Some of you may be aware of the so-called “personhood” effort, the movement among far-right-wing anti-choice extremists to legally endow fetuses, from the moment of fertilization, with all of the rights of actual living, breathing people. The goal is to undermine reproductive rights, and these extremists are trying to get these laws passed at the state level.
The concept is so right-wing that even Mississippi’s electorate overwhelmingly voted against it in a ballot initiative in 2011, with more than 55% of voters in opposition. That defeat hasn’t stopped several other states from considering similar far-right-wing “personhood” initiatives, including North Dakota, where a “personhood” bill recently passed their state senate and is expected to pass their state house of representatives.
The issue of fetal personhood has now popped up in Massachusetts’ special election for U.S. Senate. We all know that Congressman Stephen Lynch has long been an anti-choice legislator, going so far as to oppose the creation of buffer zones around abortion clinics. Despite his recent efforts to veer back to the center on the issue, his record is a conservative one.
Yesterday, Meghna Chakrabarti of WBUR’s Radio Boston asked Congressman Lynch whether he thought fetuses should have the same legal rights as a person. Instead of offering anything resembling a clear position regarding this notion of “personhood,” Lynch responded with a mushy word soup involving a vague interpretation of Roe v. Wade.
[13:31] Lynch: I don’t claim to be an expert on church teaching, I really don’t. I am an expert on what I believe. […]
[13:55] Chakrabarti: If you’re an expert on what you believe, do you believe that fetuses are viable- human life- or a legal person, I should say?
[14:08] Lynch: Well, I think that [pause] I think that certainly Roe v. Wade recognizes at some point that late-term abortions are something that present a position of state interest very late in the pregnancy. It also- I think- federal court law, even that supporting Roe v. Wade, says that there is a state interest there, and that absent some issue of rape, incest, or the health of the mother, that the federal court recognizes that that presents a different situation.
With all due respect to Congressman Lynch, he wasn’t asked about his interpretation of Roe v. Wade. He wasn’t asked about his position on late-term abortions. He was asked, very clearly, if he believes that a fetus equals a legal person. Essentially, he was asked whether he supports that notion of “personhood” that far-right-wing extremists are trying to pass into law. And he ducked the question, despite crowing about being “an expert on what I believe.”
Congressman Lynch’s inability to offer a direct, clear response to this question should be yet another red flag to voters concerned about reproductive rights.
This would ONLY be appropriate if Lynch were trying to become a Pope or Cardinal. When the hell are these Right Wing Nutjobs going to get it into their heads that we don’t want the rules of their religion forced upon us as laws. I am not Catholic nor do I want the government to impose religion upon me. If he cannot even pretend that there is a separation of Church and State in order to get elected, then he has disqualified himself (at least to me) as a serious candidate worthy of my consideration. I am trying very hard not to use the P-Word and DINO, but he makes it so hard not to do so.
Is quite clearly in favor of fetal personhood, hence why Humane Vitae still to this day claim faithful Catholics can’t use birth control or have abortions if the pregnancy results from a rape, incest, or endangers the life of the mother. Any regular mass going Catholic knows this. And most choose to ignore it. For years Lynch has claimed to hold this position and now he is trying to back-pedal from it. I disagree with the notion that our party has to have a small tent on abortion, but it should definitely be uniformly against fetal personhood and other right wing inventions that take away female autonomy.
Bob Casey is against abortion, he is also in favor of increasing access to contraceptives to reduce abortion. As is Democrats for Life. If Lynch does not explicitly state he is in favor of birth control he is to the right of even the pro-life members of our party, and the majority of members in the Republican party. And to the right of the majority of Mississippi voters. Not a good place to be, or even have doubts about leaving. He very clearly could have stated his opposition, he did not.