Anti-Abortion groups start their push towards outlawing contraceptives by changing the legal definition of what a person is

WASHINGTON (June 5, 2011) - Fringe anti-abortion groups are pushing to outlaw contraceptives by redefining when life starts. And if successful, more than 43 million men and women may face criminal charges for using any form of contraceptives.

Personhood USA, a fringe group, has been good at getting legislation on the desks of our country’s leaders. And if successful, the moment of life may be redefined to start at the moment an egg is fertilized.

Contraceptives, such as birth control pills, condoms, IUDs, will become illegal, even though the medical community has a long standing agreement that the instant an egg is fertilized does not start the beginning of pregnancies. Only half of all implanted eggs that are fertilized make it to pregnancy. Lawmakers, growing in large numbers, are supporting Personhood USA's efforts to go against medical advice on the accepted definition on when life starts.

The GOP takeover of the U.S. House of representatives and state houses countrywide in the 2010 election has had a dramatic change in our country’s debates on abortions. What is now being asked is: “When does someone legally become a person?”

The answer is not as simple as it sounds, as variations exist from state to state, and the Federal government.

One such bill has passed in the House of North Dakota, and another in the Iowa House subcommittee. Georgia, Montana, Texas, and Oklahoma have also introduced personhood legislation, reports Personhood USA.

House Bill 1450, The Defense of Human Life Act, passed the North Dakota House in February, 2011, with the vote of 68-25. The text defines “human being” as “an individual member of the species homo sapiens at every stage of development.” It also allows an exemption from criminal charges if the abortion is needed to save the mother’s life.

The Alabama Senate Bill, SB301, overwhelmingly passed by a vote of 23-7 on May 26. Last minute changes to the bill changed it from a personhood bill, which would have banned all abortions, to a ban of all surgical abortions and many chemical abortions. If the bill passes the House, it will be the first time in state history that all surgical abortions will be outlawed since Roe v. Wade.

Introduced by Senator Phil Williams, it reads: “The term ‘persons’ as used in the Code of Alabama 1975, shall include any human being from the moment of fertilization or the functional equivalent thereof.”

The amended text now reads “The term ‘persons’ as used in the Code of Alabama 1975, shall include any human being from the moment of fertilization and implantation into the womb.”

“Personhood bills and amendments make all abortion illegal. We recognize the good intentions of the Senators who changed SB301, but grieve that it will still be legal to kill unique individual human beings with some chemical abortions or in a laboratory,” stated Jennifer Mason, spokesperson for Personhood, USA.

"The definition of personhood ranges if you're talking about property law, or inheritance, or how the census is taken," says Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union's Reproductive Freedom Project.

And it is these differences Keith Mason, president of Personhood USA, wants to change. He believes that it’s time for policymaking to catch up with scientific advancements.

"We know, without a shadow of a doubt, when human life begins," he says. "But our laws have not caught up to what we know," adding that laws should recognize fertilized eggs as individuals, complete human beings.

As of June 3, Personhood USA, according to its Web site, has 922,327 petition signatures in 50 states, supporting their cause.

Their mission, taken from their Web site, states: “The Primary Mission of Personhood USA is to serve Jesus by being an Advocate for those who can not speak for themselves, the pre-born child. We serve by starting and coordinating efforts to establish legal "personhood" for pre-born children through peaceful activism, legislative efforts and ballot-access petition initiatives."

And according to his organization, those laws should recognize every fertilized egg as an individual and complete human being. And if such laws are passed and survives judicial review, using contraceptives will be the legal equivalent to committing homicide.

According to a study performed by the Guttmacher Institute in June 2010: about 38.2 million women in America use some form of contraceptives; with birth control pills around 11 million; about 2 million use intrauterine devices (IUDs); another 10.4 million have had tubal sterilization done.

Men also could be considered as "legally committing homicide" by using contraceptives as well. Close to 13 million men use some form of contraceptives according to the study: about 6.2 million men use condoms; and 3.8 million have had vasectomies performed on them; Another 2 million use the withdrawal method, and 1.2 million receive Depo-Provera injections.

Because contraceptives prevent eggs from being fertilized, the Personhood USA group considers this a form of abortion. And the group wants to make it a criminal offense, which would prevent doctors from performing life-saving abortions.

In addition, millions of women could face prosecution if fertilized eggs do not start development, never implanted, or implanted but the egg spontaneously aborts.

Personhood USA and other groups have one large hurdle to overcome if they are to succeed. That’s the U.S. Supreme Court. In a landmark case, Griswold vs. Connecticut, The high court voted 7-2 striking down a law that made it illegal for married couples to use contraception.

Griswold was the executive director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut. The league gave out information, instruction, and other medical advice to married couples about birth control. Griswold and her colleague were convicted on charges criminalizing the counseling and other medical treatment to married persons to prevent conception.

The high court had to deal with the question of whether the constitution protected the rights of married couples for the purpose of preventing conception.

Although the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly protect a general right to privacy, together, the First, Third, Fourth and Ninth Amendments create a new constitutional right to the privacy in marital relationships. The Connecticut law was considered null and void.