Should we be concerned?

Should we be concerned about a government that does not want to acknowledge a fundamental right of children to continue living?

The Amendment put forward before the Title Board states:

"Children have the right to continue living from the moment they are conceived." - 2025-2026 #149

The opposition was correct that this amendment would "ban abortion" in the sense that it would end electively and intentionally killing children in the womb and during and following birth.

The definition of "abortion" is easily changed. Right now, a miscarriage is referred to as a "spontaneous abortion", which no one is arguing should be illegal, but the opposition would use it as a definition if we use that word. A child's natural death is as different from an untimely death as a man who is dying of cancer is different than a man who is shot in his home.

The opposition wants us to use the word "abortion" which is a word of death. We do not want to focus on death, but life (Philippians 4:8). All of the death industry's propaganda has conditioned an opinion about the word "abortion" without providing a clear definition. It's even currently in our Colorado Constitution as a "right" without a definition.

By admitting that the right of children to continue living would end electively killing children shows that the opposition understands our proposed amendment.

Elective abortion is just one of many forms of chemical and physical violence which deny our youngest the right to continue living. To say we are just trying to ban abortion negates the concept of protecting all children.

The right to continue living is broader than closing a death facility. It applies to the ex-boyfriend who shot a preborn child still residing in his mother's womb. And the child whose mother has died in a car accident and is still kicking trying to live. And the mother who is in a comma while her child continues to grow and develop toward their birthday. And the child who should not be used for experimentation or to inject into another child's body to carry a living virus.

While there may be many applications, the guiding principle is the same as our founding fathers gave to us while we were yet their Posterity. We want to put LIFE into our Colorado Constitution.

This process of a people's initiative is supposed to be presented by citizens to be decided through a democratic process, not a government-sanctioned initiative determined by three paid bureaucrats acting as gate keepers. If 125,000 people sign that an amendment should be on the ballot, it should be there. And if 55% of Coloradans vote to put it into the Colorado Constitution, it should be there. Three staff members paid by the state should not decide for the entire state if we will get a chance to vote on it.

This amendment would protect our youngest and most vulnerable children from the moment they are conceived. In doing that, it will stop tax funds from paying for killing children all nine months of pregnancy and make it legally possible to close death facilities and stop poisonous abortion pills in our state. Parents will be referred to non-violent resources, instead.

This right is already guaranteed in our United States Constitution, though unconstitutionally ignored in the state of Colorado.

The Declaration of Independence states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ...."

The Constitution of the United States declares: In the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” [Emphasis added]

The 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America instructs:

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” [Emphasis added]

It is both a scientific fact (96% of embryologists agree) and a theological fact (Jesus came to earth when He was conceived) that we are living human beings from the moment we are conceived. As living human beings, "children have the right to continue living from the moment they are conceived".​ ​​​There are no exceptions to a child who does not deserve to continue living. There is no child who should be executed by the state. There is no child who should be given an untimely death. It is never necessary to intentionally kill a child. 

What kind of government doesn't want the people to decide to apply our inalienable right to life to our youngest and most vulnerable children and grandchildren? In a Constitutional Republic, we the people are the government. But in an oligarchy or Marxist state, the government sees its own rights in competition with that of the people. They want to rule over the people rather than serve them.

If the youngest and most vulnerable among us have no protections, neither do any of us.

This amendment is currently before the Colorado Supreme Court. We will see if they will give what we believe to be a fair judgement of a child's right to continue living.