Carson City, NV – 12/20/11 – A state judge in Nevada has rewritten language for a personhood amendment, handing down a decision on a lawsuit filed by abortion industry giant Planned Parenthood and pro-abortion group the ACLU. This is the second such lawsuit in Nevada, and among nearly a dozen nationwide, in which abortion profiteers Planned Parenthood have attempted to halt citizen-led efforts for pro-life ballot initiatives.
A 2010 Nevada lawsuit was successful in blocking the effort, but in this most recent decision the judge ruled against Planned Parenthood and the ACLU, stating that the amendment did not violate the single subject rule, and allowing the initiative to go forward.
However, the judge’s decision is marred by the rewrite of the language, incorrectly stating: “The initiative will impact some rights Nevada women currently have to utilize some forms of birth control, including the ‘pill;’ and to access certain fertility treatments such as in vitro fertilization. The initiative will affect embryonic stem cell research, which offers potential for treating diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, heart disease, and others.”
In truth, third-party organizations such as the Mississippi Center for Public Policy have established that women will still have access to contraceptives and fertility treatments such as in vitro fertilization. As with all personhood amendments, the only pills and procedures that would be outlawed are those that are used to intentionally kill an innocent person.
“The judge appears to have taken a page from Planned Parenthood’s book of scare tactics,” commented Keith Mason, President of Personhood USA. “Planned Parenthood states that the pill kills when they are trying to block personhood measures, but tells their patients it is contraceptive when they are selling it.”
“Further, the decision says that personhood will block access to in vitro fertilization when, in reality, it will only block the procedures that intentionally kill innocent children such as the discarding of ‘unused embryos’ and ‘selective reduction’ abortion of twins, triplets, and multiples, thus making it safer for both moms and babies,” continued Mason. “An IVF study published in October stated that ‘Transferring one embryo into women during in vitro fertilization (IVF) doesn’t lower their chances of giving birth but it does mean fewer women give birth to twins, with all the attendant health risks.’”
“Thankfully, it is true that the initiative will end embryonic stem cell research, but the judge was incorrect in stating that the practice holds any promise,” said Mason. ”Rather, embryonic stem cell research has been abandoned by corporations owning the patents. The discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) means that embryonic stem cell research is obsolete. Adult stem cell research holds all of the promise and has proven successful in discovering dozens of treatments.”
Organizers have stated their intent to either appeal the decision or resubmit the language entirely.
“Just as we are pleased with the court’s understanding and ruling, we are significantly more perplexed and disappointed by the second part of his ruling. Not only did this judge deny our amended description of effect which the court had ordered we submit, this egregious ruling demands that use the very language proposed by Planned Parenthood and the ACLU who sued to block our initiative in the first place,” said Chet Gallagher, Director of the Nevada Pro-life Coalition. “In the great state of Nevada, which historically protects our freedoms and first amendment rights, this is an outrageous infringement of free speech and the right to petition for redress of grievances. This court order significantly compromises the truth of the life-saving personhood amendment we have proposed.”