CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese



President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*


CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
June 12, 2019 04:12 PM UTC

Colo Anti-Abortion Group Opposes A Ballot Initiative Banning Abortions Later in Pregnancy

  • by: Jason Salzman

(Because it doesn’t ban abortion enough! – Promoted by Colorado Pols)

A leading anti-abortion organization in Colorado has come out against a ballot initiative that ostensibly bans abortions later in pregnancy, saying the measure doesn’t go far enough and would set the pro-life movement back.

“Our misguided pro-life allies have presided over decades of regulating child killing,” Bob Enyart, a spokesman for Colorado Right to Life (CRTL), said, as quoted in today. “You don’t regulate crime; you deter crime. Once again, they increase confusion where only truth should be proclaimed. Their immoral initiative 108 seeks to protect children ‘who can survive outside the womb.’ But what about the rest of them?”

Enyart is reflecting the views of a segment of the anti-abortion movement nationally.

KHOW radio host Dan Caplis asked Erin Behrens, a leader the Colorado initiative, which was submitted to the Colorado Secretary of State Friday, directly about her opponents’ logic.

“What do you say to the really good people who say, ‘Wait a second; I’m going to hesitate to support that because it’s like saying, abortions before 22 weeks are okay.’ What do you say to those folks?” asked Caplis during his May 23 show.

“I tell them that this is only the beginning of the conversation,” replied Behrens, who’s an ardent Trump supporter. “I think we can all agree, 99.9 percent of us here in Colorado can agree, that five months in is a very reasonable limit. Let’s get that passed. Let’s get that on the books. Let’s put the Boulder Abortion Clinic out of business and prevent those lives from being taken every year, and then let’s come back and talk more about it in 2022 and 2024,”

“We are going to put a very reasonable limit of 22 weeks, which is about five months into pregnancy,” Behrens said on air. “And we think that this reasonable limit will pass overwhelmingly in Colorado, and we will finally be brought into the 21st century. We will finally be among all the other states that have reasonable limits, and we will finally not be the late-term abortion capitol of the United States.”

Pro-abortion activists argue, among other things, that the language of the initiative, which includes the use of the word “child” in multiple sections, could be interpreted by the courts as giving legal “personhood” rights to a fetus, and thus be interpreted by the courts as banning all abortion in Colorado.

Activists from CRTL were a driving force behind massive signature-gathering campaigns that put personhood abortion bans on the Colorado ballot in 2008, 2010, and 2014. In 2014, over 500 churches and 1,000 volunteers from around the state were central to the success of the effort, which was often fueled by crusading passion, organizers said.

Personhood USA, which officially led spearheaded the efforts in 2008, 2010, and 2014, is not involved this year and is mostly dormant, according to a spokeswoman. All three initiatives failed overwhelmingly.

It appears likely that the stance of CRTL will put a dent in the ability of the proponents of the ballot initiative to collect 124,632 signatures needed to put the measure on the ballot.

The question is, how big a dent?

Part of the answer to that question depends on how Colorado’s anti-abortion churches and activists, who played a central role in previous ballot efforts, come down on tactical question of whether the initiative, as written, will hurt their cause in the long run–or is, as Enyart put it, “immoral.”


64 thoughts on “Colo Anti-Abortion Group Opposes A Ballot Initiative Banning Abortions Later in Pregnancy

  1. And some people think the DEMOCRATS are in disarray.  My favorite equivalent (adapting Mel Brook) …. REPUBLICANS ARE REVOLTING.  But if this keeps up, I may have to shift. 

    REPUBLICANS ARE RIVEN?  (there do seem to be distinct, separate tribes in the party.)

    REPUBLICANS ARE RETICENT? ("not revealing one's thoughts or feelings readily" since they don't seem to be talking to each other)



    1. marked by or involving public disorder.
    2. characterized by wild and uncontrolled behavior.
    3. having a vivid, varied appearance.
    4. hilariously funny
        1. I've never had the chance to need one, but, if I, for some reason, did, it would be good that I could get one and, if I chose to get that abortion, the abortion would be a good thing because it would allow me to choose not to be pregnant if that's what I wanted.

          1. Signing an anti-abortion petition as a "means" of increasing progressive turnout seems bass ackwards to me.

            If one supports reproductive freedom, within the meaning of the multiple SCOTUS decisions on abortion and contraception, there is no valid reason to sign such a petition.

        2. Okay, wow.  What an incredibly inappropriate question.  Is your assertion that one can only be pro- any medical procedure if they are willing to disclose that they have had the medical procedure done themselves?  Kudos to deathpigeon for answering your question.  I'd have told you to mind  your own business.

          1. It wasn't a question, Arvadonian.  It was my way of suggesting to the wombless wonder orating at length on this topic that said WW might want to talk to some actual women who have faced this issue before mansplaining to them about the subject.

    1. Except for the person having one, abortion is no one else's fucking business. 

      No one else's opinions, feelings, or approval are required, or even relevant. 

      Including my own.  

      1. For a change, we agree on something. I've said before; one of the founders of the modern conservative movement in the US was the late Senator Barry Goldwater (R-AZ). 

        About abortion, he said this: "it's not a conservative issues, it's a matter between a woman and her doctor."

        Seems like we in the West have a much better view of these reproductive issues than do residents of the religion-besotted states in the deep south, and the border states.

        1. I actually agree with a lot of classical Conservative viewpoints, like Goldwater's.  It's the peversion of neo-Conservatism I have a problem with.  

  2. This would be a good time, dp,, to move to our planet and talk to some of the creatures — we call them "women" — to whom abortion is not just another in a long line of ideological constructs.  I f you ever watched the flesh of your flesh struggle with the question of whethe r to kill the young life within her, you'd know how silly your mansplained (Transplained?) endorsement of the good and radiant qualities of abortion was.  

    No, abortion is never a good thing.  It is an awful thing, which sometimes is the least awful of the alternatives available.  In the end, the woman/girl involved has to make the decision.  Yes, people like you are lined up around the block yelling at her about your views on her private affairs.  But it is her womb carrying that life and unless you have or have had an actual womb of your own, you have no idea what she's going through.  If she is lucky, that woman has a supportive family and resources to bear a child into this world, if that is her choice.  But even then it is never easy.

    Madco is right.  No sane person is "pro abortion.". The wise among us are " pro choice" and support and empower the choices those young women make.  And what ever choice she makes, her life and the lives of those who love her will never be the same again.

    1. Abortion isn't "an awful thing". It's a necessary medical procedure which many people choose and is very effective at the desired results. Abortion is actually good because it allows for more choice than a lack of abortion allows for. It's not some necessary evil or an awful thing which we should be allowed to engage in, but a good thing overall. I am pro-abortion because of all the good abortions do for people.

      Also, it's not just women who get abortions. Many intersex people get pregnant and need abortions as do trans men and many non-binary people.

    2. Seems to me that it's a waste of time to try and engage in coherent and reasonable dialogue with death pigeon, whoever he or she or it is.

      Anyone that openly states that they are "pro-abortion" would seem to be making a straw person argument on behalf of the pro-birth crowd.

        1. Sorry, DP. I'm with V on this one. Come back and talk to me when you know what it's like to count on your fingers in a panic, and think that you might have to consider that tragic choice. It IS ALWAYS a tragedy, regardless of the reason and it is NEVER something to be celebrated.

          1. How is it always a tragedy? If someone doesn't want to have a kid and an abortion allows them to not have a kid, that's a good thing. The abortion did good by allowing the person to choose not to be pregnant. There's no tragedy in being given the option to not be pregnant. The tragedy is when you are denied a choice, either because you're unable to have an abortion or because economic or social situations force you to give up on a child when you don't want one. But not every abortion is something you're forced into and, even when you are, it's not the abortion that's the tragedy, but the situation you find yourself in.

            1. I'm starting to think Deathpideon is actually a fake account created by the Pro-Life team to caricature the Pro-Choice movement. In my lifetime I have NEVER met someone on the Pro-choice side who claims to be "Pro-abortion" and has stated that "Its a good thing".  There is something very fishy or very sick with this person.  Your arguments would turn more people against choice and support the idea that abortion on demand is something that is good.  Please just keep your opinions to yourself, you are not helping.  

              1. I am pro-knee replacement surgery.

                Either it's about a choice of medical procedure or it's something else.
                Either it's about protecting the doctor patient relationship, or it's something else.

                When you make it something else, pro-choice loses.


                1. Exactly. Abortion is a necessary medical procedure, like knee replacement surgeries. Imagine how ridiculous you'd sound insisting that people should merely me "pro-choice" about knee replacement surgeries and not "pro-knee replacement surgery".

                  1. So, you want to replace the knees on people whose knees are perfectly fine?  Personally, I'm in favor of leaving people with healthy knees alone!

                    1. which med school did you attend?

                      I'll do whatever medical procedure I choose, whenever I choose. It's none of your beeswax – it's just me and my doctor.


              2. You shouldn't be so smug about not knowing many abortion activists.

                Also, it's far more harmful to call abortion "an awful thing" and "ALWAYS a tragedy" as that promotes stigma against getting abortions and shame for those who get them.

                Abortion should be free, legal, accessible, and unstigmatized. Promoting stigma, legal restrictions, restrictions to accessibility, and barriers of cost for abortion are all harmful and all should be opposed.

              3. Dp doesn’t need to keep their opinions to themselves..*

                As someone who has had an abortion, I feel free to explain that it is a two-edged sword – so yes, a tragedy, in that the parents never get to see that little face, and that potential life never exists in the world….and yes, it is also usually a gigantic relief from pressure to be that parent and support that life when circumstances would make it an ordeal.

                In my case, not aborting would have kept me in an abusive marriage, made it more difficult to support existing children, and endangered my health. I’m typical… 60% of women who abort pregnancies in the US have other children. So legal abortion is tragedy and empowerment, grief and relief, agency and abandonment, responsibility and irresponsibility.

                Preaching from pro or anti-abortion people about what women “should” feel – and I’m looking at V and dp here- is not helpful.

                * dp – just fyi, the English teacher in me hates assigning a plural pronoun to an individual…but the language can stand the change, as it always does.

                1. Thank you mj. 🙂 I'm absolutely not going to preach at someone to get an abortion, but I'm gonna push back against anyone who calls abortion a bad thing. It's an important medical procedure which has done a ton of good in the world and, like most medical procedures, it should be a choice made by the person getting it.

                2. So no w that DP has drawn on their vast personal knowledge to mansplain to you the abortion issue, are you pro choice, like me, or pro abortion, like them, mj?

                    1. And maybe sometime you can join them in doing that?  Not a skinny cook could explain to you how to do that, MJ.

  3. wrong, wrong, wrong

    V- you don't get to challenge anyone on whether or not they have had a medical procedure to establish their credibility. Unless you are willing to stfu about things that you have no direct experience of.  didn't think so. It's like you're "pro-choice" but only with shame or guilt or painor other adequate emotional reaction. You and notskinny don't get to decide who feels what.

    Curmudgeon is on the button.

    Not everyone will see it as a tragedy. Not everyone will see it as a big deal. And no one gets to tell anyone how to feel.


    1. Great job of mansplaining and contradicting your original position, Madcow.  But DP is a far better mansplainer and they aren't even a man. Cue the bongo drums.

  4. Pro-choice also means pro-choice for women* who want to bear that child. For all the thousands of Native women sterilized without their consent, for prisoners and institutionalized people of all genders sterilized by state order, for Chinese families ordered to abort or give up their second child, for Russian women forced to abort, for all the trafficked women everywhere who still don’t get to raise their child /children in freedom, they need that choice too. We need to truly be “pro-choice”, which usually means changing the conditions of daily life to be less oppressive. 

    * I mean anyone with a womb – I do realize that gender expression may vary. 

  5. DP thank you for the clarification of your position.  I was worried about your quick use of the term "Pro-Abortion" and "Good thing" because this is exactly the way many Pro-lifers try to label the Pro-choice movement.  Many of them believe that we see abortion as just one more method of birth control rather than as a medical decision between a woman and her Dr.  While true that abortion is a "good thing" depending on the situation, I personally would be hesitant to use that to win over the other side or try to get voters to support my position.  Abortion should be legal, safe and rare.  Getting the other side to better understand our arguments for keeping it legal is tougher when using terms such as "good thing" and "pro abortion".  This was my only point. 

    1. Abortion should be legal, safe, accessible, unstigmatized, and free. It should only be "rare" if people don't choose it often, but it should be common if people choose it often. We should never, ever make rare abortions a goal because the rarity of abortion should be governed purely by the choices made by those who have them.

    2. Just so you understand, Windsor.  Your comments are exactly on target.  But the dead bird is not a false flag from the pro-lifers, however tirelessly DP serves their cause.   DP is an established, albeit sporadic, poster here.  By their own admission, they is also mentally ill.  They once rattled off four diagnoses of mental illness to me, most of which I forget.  The one that sticks is obsessive compulsive disorder.  They is an expert on everything, would rather cut off their arms than admit they are wrong.  So, while their wombless condition makes their endless lectures to women as hypocritical as they are uninformed, they would keep this exchange up for years if necessary to get in the last 5,000 words.

      They present as nonbinary, and get quite upset if you use gender related pronouns.  Understanding that, the dead bird, within its limitations, is a dear sort, who can usually be found on the side of the underdog — even when, as in the abortion debate, it is locked into tactics which advance the opposing side.

      Am delighted to see you in this forum and hope to see more of you.  We can always use the wise and clear thinking.

      Pax Vobiscum

        1. Just breathe free and let it go.

          Meanwhile – the messaging is the issue. 

          It's not Medicare for all, it's a public option.  (Might as well call it CHAMPUS for all.)

          It's why the Department of Defense replaced the War Department.
          It's why the anti-choice crowd prefer pro-life, even though what they mean is pro-uterine birth. 

          I know what you mean. I suspect others do too – but wanna play games just cause.  

          1. The concern with messaging I have is that the "safe, legal, and rare" and the "it's bad, but people should have the choice to do it" messaging implicitly accepts the message that there's something shameful about getting an abortion put forward by the opposition which is harmful toward those who are getting an abortion. We shouldn't do messaging which contributes to stigma around abortion since our goal is, presumably, to allow for those who need abortion to have them with as little barriers to having them, including social barriers like stigma.

              1. I assume you ar e also opposed to sex educatio n — because it makes abortion rare?  And because it spares girls the trauma of abortion– thereby taking away the charge you get when you order them to have one?


                  1. The part where you claimed it is a good and jollly choice, not the desperate act of a 14 year old girl.  Legal safe and rare Is the goal. Only a fool thinks abortion is a fun thing and a good substitute for birth control.

                    1. No one. Again…


                      Did anyone say abortions are "fun" or "jolly"? Or are you lying about someone else's position?

                    2. What, Curmy?  They didn't cover "sarcasm" on that GEd test you're so proud of?

                      Always good to hear the voice of the uneducated among us!

                    3. Most abortions are done by adults making a reasoned decision to no longer be pregnant. It's not fun. It's not a substitute for birth control. But it is a necessary medical procedure that does a lot of good for the people who choose to go through it. I am pro-all necessary medical procedures that do a lot of good for the people who choose to go through them. I'm pro-organ transplant. I'm pro-sexual reassignment surgery. I'm pro-vaccination. I'm pro-antibiotics. And I'm pro-abortion. These are all good things.

                    4. Even someone who didn't spend their lives sitting on their fat ass typing knows the difference between sarcasm and misrepresenting someone else's statements, Bob.

                      A real journalist might know that, even. 

          2. Catch up, Maddco. It's not CHAMPUS any more, it's TRICare now, or so my mom tells me. She was one of the abandoned service wives who got back the military benefits she earned, thanks to Pat Schroeder.

            1. believe it or not – there are still
              and maybe one or two other surviving versions

              Meanwhile – non of them work for branding.
              And TRICARE would be disasterous – it's for veterans, not just anybody


Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

75 readers online now


Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!