New York Times omits the Pill in list of Personhood prohibitions
Our deep experience with personhood amendments here in Colorado has taught us that a government that gives legal rights to zygotes (otherwise known as fertilized eggs) would have no choice but to ban some forms of the Pill.
But unfortunately, the New York Times, in an article yesterday, failed to mention that some forms of the Pill would have had to be banned if the personhood amendment passed in Mississippi.
The Times reported:
Mississippi voters said they thought twice about the proposal when they heard that it would not only ban virtually all abortions but also some forms of contraception like I.U.D.’s and morning-after pills, could hamper in-vitro fertilization clinics and could, doctors warned, discourage critical medical care for pregnant women.
Birth control was also at the center of the Personhood debate in Mississippi, and to be fair, the Times’ Erik Eckholm should have added “some forms of the Pill” to the list of items that worried the people of Mississippi.
The New York Times itself reported in Dec. that all hormonal contraceptives, which include the pill, may “make the lining of the uterus less hospitable to a fertilized egg.”