Beerworth: Planned Parenthood spent big on misleading Article 22 advertising

by Mary Hahn Beerworth

Despite a statewide effort to expose the truth about Planned Parenthood’s push to “enshrine” abortion into the Vermont Constitution, the vote passed in Vermont by a wide margin.

Planned Parenthood used massive financial resources to launch a misleading advertising campaign on all Vermont airwaves. Voters were inundated with false messaging that successfully managed to hoodwink Vermonters into believing that they must support passage.

Thousands of Vermont voters were misled into believing that abortion would become illegal in Vermont unless citizens cast their votes in favor of passage of Proposal 5/Article 22. In the wake of the US Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v Wade, abortion proponents capitalized on that public fear of losing the right to abortion entirely. Proponents also neatly side-stepped the fact that abortion is already legal in Vermont and has been since 1972.

Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in the state of Vermont (performing 90% of all abortions) and passage of the amendment now permanently shields their abortion business from any oversight or state limitations at any time throughout all nine months of pregnancy. This is a tragedy for mothers and their babies.

Abortion supporters, like Planned Parenthood, not only raised and spent massive amounts of money, their strategy also included a refusal to participate in debates or forums. A strategy of “the less the voters know the better for our side” ultimately succeeded. On the other hand, opponents of Prop 5 were fully prepared to examine the amendment in depth for greater public understanding – but that never happened.

Furthermore, the Vermont media coverage was unfailingly biased and unbalanced and that added to voter confusion. Most local news coverage only included proponents of the amendment and often even included the abortionist at the University of Vermont Medical Center as a source of “neutral” information.

The Vermont Right to Life Committee is disappointed with the vote total and the loss. However, pro-lifers can expect that our efforts to inform Vermonters about life in the womb and alternatives to abortion will continue unabated and undeterred.

The author is the executive director of Vermont Right to Life.

Categories: Commentary

17 replies »

  1. Thank you Mary. A whole lot of outreach and education can make a huge difference in stopping Planned Parenthood’s sale of baby body parts.

  2. It will back fire on them.

    On Vt Digger, you can see a sign that says….

    Not your body
    Not your choice

    Then it will be replied….by the legal system.

    Not my payment

    Not my payment for child support
    Not my payment for prenatal care
    Not my payment for state funded support of single women with children

    It is totally “their” choice.

    So now because of their law, men can no longer be entrapped and enslaved. They can be no longer forced to father children, unless they are married and agree to the child rearing ahead of time in writing.

    Can’t entrap some with your body, it’s your choice, just as you say. And it’s not a baby right? It’s not a baby until the birthing parent makes that declaration after birth.

    God works in mysterious ways…..this amendment will be what outlaws ALL abortions.

    • This is the potential unintended consequence that I see coming. Though I think this is why the state gets a say if it has a “compelling interest.” Single mothers can’t do it all and rarely do. They get child support, and failing that, the state steps in and stepfathers the financial support at the taxpayer’s expense. But the state will likely find that it has a “compelling interest,” in saving a lot of money, and the “least restrictive means,” will remain forcing men to be accountable in ways that women are not. However… I also see another unforeseen potential. Indentured servitude, in ANY form is now unconstitutional as well. Tell me how state mandated child support, or even alimony isn’t at the very least a form of indentured servitude? I can imagine some legal weaselisms, but not an honest accounting. If you can’t force a murderer to work for you, then surely, you can’t force the man whose girlfriend lied about her fertility, or worse, as the NBA famously had to warn players, cheeked a BJ, or stole a used condom, or how about young boys, increasingly preyed upon by 30 something teachers? There was a 13 year old boy forced to pay his rapist child support upon reaching 18 in Texas recently. But women can’t stand the thought of “forced motherhood.” They do it to men all the time, and cheer each other on for doing so, if Oprah is anything to go by. I honestly hope these feel-good amendments slap some sense into the ladies of libbyland, and show them what equality actually looks like, but I somehow doubt it.

      • And those women should be charged with sexual assault… the very least.
        Extortion, entrapment and just plain evil……not all women are sugar and spice and everything nice….they are just as messed up as we are, just in different ways.

  3. Follow the money. I saw a video where planned Parenthood is on record stating that the older the aborted baby is, the more valuable their organs. This was not about denying life saving care to woman experiencing complications during pregnancy, including aborting the child to save the mother. I have never heard so many lies. Absolutely shocking. Fletcher Allen also ran such a commercial. They have a financial interest in full term abortion, as these procedures are done in hospital. Then there is the issue of women being paid to abort their babies as late as possible. The aging elite much be chopping at the bit for their new organs. Based on the level of dishonesty, we can assume this change is financially motivated. Otherwise, why would the campaign advertising been so utterly deceitful.

  4. Thank you Mary-for all you did in an attempt to educate voters about Article 22. It was very frustrating for a lot of us, and still is. If I heard “oh-that won’t happen” once-I heard it a hundred times.

  5. One thing Mary Beerworth fails to mention is that she supported Christina Nolan’s Senatorial campaign and encouraged Vermonters to donate to Ms. Nolan.
    Despite the fact that Mary Beerworth is Executive Director of Vermont Right to Life, she supported Ms. Nolan who campaigned on abortion thru the 2nd Trimester, 99% of all abortions. And Ms. Nolan stated she would fight to codify Roe V Wade if elected.
    Everything Pro Life Vermonters fight against.

    So in effect, Mary Beerworth thought 12 Vermont Babies annually were worth fighting for, because that has been the average of 3rd Trimester abortions in Vermont.

    Mary Beerworth states that opponents of Prop 5 were fully prepared to examine the amendment in depth for greater public understanding – but that never happened.

    It did happen, I spent a great deal of time and effort educating Vermonters about the Holocaust that Prop 5 / Article 22 really are. In fact until the last moments on Tuesday Night my Wife and I stood in front of the Founders School where voters cast their ballots. We educated voters who were confused by the language and asked for clarification as to what Article 22 really was.
    We changed some minds even as they walked in. Just like it changed the minds of many we have spoken with this year.

    I, along with many Vermonters have fought for every Baby from the moment of conception. Mary Beerworth has become a Part Time advocate for the unborn depending on what Trimester of development the Baby is in.

    I have called for Mary Beerworth to resign from Vermont Right to Life several times this year. I hope every Pro Life Vermonter demands her resignation.

    You can’t be Pro Life part time. Especially as the face of Vermont Right to Life.

    • What’s the source for the 3rd trimester abortions? I can’t find it anywhere on the internet…..

  6. As they say to athletes after losing a big game: You left everything out on the field, Mary. You gave it your all. Thank you. This is a shameful day for Vermont but those of us in the 23% know we are on the right side of history. Keep on fighting the good fight for those who can’t speak for themselves.

  7. Was there any real debate over the gerrymandering that preceded this election.
    Shutting down debate is a standardized tactic with the new Left. Marina Brown harassed me on Tuesday. The rally to stop CPS from seizing children arbitrarily was held in Newport. Brown left after failing to get me expelled. Open debate exposes these people’s hidden agendas. In reality , Antifa, etc. looks for more govt. control over children. Now, countless children are “transed” despite everything that parents do to prevent it.

  8. Mary, not so fast. The amendment passed 72 to 22, a massive 50 point spread. Abortion is now a constitutional amendment–thanks in part to you and your group. Over half of Republicans are pro choice. Even you are pro choice as jim sexton points out. Gerald Malloy also was pro choice in the debate against Welch.Liam Madden was pro choice. The pro life argument as made by you and your people does not convince people. It’s sad but it is a fact. Pro-life the way you have chosen to do it is over in Vermont. The vote should be your cue to exit and close shop. Nobody was confused or misled about the language in the prop–that’s nonsense. We have been debating abortion for 50 years and everybody knows the deal. You and your people failed. Stop with the excuses. Why the objections above–you showed people that pro choice was fine when you supported your niece Christina Nolan. Now its not? You are shirking responsibility. It is too late– there is no going back after Tuesday. It is not remotely possible to overturn this constitutional amendment ever. Its over. Vermont will now become the abortion refuge hotspot of the country. It is all very sad. Resign please this week so we can move forward with new leadership and new ideas.

  9. The big issue here is that Proposition 5/ Article 22 really has nothing to do with abortion, and everything to do with totalitarianism and slavery, found in a string of three words: “compelling State interest”, words that Becca Balint is co-responsible, in 2019 with other State Senators in placing in the Proposition.

    Thus all reproductive freedom is subject to “compelling State interest” and thus those who want to reduce the population of the planet to address “global warming” can go forward with state sponsored sterilization programs to which the Warp Speed Covid-19 ‘vaccines’ are creating a mass wave of stillbirths world wide, and other reports of sterilization…

    Slavery is still legal in Vermont!

  10. I am convinced that the supporters of Prop. 5/Art. 22 cast their votes knowingly and willfully – the entire platform of the Democrats revolves around abortion and the overwhelming and decisive victory that the Dems realized at the polls is indicative of the electorate’s dedication to all things abortion.
    I pray that God will judge Vermont … decisively!

  11. Ms. Beerworth’s allegation that Vermonters were “hoodwinked” when they went to the polls is an insult to the intelligence of Vermont voters. All indications for weeks indicated that Proposal 5/Article 22 was favored by an approximately 3 to 1 ratio. The proposal passed by an even greater margin. She also references Planned Parenthood’s financial campaign in support of the proposition. I wonder how many practicing Catholics are aware that the Church in Vermont gave $50,000 to oppose this ballot item. I’m not aware that Catholics were informed that their donations, intended for normal Church operations, were to be directed to a pollical campaign that was doomed to failure from the very start.