Personhood Measure Clears First Hurdle To Get On Ballot In California

19 11 2011

The AP is reporting that a pro-life group has been cleared to begin gathering signatures to get a personhood measure on the ballot in the 2012 election.

Union City-based California Civil Rights Foundation must collect more than 807,000 signatures by April to qualify for the November 2012 ballot, the secretary of state’s office said.

The foundation’s president, Walter Hoye, is an Oakland pastor known for protesting outside abortion clinics. He said he launched a similar campaign in California in 2010, but it fell short of the required signatures.

“The more of this conversation that we have, the stronger the pro-life movement becomes,” Hoye said.

He said he is hoping for a spirited signature drive for the “California Human Rights Amendment.” Hoye declined to identify any major financial contributors.

The California proposal would define a person as a living human being from the time of fertilization, giving embryos equal protection under the state Constitution.

Advertisements




Pregnancy Centers Fight San Francisco’s Blatant Discrimination

18 11 2011

No one should be surprised at anything that happens in San Francisco, the bastion of hyper-liberal politics. But here’s the latest one coming out of that city. According to Courthouse News Service, the city’s mayor, Edwin Lee, signed a bill on 4 November that would fine pregnancy centers if they make “untrue or misleading” statements. The bill’s sponsors readily admit that they are targeting two pregnancy centers that try to offer alternatives to abortion to pregnant women. But the centers are fighting back.

…in a federal complaint, one of those centers says the legislation is an unconstitutional restriction on speech. First Resort calls itself a “state-licensed health clinic that provides free counseling and certain free medical services to women who seek pregnancy-related information and medical care.”
“The purpose of the ordinance is to destroy or minimize First Resort’s ability to communicate with women who are or may be considering abortion,” according to the group’s 16-page complaint.
The law would allegedly have a chilling effect on organizations like First Resort “by threatening the imposition of severe fines and penalties for violations of unconstitutionally vague regulations of speech.”
Noting that it neither performs abortions nor refers clients to abortion providers, First Resort says it is being singled out for its political views.

Wait a minute…I thought San Francisco was all about freedom of expression. I mean, isn’t that what all the gay pride parades and walk-around-without-clothes-days are all about? The government shouldn’t be telling us how to live our lives, right? EXCEPT if the way we’d like to live (or work) happens to conflict with the official liberal party line. I’m sorry, but could someone please tell me the difference between what the city of San Francisco is attempting to do and what the Nazi party did in its earliest stages in 1933? If you don’t spout the official party nonsense, you shall be punished.