"No" on Amendment 62 Resource Center

"No" on Amendment 62 Resource Center

Executive Committee of the Denver Democrats Unanimously Passes a Resolution Opposing Amendment 62

Click here to read the full resolution.

Amendment 62

Proposed Initiative

Amendment 62 adds a new section to Article II (Bill of Rights) of the Colorado Constitution that defines a “person,” with regard to inalienable rights, due process, and equal treatment under the law, as a “human being from the beginning of biological development of that human being.”

Likely Consequences

 By elevating a zygote (single fertilized egg cell) to the legal status of a person, the following could potentially become crimes [i]:

·        Abortion at any stage of development following fertilization, for any reason with no exceptions

·        Use of any birth control method that works after conception, such as blocking implantation by the presence of intrauterine devices or morning-after pills

·        Discarding any cells fertilized in vitro rather than implanting them into a woman’s uterus, resulting in the effective elimination of in vitro fertilization as a way for sterile parents to have children.

·        Any action that results in a miscarriage, even if unintentional

The life of a pregnant woman will have no greater legal protection than the life of a fertilized egg cell[ii].

Human stem cell research will become legally impossible, thwarting the search for treatment of chronic diseases and disabilities ⁱⁱ.

Medical research in fields like cancer and drug development that use human cell cultures could become illegal in Colorado, depriving the state of federal grants for research and the economic stimulus of the biomedical science industry

Thousands of state statutes could be impacted, ranging from property and inheritance rights to who can file a lawsuit [iii].

Protracted litigation and legislation will be required to disentangle the knot of scientific, philosophical, and bioethical issues generated by instilling into the Colorado Constitution a new and novel definition of personhood, including, among others ⁱⁱ:

·        The scientific ambiguity of the definition of a human individual, which could range from a single cell (even with chromosomal aberrations), to a fully developed fetus

·        The relevance of concepts like “free will” and “sentience” which in philosophy are generally regarded as essential to the concept of personhood[iv]

·        The bioethical equivalence of all stages of human development, regardless of state of differentiation, sentience, or self-awareness

Position of the Democratic Party of Denver

The real intent of the proposed amendment is to criminalize abortion for any reason and outlaw stem cell research.[v]      Doing so indirectly by changing the state constitution not only subverts an open debate on the merits of abortion and biomedical research using human-derived cells, but calls into question existing laws on human, property, and legal rights. It sets up a legal equivalency between a single cell and an adult human, potentially investing embryos with rights not even accorded to children or mentally incompetent adults by current law.  The redefinition of “personhood” in the amendment is philosophically dubious and scientifically ambiguous, since the point at which human development begins is subject to a variety of different biological criteria.  The law is opposed by many groups, including health professionals, religious leaders, and advocates of reproductive rights for women[vi]. The Democratic Party of Denver agrees that Amendment 62 represents bad law, bad science, and bad policy. We therefore OPPOSE adoption of Amendment 62, and urge a “no” vote in the November 2, 2010 General Election.

News Stories

Yes/No Sides Battle Over Amendment 62
Strong opposition to ballot initiative that would outlaw abortion and some contraception.  (The Colorado Statesman, September 3, 2010)

Other Resources

Protect Families Protect Choices, the coordinators of the "No on 62" campaign.