‘I think women have nothing to fear with when it comes to contraceptives, he will doing nothing on that issue.’

Asked to expand and clarify her point, Santorum told Morgan that if elected president, her husband would respect a woman’s right to contraception, and would not allow his religious beliefs to impact his political position:

‘Absolutely not. And again I think the issue is the government forcing people to go against their conscience. That’s really the issue here.’

For the third time in this country, voters of varying political perspectives and personal philosophies have rejected these ballot measures, recognizing them for what they are – an extreme, dangerous and direct assault on the constitutional rights that we are all guaranteed. Outlawing medical services commonly used and relied upon by Americans in their personal lives runs completely counter to the U.S. Constitution, not to mention some of our most deeply held American political traditions and values.

By its supporters’ own admission, the measure had implications far beyond banning all abortions—including banning many forms of birth control and fertility treatments. The measure was without a doubt a massive evisceration of everyone’s constitutional rights. Today’s vote is a huge victory for anyone concerned about protecting our constitutional rights against erosion. And it sends an unequivocal message to proponents of these measures – that the American people, no matter the political perspective, will not stand for such blatant attacks on the health and constitutionally protected rights of women in this country.

That’s partly because the Personhood movement hopes to do nothing less than reclassify everyday, routine birth control as abortion. The medical definition of pregnancy is when a fertilized egg successfully implants in the uterine wall. If this initiative passes, and fertilized eggs on their own have full legal rights, anything that could potentially block that implantation – something a woman’s body does naturally all the time – could be considered murder. Scientists say hormonal birth-control pills and the morning-after pill work primarily by preventing fertilization in the first place, but the outside possibility, never documented, that an egg could be fertilized anyway and blocked is enough for some pro-lifers.

Indeed, at least one pro-Personhood doctor in Mississippi, Beverly McMillan, refused to prescribe the pill before retiring last year, writing, “I painfully agree that birth control pills do in fact cause abortions.” Bush does prescribe the pill, but says, “There’s good science on both sides … I think there’s more science to support conception not occurring.” Given that the Personhood Amendment is so vague, I asked her, what would stop the alleged “good science” on one side from prevailing and banning even the pill?

Bush paused. “I could say that is not the intent,” she said. “I don’t have an answer for that particular [case], how it would be settled, but I do know this is simple.” Which part is simple? “The amendment is simple,” she said. “You can play the ‘what if’ game, but if you keep it simple, this is a person who deserves life.” What about the IUD, which she refuses to prescribe for moral reasons, and which McMillan told me the Personhood Amendment would ban? “I’m not the authority on what would and would not be banned.” No – Bush simply plays one on TV. And if her amendment passes, only condoms, diaphragms and natural family planning — the rhythm method – would be guaranteed in Mississippi.