Colorado should reject personhood and its advocate, Cory Gardner

One week from today is November 4, Election Day in the United States and, mercifully, that will be the end of the 2014 political campaigns. Of course, the 2016 campaigning for president is already unofficially underway, but we can let that slide for a while because here in Colorado, we need a rest. We’ve had a truly ugly senate race in progress between Sen. Mark Udall (D) and Rep. Cory Gardner (R). It’s been pretty much a single-issue campaign focusing on whether or not Gardner is a proponent of personhood (he is) but we, the voters, stopped listening a long time ago. After all, if memory serves, the first TV commercials for this race aired last January.

It would have been nice to hear what the candidates have done for us in the past, or hope to do if elected, but there’s been none of that. Just the endless accusations and denials about whether Gardner supports personhood. The record is clear, of course. He has in the past supported several personhood measures in Colorado and although he continues to deny it is a personhood bill, he is a co-sponsor of the bill in Washington known as H.R.1091 – Life at Conception Act.

Polls have, in recent weeks, shown Gardner leading by as much as 7 points (avg. today is 3.2) and pro-choice voters are bracing for disappointment. It’s depressing to think a man so opposed to the rights of half the US population might actually win this race.

An aside worth repeating to personhood proponents, from Pied Type, October 29, 2012:

Supreme Court rejects OK personhood appeal

The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal by abortion opponents to get a “personhood” amendment on the Oklahoma ballot. Therefore the April ruling of the Oklahoma Supreme Court stands: The proposed amendment is “clearly unconstitutional.” The amendment would have defined a “person” as “any human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being to natural death.”

This is not a person

The candidates themselves made this a single-issue race. And Colorado voters have twice rejected personhood measures on state ballots. Personhood is a religious concept, a thinly veiled attack on women’s right to reproductive choice, and Gardner is a walking, talking, prevaricating personhood advocate. Voters should once again reject personhood by rejecting Cory Gardner.

11 thoughts on “Colorado should reject personhood and its advocate, Cory Gardner

  1. What I love, just love, is men weighing in tell g women what to do with their bodies.

    ‘We know best sweetie, just shut up, and do as we decide,’ etc etc

    I had no idea, before I started blogging some years ago of the entrenched religious views held by so many politicians.

    Religious views are fine for the individual. But not when they impact on people who don’t share those views.

    It’s a good graphic. Trouble is, they would argue the opposite …

    It is a future chicken, a future tree, a person, I think the silkworm one isn’t quite the same, but still, it’s thoughtful.

    1. The extent to which people will go to get their personal religious beliefs made into laws for everyone constantly amazes and horrifies me. It’s so hypocritical to espouse “do unto others” and then try to force onerous, intrusive religious edicts on everyone else. Not to mention that little thing called the Constitution and the politicians’ oath of office that says they will support and defend it.

  2. You’ve had campaigns worse/even longer than us.
    I voted already. Now just hitting mute with TV ads…both sides warped info misrepresentations/ half truths/ implied “facts”. Both hitting all the ugly emotional knee-jerk phrases and images. UGH.
    Some people just can’t stop. No use arguing with them – they don’t listen or think.

    1. I’m sick, sick, sick of all of them. I’ll be so relieved when it’s all over (except I have a sinking feeling about how it’s going to turn out). I voted at least a week ago. Mail-in ballot. So nice compared to systems I’ve endured in the past.

      Hey, cheer up. The Christmas commercials have started!

  3. If we submit everything to reason our religion will be left with nothing mysterious or supernatural. If we offend the principles of reason our religion will be absurd and ridiculous . . . There are two equally dangerous extremes: to exclude reason, to admit nothing but reason.
    ― Blaise Pascal

... and that's my two cents