Commentary on the Drafting of the Ultimate Human Life Amendment – ARCHIVED PAGE

The Ultimate Human Life Amendment was the first ever state Personhood Amendment introduced in U.S. History.  It was introduced in Mississippi by Pro-Life Dave in 2005.  This exact amendment is no longer promoted although some of its wording and concepts live on in other personhood amendments.  This web page was written many years ago and strategies and concepts change and improved over time so this page may not exactly reflect our current views.

The Drafting of the
the first State Human Life Amendment in U.S. History
(also known as a Personhood Amendment)

Commentary by its author, Pro-Life Dave  (David Rogers)


This document contains a sentence-by-sentence commentary on the background and construction of the Ultimate Human Life Amendment (UHLA).  This is provided to answer many common questions and to be a resource for other states in drafting of their own Ultimate Human Life Amendment.

The UHLA, first introduced in Mississippi, was the first ever proposed State Human Life Amendment (aka Personhood Amendment) in U.S. History.  The Mississippi version of the UHLA was authored by Pro-Life Dave with the consultation of a select group of scholars with expertise in Science, American Government & History, and Constitutional Law.  The UHLA drew upon wording from a series of the most popular proposed Federal Human Life Amendments to Congress.

Research and drafting of the Mississippi UHLA began in 2004, the language was finalized in August of 2005.  Its introduction and official filing was put off until Nov. 1st because of a direct hit by Hurricane Katrina.  The official filing letter, introducing the UHLA, contains the “Declaration for the Unborn” which you can read here.

GOALS of the
Ultimate Human Life Amendment

Some of these areas may seem technical but all are important.  IF you are serious about personhood for the unborn then study each area.  In doing so you will learn the critical concepts and components needed to overturn Roe v. Wade and END Abortion Once and For All.

ONE:   (God gets the Glory)
Public recognition of God as our Creator AND  that our Rights come from God.

Connecting Personhood to the State’s Due Process Clause.

Force the State Government implement the Amendment equally.

FOUR:    (Personhood)
Define “persons” for Due Process Protection to include all Unborn Children and other vulnerable in our society including the elderly, handicapped, and the infirmed.

Permanent Classification of Assisted Suicide as Murder.

Protecting the Life of the Mother.

The spelling and use of some words in the Mississippi UHLA may appear odd, like “shall” and small “s” in state, but they reflect the style and format already present in the Mississippi Constitution.

UHLA Paragraph
1, Sentence 1:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all persons are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are the Right to Life, that is, the Right to not have one’s life taken from them.

Achieved Goal # 1:
Public recognition of God as our Creator
that our rights come from God

What better place to start than with America’s great Declaration of Independence.  “Self-Evident” truths are those which all men know in their heart to be true. Among these are the Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.   That these Rights are a gift from God!

jefferson-statue-sm“Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.”
– Thomas Jefferson
   (Query 18, Notes on the State of Virginia)

All too often you will find today’s landscape of American politics painted in perverted twisted shapes similar to some types of modern art.  The public face of American politics more often shows a warped version of reality and distracts from the real fundamental issues and core principles of liberty.  This false political world creates fake issues and motivates people to pursue rabbit holes of logic that lead nowhere.  SO, in designing the first sentence, my purpose was to firmly establish and to point readers back to a main document in American Liberty that promotes the founding fathers’ ideals of a God-given of the Right to Life for all.

The only modifications here were to change the word “man” to “person” and “unalienable” to “inalienable” (which is grammatically correct) and then dropping the words “liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” because we are focusing on, for the purpose of this amendment, the Right to Life.

One main concern that arose after the initial draft was that the term “Right to Life” might be twisted by lawyers and courts to include a right to have the State pay for health care or some other right.  To resolve and to clarify this the following wording was included to define the Right to Life, “that is, the Right to not have one’s life taken from them.”

o-the-God-given-Right-to-LiUHLA Paragraph 1, Sentence 2:

Therefore, the government of the state of Mississippi shall recognize and defend the God-given Right to Life of all persons equally in accordance with Section 14 of the State Constitution of 1890.

Achieved Goal # 2:
Connecting Personhood to the State’s Due Process Clause.
Achieved Goal # 3: 
Mandate the State Government implement Equal Enforcement.

“Therefore” takes the entire last sentence and announces the main point.   Next, “the government of the state of Mississippi shall” means all parts: legislature, courts, sheriff, county, city, governor, etc —  everyone in any type of government position within the state of Mississippi.  Next, “shall recognize” means in all their actions they must legally respect the Right to Life of all persons.  Next, “and defend” means that the government must proactively defend the Right to Life.  The main venue being through the state legislature who writes the laws and district attorneys who prosecute.  Next, “the God-given Right to Life” is another recognition that our rights are endowed to us from God and not from any man or government.


Next, “of all persons equally” – This will force the State of Mississippi to prosecute murder of unborn children using the same murder laws for born persons.  The U.S. Supreme Court had a major issue in Roe v. Wade with the state of Texas walk not matching their talk.  Several Supreme Court Justices asked this question: “If an unborn child is a person then why didn’t Texas prosecute abortion as murder under existing state murder laws?”  Even though the attorney for Texas said the state believed and even though he argued that life began at conception and that full protection and personhood should begin at conception — the state’s own limited anti-abortion laws (allowing abortion under some conditions) and also the fact that they did not use standard murder laws to prosecute abortion… all added up to proving to the U.S. Supreme Court that the state of Texas really did not believe an unborn child was a person.

So the key to overturning Roe v. Wade is not just personhood, the legal recognition of unborn children as persons, but that the state acts in prosecuting abortions as murder in the same manner of a born person.  Also that the state does not allow any circumstances under which an abortion can take place, except to save the life of the mother.

A main reason why we have abortion today.

Either ALL abortion is wrong or ALL abortion is right.

The State giving any reason to kill an unborn child, like for rape or incest, is what got us into this entire mess with abortion in the first place. Mississippi in 1966 and Colorado in 1967 were the first states to enact laws with such exceptions.  There can be no middle ground, ethically, technically or legally.  Any compromise of the absolute position of not allowing abortion under any circumstances, except when saving the life of the mother, only proves the position (especially to judges) that unborn children are not human beings.  This automatically allows abortion at any stage of pregnancy, for any reason, and by any means.

In addition, if a state does not act or prosecute abortion as murder, except when saving the life of the mother, then that state is ALSO proving the position by their actions that they do not consider an unborn child to be a human being and a person.  So a state’s walk must follow their talk.

One of the main reasons why we have abortion legalized through the courts today is that the state of Texas, and most states of that day, did not take an absolute position on abortion in the 1970s thus leading up to the decision in Roe v. Wade.

Think about this.  If a state does not prosecute for the murder of a black man, or a disabled person, then what they are saying by their actions is that they are not people or they are ‘less than human’.

One of the most heart wrenching arguments for compromise on abortion is that one should “at least” allow for the rare cases of rape or incest.  Not to diminish the impact to these women’s lives, but IF ANY circumstance is allowed then ALL abortion will be legal.  What remains is this:  Should a child be killed for the crime of their father?    Was the child convicted of a capital crime due the death penalty?  Obviously the answer is ‘no’.


The Mississippi Constitution’s Due Process Clause, Section 14, reads:

Section 14. Due process.
“No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property except by due process of law.”

In the UHLA, using the wording:  “in accordance with Section 14 of the State Constitution” with “of all persons equally” – binds Mississippi’s due process clause to all persons equally, which along with next sentence in the amendment, now includes unborn children.  This recognizes, among others, unborn children’s due process rights, among which is the Right not to be deprived of life, except by due process.  That means an unborn child would have to of been tried and convicted of a capital crime.  Not likely.

Binding the equal enforcement wording with the state’s due process clause now completes the equal enforcement principle talked about above.


We recognize there are differing views within the pro-life community on the death penalty.  While not speaking to the merits of any view, put simply, changing the death penalty would mean altering the due process clause.  Mississippi Constitutional Initiatives cannot change, add to, or repeal any part of the state Bill of Rights, which Section 14 (the due process clause) is a part of.

UHLA Paragraph
1, Sentence 3:

The word “person” shall apply to all human beings, regardless of race, color, creed, religion, citizenship, ancestry, national origin, sex, age, health, function, or condition of dependency, at all stages of biological development from fertilization until natural death.

Achieved Goal # 4:
Defining Personhood for all.  No Exceptions.

This is the first mention in the Mississippi Constitution of protection for people regardless of race, color, creed, disability, age, or health condition.  Although we may enjoy certain ‘federal’ legal status and protections of rights, I believe strongly that we, as a people in Mississippi, should govern our own selves well and should institute within our own state government and constitution those provisions we now hold sacred, noble, and true.  Among these sacred truths are that “all people” have a Right to Life regardless of race, national origin, religion, disability, or health condition.  This must include ‘all human beings’ from our very beginning at fertilization until natural death.

Why do we go Beyond Personhood for the Unborn?

  • That is what God Wants
    Should not God’s Goals be Our Goals?
    Legal mumbo-jumbo aside, God’s goal is the respect and protection of ALL INNOCENT LIFE not just unborn children.  Is this not supposed to be the true Pro-Life standard?  That is the goal behind the Ultimate Human Life Amendment (UHLA). Should not our goals be the same as God’s?
    The UHLA was meant to protect all innocent life even if the wording may sometimes get a little complex.  EVERY word has a specific purpose and pattern and was thoroughly researched for about a year, consulted on with constitutionalist, scientists, and historians.
    IF we are going to make an effort shouldn’t we make it our best effort and protect all innocent life?!
  • Preserving Liberty is a Process
    Sometime people need to stand up and make a public declaration of fundamental truths and ‘enshrine’ them into our state constitution.  We do not know what the future will hold.  Racism and prejudice may creep back into and take a stronghold in our state.  It is important that we make this public declaration now in setting a clear standard so that great travesties of the past will not occur again in our state’s future.I believe strongly in setting the record straight and setting a clear standard using our legislative and constitutional processes.  The people look to our state leaders and those in authority to give societal parameters and to define fundamental basics of good and evil.  So setting the complete “human life” record straight was important to me, not just the recognition of unborn children as persons but the recognition of the Right to Life for all people.We all are in a struggle for the preservation of our most basic rights, among the highest, the Right to Life.  We all are in this struggle together.  The diminishing of one group of people’s Right to Life is a threat to us all.  When the rationale for abortion crept into our culture the same reasoning that breaks the principle of valuing all human life allowed doctors and others to make judgment calls as to whether an older, senior adult or a handicapped person can be killed or allowed to starved to death.  These things are happening today in America!  America’s dirty little secrets.  This is the result of moving away from the principles and sacredness for ALL human life.The U.S. Supreme Court once ruled that African Americans could be legally owned, bought, and sold like property.  Up until 50 years ago U.S. Citizens who were Native Indians, Irish, Mexican, Jewish, Catholic, Mormon, and from African decent were all demonized and looked upon as less than human, somehow retarded, a ‘lesser species’ of human.  Just 60 years ago, during World War II, U.S. citizens of Japanese descent were forced from their homes and placed in concentration camps.
    Come on America!  Wake up!

All human beings deserve the absolute protection of life.  Once we diverge from this absolute principle then we create a ever growing culture of death, as seen today, by which those in authority who can choose to end someone’s life without due process; where teenagers go on shooting sprees in schools; where abuse of children, women, the elderly, the sick, and disabled are now common; where adults murder each other without considering it to be wrong.  Why?  Because if there is no absolute principle of life anymore then anybody can make up their own rules or change them as they please.


UHLA Paragraph 2, Sentence 1:

No person shall deprive another person of life by assisting or aiding in their suicide.

Achieved Goal # 5: 
Permanent Classification of Assisted Suicide as Murder.

Euthanasia is always considered murder and is prosecuted as such. Although Assisted Suicide is already illegal in Mississippi, I felt the needed for it to be “enshrined” in the Constitution.  The wording here clearly defines assisting in a suicide as a criminal act and classifies it as murder by the wording, “deprive another person of life”, although it leaves the level or classification or degree of murder up to the state legislature.

UHLA Paragraph 2, Sentence 2: 

No person shall deprive an unborn person of life; provided, however, that nothing in this amendment shall prohibit a law allowing justification to be shown for only those medical procedures required to prevent the death of either the pregnant woman or her unborn offspring as long as such law requires every reasonable effort be made to preserve the life of each.

Achieved Goal # 6: 
Protection of the Life of the Mother.

The whole purpose of this sentence is to not allow the state, judges, or any authorities to mandate or force the mother to die for her unborn child.  Not providing such a protection COULD allow the state to intervene in these situations.  While existing legislative public policy and current court rulings support this already we felt including this wording would reinforced this principle.  The state legislature is charged with making laws detailing the specifics of situations and current medical procedures under this mandate that: “every reasonable effort be made to preserve the life of each. “

Sometimes hard decisions have to be made to take action that would result in the death of a unborn child.  While rare, not making such a decision could just as well result in the death of the unborn child anyway.  Such decisions can only be made justly while in the act of saving the life of the mother.

Although this sentence might be hard to read at first, it was carefully and specifically worded.  The language comes from National Right to LIfe‘s “Unity Human Life Amendment” designed for Congress and introduced in 1981.

This sentence helps the reader understand that saving the life of the mother AND her unborn child is always the priority but IF the life of the mother is in danger then the unborn child’s life can be taken.  This gets into weighing of one life against another, as discussed in Roe v. Wade.  The same Pro-Life principle that supports the Right to Life of the unborn child also supports the Right to Life of the mother and thus it would be wrong to legally force the mother to sacrifice her own life to save her child.

UHLA Paragraph 3, Sentence 1:

No designated funds are required to implement this amendment.

This looks like an odd statement to be thrown in here but it is a required budgetary statement for constitutional initiatives in Mississippi.  Simply put, there are no special funds needed to be set aside in the state budget to specifically carry out this amendment.  The carrying out of this amendment will fall under existing enforcement of murder laws by law enforcement and state prosecutors and their existing budgets.


This Page is Located at:


 (c) Copyright 2004-2015  Pro-Life Generation.  All Rights Reserved.
The Ultimate Human Life Amendment was the first ever state Personhood Amendment introduced in U.S. History.  It was introduced in Mississippi by Pro-Life Dave in 2005.  This exact amendment is no longer promoted although some of its wording and concepts live on in other personhood amendments.  This web page was written many years ago and strategies and concepts change and improved over time so this page may not exactly reflect our current views.