This election, Question 1 on the Maryland ballot asks voters to amend the Maryland Constitution with a reproductive freedom amendment. The Reproductive Freedom amendment is not what you think. Over 70% of Marylanders are pro-choice. Supporters and sponsors hoped to take advantage of that sentiment and get this amendment passed without any effort without voters realizing this amendment goes well beyond abortion. Campaign ads are training people to think reproductive freedom is about abortion and abortion only. The ads say, “Women’s rights are under attack. We’re going to protect your reproductive freedom.” The word abortion isn’t used and still word choice implies abortion.
But here’s the truth. Abortion is the Trojan horse being used to trick Marylanders into voting away their parental rights.
How?
Reproductive freedom is neither defined in the amendment nor anywhere in Maryland law. This is a catchall term to include anything that pertains to the reproductive system and the reproductive anatomy. Reproductive freedom is not limited to abortion rights.
Here are the clues: The amendment says, “that every person.” It doesn’t say every adult person. It doesn’t say every person over the age of 18. Persons and individuals are human beings, male and female, adults and children. We know “reproductive freedom” is more than abortion because of the phrase “including but not limited to” before the words describing pregnancy decisions.
According to the ballot, the amendment confirms a right. This is false. The amendment creates a brand new right for all individuals, regardless of age, with little checks in place to protect those individuals. When abortion was made a right in Maryland, it was through the 1991 Maryland Freedom of Choice Act. The Maryland Freedom of Choice Act is 12 pages long and uses the words woman and abortion to clearly state its intent: to legally allow women to obtain abortions. It also allows the abortion provider to decide whether to notify parents if a minor girl is involved.
In comparison, the law to put the Reproductive Freedom amendment on the ballot is less than 2 pages and still does not define “reproductive freedom”. The words woman and abortion are not used in the amendment to confirm what the right means or who the right is for. Despite efforts by politicians such as Senator Bryan Simonaire to include language excluding minors in the law, there are still no requirements on age and parental consent. Without said requirements, the Reproductive Freedom amendment will not only put minors in danger, but it will also remove any preexisting protections involving parental consent.
Children need written parental permission to take Tylenol or Ibuprofen when in school. They need parental consent to get tattoos or piercings. They cannot buy alcohol, cigarettes or marijuana, so how can they be expected to handle life-altering decisions?
Children are too young and lack the knowledge to give informed consent for any procedure but especially for drugs and procedures that will permanently alter their bodies.
Do you think a 10-year-old boy should be able to take puberty blockers without parental knowledge or consent?
Do you think a 12-year-old girl should be able to get a birth control device implanted in her arm without parental knowledge or consent?
Do you think a 14-year-old girl should be able to get a double mastectomy without parental knowledge or consent?
Should parents have to go to court to fight for their right to parent their child?
It’s not freedom to take away parental rights. It’s not reproductive to allow children to sterilize themselves, especially without parental consent or knowledge.
Being pro-choice should not mean you sacrifice your parental rights.
Parental rights are a common ground, common sense issue. Vote NO on QUESTION 1.
For more information and to Volunteer and Donate, go to HealthNotHarmMD.org
