According to the Yes On 26 FAQ: Under personhood, the doctor would be required to save both lives if possible, but in the hard cases where the baby is unviable, the doctor would save the life of the mother. It … Continue reading
I’ve seen several people ask about the memo which was issued today by Mississippi Center for Public Policy, a local think tank. While it’s obvious that MCPP is a socially conservative institution, I have not come across any connection between … Continue reading
When I make claims about the potential effects of Yes On 26, I don’t like to ask you to take my word for it. I always like to explain my thinking, and if possible, to back it up with pro-life … Continue reading
I’ve had several pro-26 commenters suggest to me that Initiative 26 is about deciding whether human life begins at conception, or about whether an embryo is a person. This is not correct, because those are scientific and religious questions that … Continue reading
We’ve been saying for months now that the restrictions on IVF resulting from Initiative 26 would go far, far beyond simply affecting embryo disposition. This morning on the Gallo Radio Show, Dr. Eric Webb was kind enough to clarify this … Continue reading
The entire text of Initiative 26, the Personhood Amendment, reads as follows: “The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof. Seriously, folks, that’s all it is. Twenty-one … Continue reading
The Yes On 26 campaign says that personhood won’t ban IVF or hormonal contraception, and that anyone who says it will is engaging in deception or scare tactics. Since we here at Parents Against MS 26 assert that personhood does … Continue reading
