• Get Crisis in your Inbox

  • What is a Person Worth? Support the Personhood Campaign

    by Jason Jones

     

    On Tuesday, Nov. 8,  the voters of Mississippi will have a very rare privilege in today’s America, so much of which is governed by unelected judges and unaccountable bureaucrats, where so many basic issues seem invulnerable to change: Those voters will have the chance to make an existential decision, to vote with a flip of their fingers on whether or not human life has any value or meaning. They will vote on whether or not the law of their state should deem an preborn child a person.

    Of course, in some sense we make profound decisions many times each day, when we accept the aid of grace and do the right thing, or shrug it off and sin. Each tiny sin says “no” to eternal life, while each virtuous act says “yes.” But we rarely see things so starkly, and indeed if we did we probably couldn’t function. For most of us, it only happens a few times in our journey that we are presented the chance to say a stark “yes” or “no,” to exercise what some theologians have called a “fundamental option.” I’m reminded of the incidents in the Gospels where Jesus calls a fisherman to drop his nets, a tax collector to leave his stall, “and follow me.” We aren’t told, but I wonder if there weren’t a number of potential apostles who told Christ to take a hike. Even Our Lady was utterly free to reject the invitation of Gabriel; our God does not act like Zeus and pluck human brides like fruit from a tree.

    Since Roe v. Wade removed the sanctity of human life from the realm of free democratic decision-making by an act of breath-taking judicial hubris, tens of millions of American women have acted—many under enormous pressure—to say “no” to life. An equal number of men have surely cooperated in these actions. By some estimates, one in three American women in the post-Roe generation have ended the lives of their preborn children. It won’t be in this life that we will understand the toll that has exacted on their souls.

    I know what one such act cost me, and what it made me decide to do. I would like to cast some light on the choice Mississippi’s voters will be making by sharing my story here.

    It was a Saturday morning in the fall of 1988. I lay half-awake, half-asleep, my body aching from the football game the night before. The sound of footsteps coming up the stairs and the smell of bacon from the kitchen stirred me a little. The door to my room opened and someone fell under my blankets. Pulling back the blanket expecting to see my baby sister, I was surprised to see my girlfriend looking up with tears in her eyes.

    My first thought was she’d had a fight with her father. Two words and my life would be forever changed. “I’m pregnant.”

    I don’t know why, but I was overcome with happiness. My girlfriend began to cry and laugh and we just held each other, doing that, not saying a word for minutes.

    We spent that Saturday in my room, which was half a child’s and half a man’s — with a Walter Payton poster on the wall, a Scooby Doo pillowcase, and artifacts from each of my 17 years spread around it — trying to make a plan. We came up with a very simple one: I would drop out of high school and join the Army. Katie would wear baggy sweaters and take vitamins. And we would live happily ever after. That was the plan.

    And soon after I was on my way to Basic Training, my Scooby-Doo pillow case filled with the required list of supplies: two pair of socks, two pair of underwear, toothpaste, toothbrush and a razor blade. Katie took her vitamins and wore her baggy sweaters. With less than two weeks left of Basic, I got a letter from Katie saying: “If the baby is a boy you can pick his name but if it’s a girl I want to name her Jessica.” It was a deal.

    On the Sunday before we would “graduate,” I was cleaning pots and pans. Not having been raised a Christian, I didn’t go to church, so I often pulled extra detail on Sundays. A friend came into the kitchen and said, “Jones, your girlfriend is on the phone…. She’s crying.” I never heard a woman cry like that before or since. Her soul was crying. “I’m sorry, I’m sorry. I’m sorry,” was all she could say.

    Then her father grabbed the phone. “I know your secret and your secret is gone…. I took Katie to get an abortion!”

    A drill sergeant reached over my shoulder and hung up the receiver. I hit him as hard as I could. Another sergeant grabbed me and dragged me into his office. I was sobbing out: “He killed my baby! He killed my baby – call the police!”

    At this, that large Army Ranger started crying himself. He made me explain. When I did, he looked blank. “Private, we can’t. Abortion is legal.” I just stared at him. So my captain delivered the Cliff Notes version of Roe v. Wade, then gave me a roll of quarters. As I zombie-walked to the PX, I was heartbroken at the loss of my child and the sound of Katie’s pain. But just as strongly what I felt was shock and confusion: This is all perfectly legal. Under law, a fetus is not a person. That was the rotten heart of Roe v. Wade (and it still is today — despite three pro-life presidents who won office dripping with promises).

    I had never been to church in my life. I was a high school dropout. I didn’t know much. But I knew that my daughter Jessica was a person. She was worth something. She had a human dignity you don’t grant a lump of skin cells. I also knew that a terrible injustice had been done — to all three of us. When I got to the PX, I called my girlfriend and we talked straight through that roll of quarters. Then the mechanized voice on the phone warned, “You have one minute left. Please deposit change.” I was desperate to say something comforting before we ran out of time, so I blurted out what was in my heart. “I am going to end abortion — for you!” I know now that that is a foolish promise for any one person to make — but I really meant it. And I still do.

    I ask each of you reading this to do something for the Katies of America, for the Jessicas, for the goofball high-school dropouts like I was. We must take away the fatal choice, the deadly temptation that is abortion on demand. It seems so easy, it makes things so much simpler, it wipes the slate clean of inconvenient human lives… by pretending they aren’t real. It tells the young and the scared that they can have a more abundant life, if only they will accept this tiny lie about a tiny creature whom they’ll never have to see. “Just play pretend with us, with us judges and doctors and lawyers, and everything will go back to what it was before.”

    I ask you to support the Personhood Initiative—with your votes, if you live in Mississippi, with your voices if you don’t. There are some well-meaning people who say it goes too far, it cuts too close to the heart of Roe v. Wade, and it will backfire. They want us to keep on nibbling away at the edges of this monster. But we have been trying to do that for almost 40 years—and what have we accomplished? American abortion laws are the most permissive in the world, far worse than in “decadent” Western Europe. And why? I would argue because we haven’t faced down the lie and told the truth: A preborn child is a person. Period. Our laws should reflect that. And we should fight until our laws tell the truth. As Alexander Solzhenitsyn said to sum up the message of his work: “Live not by lies.” Or better: “The truth shall set you free.”

    It took the “radical” decision of Brown v. Board of Education—which many civil rights advocates were afraid went too far, too fast—to drive a stake in the heart of legal segregation in America. It took Rev. Martin Luther King demanding real, complete, equality to make our country listen. No wonder his niece, Dr. Alveda King, is a leader in the Personhood Campaign. In this new and even graver assault on human dignity, this lie that squats at the heart of our legal system, we need to do something simple: to tell the truth.

    Extending the protective blanket of legal personhood from the moment life begins through all stages of life is the first step our country can take toward renewing itself in countless other areas. When I “manned up” and joined the Army to care for my child, it helped turn this boy into a man. When we gain the strength to tell the truth and protect the most helpless Americans, we will also gain the courage and grace to face our other challenges. We certainly won’t solve them by hiding, running, and lying.

    On Tuesday, November 8th, I will be in Mississippi, helping to get out the vote. Twenty years ago I made a crying girl a promise I could never keep, by myself. None of us can change the world all by ourselves. But we can tell the truth. When we vote for the truth, we tell the truth together, and that can change the world. In fact, as Our Lady knew when she told the angel, “yes,” the Truth is the only thing that can.

    The views expressed by the authors and editorial staff are not necessarily the views of
    Sophia Institute, Holy Spirit College, or the Thomas More College of Liberal Arts.

    Print this   |   Share this

    • Graham Combs

      Mr. Jones, I am so grateful that your words have appeared in a Catholic publication. I know from the news that bishops and other Catholics have declined to support the Personhood initiatives around the country. I don’t fully understand why. I am a fairly new Catholic convert but I have been pro life for decades. It occured to me recently that the unborn will never have their Abraham Lincoln. The Democrats have lost their faith and numbed their consciences. Republican leaders have been sincere in their support for the unborn, but in the end, they have neither the strategy nor the will required. The late Rep. Henry Hyde was an exception. This “silent holocaust” as Fr. Powell called it will not end in Washington. This is a moral struggle, the rest — civil rights or whatever you want to to call it — is paperwork. What slavery was to the 19th; what legalized segregation was to the 20th, the sanctity of human life is to the 21st century.

      It seems to me that the Personhood Initiative presents a stark moral choice and makes a bright line moral distinction. If politicians and activists and our apostolic leadership have a better way then they must propose it clearly, propose it now, and show us how to make it happen. Institutional complacency on one end and moral squalor at the other only leads us to despair. And despair leads to the unacceptable. Becoming the enemy in order to defeat the enemy.

    • Gualberto

      What an amazing testimony. I’m sharing it with friends, please do the same.

    • Charity

      Many Catholic bishops, along with other top pro-life organizations, are afraid that the legal court appeals against Mississippi’s new personhood law (and those of other states) will fail in the courts, thus creating additional new court precedents against pro-life. They have also feared that personhood’s ban on pill contraception would fail to win over Americans, who are staunchly pro-contraception (sadly).

      As a result, the mainstream pro-life “strategy” among the Bishops has been to support legal remedies like informed consent laws, parental notification laws, and even ultrasound laws—laws that have passed constitutional muster and don’t present new reinforcements of Roe v. Wade in the courts.

      So, that’s what the Bishops are up to.

      As for me, I support personhood based on states’ rights. If 10 to 15 red states pass personhood laws and simply refuse to comply with the courts, then Roe is effectively dead in those states, much in the same way federal marijuana laws are not able to be enforced. Also, Bush’s real ID act was stopped by states using this same strategy. More than 20 states passed laws against real ID and ignored the federal law. As a result, real ID is a dead federal law, even though it is still on the books. Personhood could win the battle in precisely this same way. Let’s work and pray that it is so.

    • MMC

      Incredibly well written article. I too am tired of the slaughter that occurs in the womb. Murder versus 9 months of inconvenience that encourages the dignity of the human person? I’ve had it with the feminist nonsense…what about the women being torn apart in the womb?

      I don’t know much about this personhood project…but it sounds perfect to me. Per the bishops, sadly they are part of the problem…they have lost their way…for we need a radical stand for the truth…exactly the way Our Lord lived:+)

      God bless you all~

    • http://facebook susan vendetti

      May all of us around the country pray that the citizens of Ms provide an example of wisdom and truth in voting in support of the personhood campaign.
      God bless you all.

    • http://facebook susan vendetti

      the beautiful state of Ms is considering supporting the truth in defining personhood. Let us pray they vote in support of this message and provide an example for us in Washington State and through out the rest of the country. God bless Ms and all of its beautiful citizens.

    • http://www.lifenews.com pro-life

      The personhood amendment is nice as a statement of position on the beginning of human life. But it will not ban or stop one abortion.

      There are two ways under which it will possibly be overturned in court. But, even if upheld, it will not ban abortions — because the Supreme Court ruled as such more than 20 years ago.

      Before the personhood amendment went to the ballot as Initiative 26, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled in a case brought by the ACLU and Planned Parenthood that paved the way for Mississippi to become the second state, following failed votes in 2008 and 2010 in Colorado, to consider the personhood amendment. The state’s high court tackled a decision Circuit Court Judge Malcolm Harrison issued saying Measure No. 26, the personhood amendment can be placed before voters “and the constitution recognizes the right of citizens to amend their constitution.” His decision came in a case under which opponents of the amendment say the amendment can’t be used to change the Bill of Rights, which bringers of the lawsuit said it would do.

      The decision had the court saying they would not issue a ruling on whether the amendment could be used to change the state’s Bill of Rights until after the vote on the amendment. As Paul Linton, a pro-life attorney who has worked with a number of national pro-life organizations, tells LifeNews.com, that means Mississippi voters could spend significant time and money pursuing the amendment only to see it later shot down in court for unconstitutionally attempting to change the Bill of Rights.

      “I thought it was curious, to say the least, that the majority opinion refused to decide whether the “personhood” initiative is an appropriate use of the initiative process under the Mississippi Constitution, given the prohibition in the state constitution against using the initiative to add, modify or repeal any portion of the Bill of Rights,” he said. “The two dissenting judges would have struck the measure from the ballot as an improper “addition” or “modification” to the Bill of Rights.”

      In part because two judges have already indicated they will strike down the personhood amendment after the vote under a post-vote lawsuit, Linton believes it won’t be upheld even if passed.

      “So, the upshot of the court’s ruling is that the people of Mississippi will have to vote on the initiative without knowing whether it is a proper use of the initiative,” Linton explained. “If the measure is approved, it can still be challenged on state constitutional grounds, i.e., that it’s an improper use of the initiative process, and I would still expect the court to strike it down on that ground.”

      That’s not the only way in which the amendment might be struck down in court — assuming state voters approve it. Lower courts, after a vote, would be expected to overturn the amendment as an unconstitutional challenge to Roe v. Wade. Some pro-life groups oppose the amendment because they say it will head to the Supreme Court, which will strike it down and add to the pro-Roe v. Wade case law upholding unlimited abortions. Knowing that, they say a better strategy is supporting pro-life Senate candidates and replacing pro-abortion President Barack Obama — paving the way for new Supreme Court justices who could overturn Roe or uphold such an amendment.

      The court may also decide to uphold the personhood amendment but declare that it does nothing to ban abortions and merely functions as a statement of position by the state — thus gaining unborn children no legal protections.

      In the Supreme Court’s opinion in Webster in the 1980s, Missouri approved a statute saying “the life of each human being begins at conception” and “unborn children have protectable interests in life, health, and well-being.” The statute required that all Missouri state laws be interpreted to provide unborn children with rights equal to those enjoyed by other persons.

      The United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri struck down that provision and the abortion limits, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed and ruled they violated Roe.

      The Supreme Court then ruled that it did not need to consider the constitutionality of the law’s preamble, defining personhood at conception, as it was not used to support any abortion laws that conflicted with Roe. Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote the decision and Justice Anthony Kennedy joined in the opinion (meaning he will likely rule the same way on any new case involving the amendments).

      Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the personhood language Missouri used decades ago but did not allow it to ban — or even limit — any abortions.