CV NEWS FEED // With the November elections approaching, voters in 10 states will decide on 11 ballot initiatives, “nearly all of which would open the door to expanding the taking of innocent life as late as the third trimester,” according to an October 10 report from Pregnancy Help News.
Arizona: Proposition 139
This initiative seeks to create a “fundamental right” to abortion under the Arizona state constitution. If passed, it would eliminate all current laws protecting unborn children, including the prohibition of abortions after 15 weeks.
CatholicVote reported that there is bipartisan opposition to the proposition, warning against Harris’s “pro-abortion extremism.”
Colorado: Amendment 79
This measure would allow for abortion on demand until birth. It opens the door to taxpayer funding for abortions and could threaten the conscience rights of healthcare providers who oppose abortion.
“Colorado already has some of the strongest pro-abortion ‘rights’ in the entire world, and this proposition is even more extreme,” Archbishop Samuel Aquila of Denver wrote, CatholicVote reported in September.
“If we do not defeat this,” the Archbishop continued, “pro-life legislation will be unable to be passed due to the constitutional right to abortion, and countless children known only to God will die in Colorado because of state-subsidized abortion.”
Florida: Amendment 4
This amendment would allow abortions until viability, which generally means up to 24 weeks. It would repeal existing laws, including Florida’s heartbeat law and parental consent requirements.
Renowned doctor and pro-life Floridian Grazie Pozo Christie warned Florida residents that the amendment “would have devastating effects on our patients for generations to come,” explaining how the unspecific language of the amendment would actually facilitate completely unrestricted abortions, CatholicVote reported.
Maryland: Question 1
This initiative proposes a constitutional amendment to codify in the state constitution “an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including but not limited to the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end the individual’s pregnancy.”
Missouri: Amendment 3
This amendment would enshrine abortion until fetal viability into the state’s constitution, potentially overturning the state’s current near-total abortion ban.
The Thomas More Society, representing plaintiffs who challenged the amendment, argued that proponents of the amendment garnered votes by neglecting to clearly convey all the restrictions it would repeal.
Montana: CI-128
This initiative permits late-term abortion, abortion of partially delivered babies, and abortion by dismemberment, and Montana Bishops have vehemently urged residents to vote against it.
Nebraska: Initiative 434 and 439
Initiative 434 seeks to prohibit abortions in the second or third trimesters, except in cases of rape, incest, or medical emergencies.
Initiative 439 would ban abortion after fetal viability, with the broad exception of when the “health” of the mother is at risk.
Nevada: Question 6
This measure would create a constitutional “right” to abortion performed by any healthcare professional until viability or when necessary to protect the “health” of the mother. This measure could potentially allow non-doctors to perform abortions.
New York: Proposal 1
This “New York State Equal Rights Amendment” aims to prevent “unequal treatment” based on an individual’s choice to abort their child.
The state currently prohibits discrimination based on race and religion by government actors. If approved, Proposal 1 will add “protections” preventing discrimination based on “pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes, reproductive healthcare, and autonomy.”
The bishops of New York collectively condemned the proposed amendment in a recent statement, as CatholicVote reported. They warned that because of its broadly worded text, the amendment would “effectively, permanently legalize abortion without restriction and up until the moment of birth in New York.”
South Dakota: Amendment G
This measure would essentially reinstate the framework similar to Roe v. Wade, allowing access to abortion up to viability, effectively broadening access in South Dakota.
The diocese of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, urged residents to vote no against the amendment, CatholicVote reported in September.
“A ‘no’ vote on G gives these babies a chance to be born,” Michael Pauley, the executive director of the South Dakota Catholic Conference stated. “But if a majority vote ‘yes,’ these babies will die. That is the stark choice before us. Only rarely is an issue of such eternal significance placed into our hands.”