhere close to overturning
Roe v. Wade. Their response to the strategy's
failure is to give it more time. When we look at
the great loss of life in allowing 10, 20, or 30 more
years waiting for this strategy to possibly work, it
just is not a viable option. Pro-Life activist who
have focused on this strategy had now
become the 'enemy' of unborn children they once fought against.
e
Pro-Life Movement were viewed in the courts as attempting to 
