For the opposing view, click here.
Advertisements in support of Michigan’s Proposal 3 have described the measure as a “middle-ground solution.” But this proposed amendment to the state constitution would create the nation’s most extreme pro-abortion law. It would do much more than simply “restore protections” from before the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade. Instead, it would enshrine a nearly unlimited right to abortion, permitting the procedure throughout all nine months of pregnancy, for any reason and without restriction.
Everyone should vote against it.
In the name of “reproductive freedom for all,” this amendment would permit abortion for reasons of “mental health,” which in practice would mean for any reason at all. It would
wipe out parental consent and notification laws, enabling children to obtain abortions without the approval or knowledge of their parents. It claims to allow regulation after “viability,” but leaves the determination of when that is to abortion providers. If passed, this amendment will end the conversation about abortion in Michigan, with the final word being that anyone can do as they please, so long as it is in the name of reproductive freedom.
This amendment would prioritize abortion accessibility at the direct expense of women—even pro-choice voters should see that Proposal 3 goes too far. It would weaken health and safety standards for abortion clinics, and make it virtually impossible to prosecute abortionists who endanger women, encouraging unsafe practices. It would eliminate laws requiring that women have “informed consent,” which includes looking at an ultrasound before having an abortion. It also would also eliminate Michigan’s 24-hour waiting period, taking away the opportunity for second thoughts before a grave choice.
Proposal 3 isn’t pro-choice, it is pro-one choice. A person who supports this amendment is pro-abortion, at any cost.
The passage of Proposal 3 would also have broader implications for society’s treatment of women. What do we tell women is most important when we allow this on our ballots? Perhaps that access to abortion is more important than their wellbeing. That abortion assists their mental health rather than cripples it, yet that they couldn’t handle the truth of their own ultrasound?
Proposal 3 also encourages the irresponsibility of men, creating an incentive for them to abandon vulnerable women. It makes birth entirely a woman’s burden, and entrenches such attitudes in our culture. If a woman has a baby in her arms nine months after sleeping with a man, it is solely because of her weakness for not getting rid of it when she had the chance. She had nine months to deal with it, right? This amendment would contribute to a society that refuses to hold men to any standards, thus revoking their opportunity to meet them; one that purports to set women free, but turns around and tells them that there is no choice for them but abortion.
We can do better for everyone.
