Pro-Life "Personhood" bill hotly debated on Utah's Capitol Hill


Story Comments Share
Updated: 2/02/2012 6:24 pm | Published: 2/02/2012 6:03 pm
SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - ABC 4 first reported the story about a Utah legislative resolution which may say that life starts at conception.

Thursday, Senator Aaron Osmond, the legislator behind the resolution, said his constituents simply want him to explore this issue.

But that explanation only enraged his opponents more.

Senator Osmond began Thursday by apologizing to his fellow legislators.

He said he didn’t want his Pro-Life "Personhood" resolution to overshadow other issues like education.

Osmond told reporters,

"I do not want this to be a distraction from that and I will not allow it to be so."

But Utah Democratic Chairman Jim Dabakis says too late.

Dabakis told ABC 4,

"We're deeply disappointed in the new young Senator Osmond, that he would align himself with Gayle Ruzicka and the extremists of the Republican Party."

Right now, Osmond's "Personhood" resolution has no text, only the title,

"Joint Resolution on Human Life."

Osmond claims he has not yet decided if he will run it this session,

“I wanted to communicate to my constituents and, frankly, throughout the state that this is an opportunity to open some dialogue on this topic."

Its comments like this which caught the attention of Dabakis,

"If you're a senator, if you're elected, if you're on the floor of the senate, be a senator and stop doing
things at the behest of some trial balloon. Take a stand senator."

And back and forth it went all day Thursday.

The governor - in an election year - seemed to want no part of this debate.

While the ACLU said "Personhood" bills have lots of unintended consequences.

This is a point quickly latched on to by Dabakis.

He asked,

"Does Senator Osmond want to give a social security number to every fetus?"

Senator Osmond says he wants to get more input before he decides what to do with this resolution.

He told ABC 4 and others,

“Once I have made a decision what to do, I will certainly let you know."




FOLLOW CHRIS VANOCUR ON TWITTER: @cvan4


Story Comments Share
3 Comment(s)
Comments: Show | Hide

Here are the most recent story comments.View All

The views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of ABC4

misty85 - 2/3/2012 11:07 AM
0 Votes
This is not about saving the "lives" of fetuses. When performed in accordance with proper protocol, the act of abortion is not killing a human being, plain and simple - it is merely eliminating a lump of genetic material that would likely grow INTO a viable human being if it were allowed to continue developing for several months. This fight is really about denying women the right to have control over their own bodies and, more importantly, their sexuality. Legislation like this is deeply rooted in old school sexism and female oppression; it supports the idea that men should be allowed to roam free like animals, enjoying sex with multiple partners and no consequences, while any woman who dares to find sexual fulfillment in a similar manner - even if she's practically the poster child for condoms, contraception, STD testing and personal responsibility - is branded a skank. If you're not having sex for procreation purposes, you are a loose woman with no morals and you deserve to be stuck with an unwanted pregnancy. Now, does that actually make any sense? Pro-life is anti-choice and, at its core, anti-woman. Denying a woman control over her own uterus makes her a slave to her sex. What's more, a shocking number of pro-lifers have had their hypocritical butts saved by the very laws they aim to deny everyone else. How convenient, huh? http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html

Barbara BellowsTerraNova - 2/3/2012 9:19 AM
0 Votes
The Effect of a Personhood Law: Women will have more babies. More women will drop out of school. More women will leave full time jobs. More families will have more expenses with less income. More men will drop out of school. Less children will go on to college. More homes will go into foreclosure. More people will be uninsured. More children will be unloved and will know it. More men will leave their wives. More people will need food stamps. More children will grow up in poverty. More children will be raised by underpaid child care workers. More women will experience domestic violence. More children will experience domestic violence. More babies will experience domestic violence. More children will go into foster care. More people will be homeless. There will be more anger. So. . . How is this Christian? How does this work for the economy? What makes sense in this? Really.

fs447 - 2/3/2012 1:20 AM
0 Votes
I think "personhood" at conception aims to deny teens access to Plan-B so they have no choice other than all the problems of children raising children or the lifelong heartache most suffer in giving up their child. Yet it also impacts childless couples wanting IVF and women who do not view the existence of a single cell as having equal value with their own life. Especially if they can't get cancer treatment because "personhood" makes it too legally risky for healthcare providers. Beware of fanatics and their secret maneuvering.
ABC 4 Poll
Inergize Digital This site is hosted and managed by Inergize Digital.
Mobile advertising for this site is available on Local Ad Buy.