To the Editor:
\nMeasure 1, the constitutional amendment on the ballot this November, states \u201cThe inalienable\u00a0right to life of every human being at any stage of development must be recognized and\u00a0protected.\u201d<\/p>\n
In the dictionary, the word \u201cinalienable\u201d refers to something that’s \u201cimpossible to take away or\u00a0give up.\u201d Using that word about human beings and their right to exist sounds like we’re taking that\u00a0right to life pretty seriously, no matter who those human beings are, or how old they are, or how young\u00a0they are, or where they rank on some \u201cquality of life\u201d scale.
\nBut wait a minute! Who says there’s an \u201cinalienable right to life\u201d? Where does that phrase even\u00a0come from? That’s anti-abortion jargon, isn’t it? That’s just some kind of religious talk, isn’t it? Saying\u00a0that there’s an \u201cinalienable right to life\u201d mean you’re imposing your morality on me! What reactionary\u00a0right-wing nut job who came up with that, anyway?<\/p>\n
Well, it was Thomas Jefferson, actually. Remember the Declaration of Independence? \u201cWe\u00a0hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their\u00a0Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.\u201d<\/p>\n
Hear it echoed in the Constitution of the State of North Dakota, written in 1889: \u201call individuals are by\u00a0nature equally free and independent and have certain inalienable rights, among which are those of\u00a0enjoying and defending life\u201d (article 1, section 1).<\/p>\n
Measure 1 protects citizens from others who think that some people don’t have a right to life. It\u00a0isn’t a radical new thought. This idea’s been around since 1776 as one of the founding principles upon\u00a0which our system of government is based. It was important for our country then. It’s important for our\u00a0state to remember now.<\/p>\n
Amanda Werth
\nCavalier, ND 58220<\/p>\n