{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021176470588235293, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011764705882352941, 'mean_word_length': 5.6484375, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Murder, Miscarriage, and Women’s Choice: Prudence in the Colorado Personhood Debate

This article analyzes texts circulated in the 2014 debate over Colorado’s Amendment 67, the so-called Personhood Amendment, to demonstrate that value claims within the abortion debate are subordinated in favor of discussing the potential legal and philosophical implications of granting fetuses personhood. Using prudence, Robert Hariman’s (1991) framework for understanding political action, as a theoretical lens, I argue the personhood debate offers scholars an opportunity to identify and evaluate competing value claims of  and  in relation to potential impacts of the amendment. Prudence offers a compelling area for political communication and rhetorical scholars to expand and develop in light of policy failures in the abortion debate, and other key areas.