Please Vote Yes on Kentucky Constitutional Pro-life Amendment

You have an opportunity to support the pro-life cause at the ballot box in the upcoming November election. Earlier this year, some pro-lifers rallied in Frankfort at the capitol’s rotunda in support of a proposed state constitutional amendment. As Maddie McQueen reported, that proposed state constitutional amendment, “Constitutional Amendment 2, was introduced during the 2021 legislative session in House Bill 91. House Bill 91 passed which sends the amendment to voters this November.”


The wording of the constitutional amendment will state:


“To protect human life, nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion or require the funding of abortion.”


As Ballotpedia staff state, to vote yes is to support a change in the Kentucky Constitution to include the notion that the state constitution does not confer a right to abortion and does not require government funding for abortion. Many Republican state government officials support the proposed constitutional amendment, such as Secretary of State Michael Adams, State Treasurer Allison Ball (probably currently the most popular state-level official), Commissioner of Agriculture Ryan Quarles, and State Representative Joseph Fisher. State Rep. Joe Fisher has remarked that such a constitutional amendment “assures that no Kentucky court will ever be able to fashion an implicit right to abortion from the language of our state Constitution. There will be no Roe vs. Wade decision in Kentucky.” On the other side, Planned Parenthood state director Tamarra Wieder has claimed that the constitutional amendment would be bad because “Abortion is healthcare and is a core component of social and economic equality.”


Now, the notion that abortion is healthcare, at least in most cases in which abortions historically have occurred in the past century, does not apply to “life of the mother” cases and the like. So, to paint abortion as healthcare in the broad sense is to view pregnancy as a disease. Indeed, on occasion, one sees or hears those on the pro-choice and pro-abortion side refer to fetuses as “parasites” and “like a cancer.” Similarly, we hear the promotional wording that condoms are “protection.” Protection from what? From pregnancy.


But if we look at the major categories of causes of death in the United States and if we start counting deaths right after conception (rather than after birth as is normally done in widely-shared lists), we would see that abortion and miscarriage are both top-tier causes of death. So, if we are looking at this from a healthcare perspective, we would want to do whatever is in our power to minimize the occurrence of abortion and miscarriage.


So, in light of that, why would those who cherish life desire to allow judges to interpret our state constitution as conferring a right to abortion? Why wouldn’t we instead want to promote personal responsibility to minimize the frequency of abortion?


Those on the pro-life and pro-birth side may view pregnancy as an investment. In that case, we would hope for a child, cherish life, and may even understand the notion of a demographic dividend for the economy in the long-term from higher fertility rates through keeping the children rather than aborting the children. We would also understand that, as with any investment, there is the possibility that a pregnancy would fail (in that case, a miscarriage would occur); and we would keep in mind that our ability to reduce the prevalence of miscarriages is rather limited. In light of that, the focus on saving the unborn is largely a focus on abortion.


Now, the second part of the constitutional amendment proposal holds that the state government is not required to fund abortion. Although it could be worded more strongly, the constitutional amendment would help us to ensure that none of the taxes you pay to the Kentucky state government would go to funding abortions. All other things unchanged, from a liberty standpoint, this could be a win: fewer people would be compelled to fund endeavors that they do not desire to fund, in comparison to a scenario in which pro-lifers are compelled to fund abortions in Kentucky.


So we at the American Family Association encourage you to spread the word about the upcoming pro-life amendment vote on the November 2022 ballot in Kentucky. Vote “yes” to help ensure that your tax dollars don’t go to fund abortions in Kentucky and to ensure that judges do not try to use our state Constitution to advance a pro-abortion agenda. We join the Catholic Conference of Kentucky, the Family Foundation, the Kentucky Baptist Convention, Kentucky Right to Life, and Sisters for Life in support of Constitutional Amendment #2, the pro-life constitutional amendment.


This constitutional amendment proposal is not trivial. In at least ten states, courts have ruled that their state constitutions allow for a "right to abortion" in a broad sense. So there is urgency on our end to pass a constitutional amendment to prevent that from happening.







Works Cited Bibliography:


Ballotpedia staff. “Kentucky No Right to Abortion in Constitution Amendment (2022).” https://ballotpedia.org/Kentucky_No_Right_to_Abortion_in_Constitution_Amendment_(2022). Accessed 18 Mar. 2022. Web.


McQueen, Maddie. “Right to Life’ Rally Supports KY Constitutional Amendment.” WTVQ. https://www.wtvq.com/right-to-life-rally-supports-ky-constitutional-amendment/. Accessed 18 Mar. 2022. Web.

34 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All