<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Unborn Personhood Amendment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://vox-nova.com/2008/05/31/unborn-personhood-amendment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://vox-nova.com/2008/05/31/unborn-personhood-amendment/</link>
	<description>Catholic perspectives on culture, society, and politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:19:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin J Jones</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2008/05/31/unborn-personhood-amendment/#comment-22823</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin J Jones]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 15:44:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voxnova2.wordpress.com/?p=2575#comment-22823</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CNS&#039; summary does a bit of legal extrapolation.  While the Constitution guarantees every person the right to life, the exact interpretation of the personhood amendment will be left for the courts or the legislature.  Keep in mind that there&#039;s a pro-choice argument saying that the right to life does not require the right to life support.

Also, the Colorado bishops&#039; statement resulted from a Personhood Amendment supporter who publicly claimed the amendment had the bishops&#039; personal support.   Being prominent figures, they certainly have to pick their actions carefully and so needed to clarify their opinion.  

As I see it, had that supporter not tried to use the bishops&#039; alleged private support as a public talking point, the clarification would not have been need to be made.  He caused needless controversy.

As a Coloradoan, I&#039;ve been concerned about the group backing the measure.  They&#039;ve been touting the youth of their 21-year-old leader, as if that is supposed to reassure people.

But their achievement of 100,000 signatures certainly surprised me.  I wish them success.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CNS&#8217; summary does a bit of legal extrapolation.  While the Constitution guarantees every person the right to life, the exact interpretation of the personhood amendment will be left for the courts or the legislature.  Keep in mind that there&#8217;s a pro-choice argument saying that the right to life does not require the right to life support.</p>
<p>Also, the Colorado bishops&#8217; statement resulted from a Personhood Amendment supporter who publicly claimed the amendment had the bishops&#8217; personal support.   Being prominent figures, they certainly have to pick their actions carefully and so needed to clarify their opinion.  </p>
<p>As I see it, had that supporter not tried to use the bishops&#8217; alleged private support as a public talking point, the clarification would not have been need to be made.  He caused needless controversy.</p>
<p>As a Coloradoan, I&#8217;ve been concerned about the group backing the measure.  They&#8217;ve been touting the youth of their 21-year-old leader, as if that is supposed to reassure people.</p>
<p>But their achievement of 100,000 signatures certainly surprised me.  I wish them success.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2008/05/31/unborn-personhood-amendment/#comment-22817</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Todd]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 13:23:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voxnova2.wordpress.com/?p=2575#comment-22817</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[oops...I mean if the amendment is ultimately used as the basis to outlaw abortion.  Agree with the contradiction noted by Soutenus.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oops&#8230;I mean if the amendment is ultimately used as the basis to outlaw abortion.  Agree with the contradiction noted by Soutenus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2008/05/31/unborn-personhood-amendment/#comment-22816</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Todd]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 13:19:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voxnova2.wordpress.com/?p=2575#comment-22816</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Purely from a Constitutional Law perspective, the question will then be whether this amendment of the Colorado Constitution violates a Federal  Constitutional right.   No doubt will go to federal court and may end up in Supreme Court.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Purely from a Constitutional Law perspective, the question will then be whether this amendment of the Colorado Constitution violates a Federal  Constitutional right.   No doubt will go to federal court and may end up in Supreme Court.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dale M.</title>
		<link>http://vox-nova.com/2008/05/31/unborn-personhood-amendment/#comment-22802</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dale M.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 03:50:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voxnova2.wordpress.com/?p=2575#comment-22802</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Will the bishops of Colorado support this amendment?   A recent newspaper article suggests they have reservations about it.

Quoting from the Longmont Times-Call:
&quot;Meanwhile, the Colorado Catholic Conference plans to soon release a public statement, said the Rev. Frank Maroney of St. Francis of Assisi in Longmont. Though the Roman Catholic Church is “totally committed to the defense of human life, from conception to natural death,” the state’s three bishops are concerned that “the amendment’s language may be open to misinterpretation as well as substantial legal challenges.”

“It’s an interesting issue,” Maroney said. “You have a number of pro-life organizations around the country that would normally favor anything to end abortion, but are kind of splitting this year on the idea of a personhood amendment, at least the way Colorado is approaching it.

“The bishops and the church (are) committed to protecting human life. We’re just not sure if this is the best strategy for doing that at this time,” he said.&quot;
http://www.timescall.com/faith/Faith-Story.asp?id=9063]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Will the bishops of Colorado support this amendment?   A recent newspaper article suggests they have reservations about it.</p>
<p>Quoting from the Longmont Times-Call:<br />
&#8220;Meanwhile, the Colorado Catholic Conference plans to soon release a public statement, said the Rev. Frank Maroney of St. Francis of Assisi in Longmont. Though the Roman Catholic Church is “totally committed to the defense of human life, from conception to natural death,” the state’s three bishops are concerned that “the amendment’s language may be open to misinterpretation as well as substantial legal challenges.”</p>
<p>“It’s an interesting issue,” Maroney said. “You have a number of pro-life organizations around the country that would normally favor anything to end abortion, but are kind of splitting this year on the idea of a personhood amendment, at least the way Colorado is approaching it.</p>
<p>“The bishops and the church (are) committed to protecting human life. We’re just not sure if this is the best strategy for doing that at this time,” he said.&#8221;<br />
<a href="http://www.timescall.com/faith/Faith-Story.asp?id=9063" rel="nofollow">http://www.timescall.com/faith/Faith-Story.asp?id=9063</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

