Illustration by Leigh Douglas

At this year’s Republican National Convention, the GOP didn’t counter the controversial comments Nebraska Rep. Todd Akin said about “legitimate rape.”

In fact, the GOP proposed a proposed human life amendment to validate Akin’s plank. This potential 28th Amendment to the constitution would override Roe v. Wade to protect the unborn, despite years of gains in rights for women. Sen. Richard Murdock (R-Indiana) spoke in support of Akin, stating that it is God’s intention if a baby is born from rape. Americans should reject this biased lawmaking.

To counter the Human Life Amendment announcement, City on a Hill Press (CHP) proposes to create a 28th Amendment for congressional consideration. Call it the “Protection of Choice Amendment.”

In our proposed “Protection of Choice Amendment,” a woman’s rights to choose will be upheld in America’s strongest institution. The law would affirm the Supreme Court’s decision on Roe v. Wade in a universally applicable way for all states.

To further ensure women’s rights in our “Protection of Choice Amendment,” doctors who perform abortions will have more protection while members of congress can only serve on a committee ensuring women’s rights by written pledge. Each clause would create the accountability needed for a fair and strong law.

If current poll results hold, the Republicans will lose the female vote by a double-digit margin in the 2012 election. With a reported gender gap at its highest level since Al Gore’s 2000 campaign, consider the text of a human life amendment to see why women aren’t flocking to Romney’s binders.

According to the official Republican platform, the GOP will “assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed.”

What’s troubling here is the proposed application of the 14th Amendment to protect the unborn, a clear violation of the amendment’s original intention.

The 14th Amendment was enacted to protect emancipated slaves at the end of the Civil War, and has been cited in many rulings that favor civil rights. One is led to believe that the amendment’s authors didn’t intend to protect the rights of beings whose consciousness is disputed among scientists today.

While CHP does expect Democrats to veto any amendment advocating the protection of human life until birth, such a ploy must not go unnoticed.

If the Republican Party can propose amendments to the constitution that strip rights away, then we propose to protect rights the same way. It’s the only way to ensure the right to choose isn’t in the hands of people who wish to take it away.