As Mississippi citizens voted and rejected on the state's controversial "personhood" amendment today, attorneys and legislators rebutted allegations made by the abortion industry.
Initiative 26 "merely offers a definition of a person that is inclusive of unborn children," said Initiative 26 attorney Russell Latino at a press conference in Jackson, Miss. "It does not, itself, outlaw abortions."
Latino said the measure is "crafted to give the legislature an opportunity to place restriction on abortion, and in so doing, set up a unique challenge to Roe: the question being whether a state can decide that an unborn child is a person." The initiative was rejected bt more than 55 percent of voters.
Rob Chambers, senior consultant for the pro-family Christian Action Commission, attended Monday afternoon's press conference at the Mississippi state capitol's old Supreme Court chambers, which was scheduled to address controversial issues surrounding the proposition. He told WND in an interview following the conference that attorneys and legislators "put to rest many of the false allegations made by the amendment's opposition."
"There is a lot of information and a lot of confusion swirling around about the purpose and effect of Initiative 26, commonly referred to as the 'personhood amendment,'" said Latino. "It is my belief that much of that is being peddled by pro-abortion special interest groups intentionally at the 11th hour to prevent effective rebuttal."
TRENDING: 'Art of the Deal': How Trump turns COVID issue into 'win-win'
Four organizations headed up efforts against the Initiative 26 campaign, the plan's supporters said.
"The misinformation spread in the concerted effort of ACOG (The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists), the American Civil Liberties Union, Planned Parenthood, and 'Mississippians for Healthy Families' to defeat the pro-life legislation was successfully addressed today," Chambers said.
Chambers asserted that Mississippians for Healthy Families, which opposed the amendment, is really the front organization for Planned Parenthood and the ACLU.
"This is a fact and is verified through the Mississippi secretary of state's office," he said. "Take notice of the [document recording] Planned Parenthood affiliates who have donated substantial amounts of money to fuel the deception they have been presenting on TV ads."
State records document Planned Parenthood's support for the "Healthy Families" organization.
There also was an issue with telephone calls generated by an automated system that claimed Gov. Haley Barbour had reservations about the personhood amendment. But the governor recently released his own statement, affirming his support.
"A pro-abortion group has called people's homes and deceived voters into thinking I'm opposed to Initiative 26, the personhood amendment," Barbour said. "As I've previously stated, I voted for the personhood amendment. These misleading calls were made without my knowledge, without my permission and against my wishes. I have demanded this deception be stopped, and those responsible have assured me that no more calls will be made."
Christian Action Commission advised the media that the five issues taking center stage were "the exceptions to save the mother if her life is at risk; the criminal liability of a doctor in the event of accidental homicide; the availability of birth control; the effects of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF); and the possibility of a woman who has a miscarriage be subject to criminal prosecution."
Chambers indicated that the four opposing groups campaigned to scare voters into believing the amendment would require that a mother's life must be taken to save her preborn child if her life is at risk, but he said this is inaccurate.
"Legal analysis says Mississippi law permits search and procedure to save mother," the senior consultant reported. "Exempt from termination of pregnancy, the passage of the amendment will not affect the statute, as physicians would work in order of trauma, where they would work on the most harmed person first, and therefore would save the mother's life."
Another concern the pro-abortion organizations brought before voters to shoot down Initiative 26 was that a physician could be charged with accidental homicide if he unknowingly allowed a mother's preborn child to die while treating her
"Under the personhood amendment, there will continue to be no criminal liability for medical professionals who prescribe medication fatal to an unborn baby to treat a female patient whose pregnancy is unknown when there is not time for a pregnancy test to be taken," Chambers explained.
He also denied a claim by Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, ACOG and Mississippians for Healthy Families that voting "yes" on 26 would jeopardize the availability of birth control.
"If the question pertains to the use of contraceptives that prevent ovulation or fertilization, the answer is a quick and easy 'no,'" the attorney explained. "If the question pertains to the morning-after pill, the answer is a little more complicated. Obviously, the use of the morning-after pill is meant to prevent a fertilized egg from being carried to term. Under the personhood amendment that fertilized egg would be considered a 'person.' Since the personhood amendment does not, itself, prohibit abortions, the logical answer is that it would not, in and of itself, prevent the use of the morning after pill."
Chambers argued, furthermore, that "being charged with a crime for using the morning-after pill is virtually inconceivable" because it's nearly impossible "to prove that a user had a fertilized egg at the time of consumption and that the morning-after pill prevented it from being carried to term."
The campaign challenging the personhood amendment asserted that the initiative's passage would end all In-Vitro Fertilization, which amendment supporters also said is incorrect.
"In vitro fertilization involves the creation of a person (fertilized egg) under the personhood amendment," said Latino. "Where the amendment might effect in vitro fertilization is in inhibiting the destruction of fertilized eggs once created, but it would not end access to in vitro treatments."
Latino also denied that women with miscarriages could face criminal prosecution.
"Under existing law, a woman who has a miscarriage might be charged with a crime if it can be shown that her action caused the death of the unborn child and that she had the required knowledge and criminal intent at the time she undertook the action," Latino explained. "This personhood amendment would not make it any more or less likely that a woman would be charged with a crime after suffering a miscarriage."
Chambers believes voters will ultimately make the right choice.
"I am very confident that when people enter the voting booth, those who are truly in sync with what is best for the unborn will vote 'yes,'" Chambers said. "Polls looked very favorable for us in the beginning, but confusion made poll results decline, so we got rid of the static to make the message clear. People have heard the clanging symbols, and I think they're going to have to say yes when they vote with their conscience; when nobody's looking over their shoulder they’ll say 'yes.'"