MEDIA STATEMENT

For Immediate Release: February 12, 2010

Contact: Jacinta Montoya Price, representative of Protect Families Protect Choices coalition, 303-638-5921 (cell)

February 12, 2010 (Denver)—Today Personhood Colorado submitted 79,813 signatures to the Colorado Secretary of State to try to earn a place on the November 2010 ballot.  In 2008, the proponents of a similar measure submitted about 131,000 signatures.

The previous effort to define person in the Colorado constitution (Amendment 48, 2008) lost in every county of the state.  Seventy-three percent of voters (1.7 million) rejected it.

 In response to today’s signature submission, medical, religious, Republican, and Latina leaders released the following statements:

Savita Ginde, M.D. (720-475-0289)

Medical Director, Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains  

“The overwhelming majority of Colorado voters (1.7 million), including voters in every Colorado county, rejected the ‘definition of person’ initiative in 2008.  It was bad medicine then.  It is bad medicine now: it could ban all abortions, even those necessary to save the life and health of the woman.  By inserting a non-medical, non-scientific definition into the state constitution, this initiative will have far-reaching consequences on important life decisions in areas of practice that go far beyond the issue of abortion.”

Rev. Dr. Phil Campbell (303-324-7923)

Board member of the Interfaith Alliance of Colorado and Director of Ministry Studies at the Iliff School of Theology

“The personhood amendment is an overt attempt to insert a particular religious definition of life in the Colorado Constitution. We do not believe state law should be based on a religious belief or doctrine,” said the Rev. Dr. Phil Campbell, a board member of the Interfaith Alliance of Colorado and Director of Ministry Studies at the Iliff School of Theology in Denver. “This amendment would threaten religious freedom in Colorado and take away a woman’s right to make decisions about her own health care with her doctor, her family, and her God without government intrusion.”

Amanda Mountjoy (303-333-0844)

President, Republican Majority for Choice, Colorado

“Changing our state constitution is a serious matter that should not be manipulated by fringe special interest groups with a narrow, single-issue agenda.  Our state constitution is not the place or the vehicle to mandate private health care decisions, which are often some of the most complicated choices facing families.”

Kenia Morales (303-882-3226)

Organizational Development Manager, Colorado Organization for Latina Opportunity and Reproductive Rights 

“In 2008, Latinos in Colorado rejected the personhood amendment and told us loud and clear that even if they would choose not have an abortion themselves, they respect and support other families' decisions to do what is right for them.  Families should be in charge of their own health care decisions. The personhood amendment would force the government to make these decisions instead.  The personhood amendment goes too far and threatens our families and our future.”