|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Steve MacDonald for Granite Grok
In 2022, the voters of Vermont approved a constitutional amendment meant to enshrine abortion as a natural protected right. The text didn’t say that, but everyone involved knows better. The goal was to make sure no one could prevent abortions. The problem, which I explored in numerous posts like this one, is that the language talks about reproductive freedom, which has to include the right to have a baby.
Vermont immediately trampled all over this Constitutional right the next year when it passed a bill signed into law (by Republican Governor Phil Scott) restricting pregnancy care centers (a viewpoint discrimination lawsuit is making its way through the courts). Vermont placed restrictions on care centers that made it impossible for them to advertise or operate.
Despite S 37 coming under Judicial Scrutiny in “National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Clark,” the 2025 Vermont Legisalture has a new bill (S 28) that would further infringe on pregnancy care centers.
“This bill proposes to expand the prohibition on untrue or misleading advertising by a limited-services pregnancy center under the Consumer Protection Act to apply to any untrue or misleading advertising about health care services,” it states.
Politicians who fund and are funded by the abortion lobby (taxpayer dollars to campaign coffer money laundering) are writing laws to further knee-cap any private competition. To do this the same people who lied out every orifice about everything during the “pandemic” are insisting that,
“Advertising strategies and educational information about health care options that lack transparency, use misleading or ambiguous terminology, misrepresent or obfuscate services provided, or provide factually inaccurate information are a form of manipulation that disrespects individuals, undermines trust, broadens health disparity, and can result in patient harm,” it states.
I’ll wait while you get the coffee out of your nose.
The offenses against Sec. 2 Article 22 of the Vermont Constitution (that’s the Right to reproductive freedom) are not limited to bad laws and new bad laws. Vermont’s Department for Children and Families (DCF),
Acting on hearsay about A.V.’s mental health, … initiated an investigation into her capacity as a future mother—despite having no jurisdiction over unborn children. Without her knowledge or consent, her medical records were pried open, and her labor became a state-monitored event. Hospital staff fed live updates on her cervix dilation to DCF officials, who—relying on falsehoods—secured custody of her fetus. The mother’s delivery culminated not in joy, but in separation: her newborn daughter was seized before she could hold her.
The allegations that prompted this grotesque intervention were not based on any medical diagnosis, criminal act, or history of abuse. The director of a shelter for battered women expressed her belief that the pregnant woman should not have the baby and encouraged her to seek an abortion. When the woman refused, the director escalated the matter by initiating contact with state authorities to intervene and take custody of the child upon birth. These speculative and prejudiced actions snowballed into an Orwellian surveillance operation. Unverified accusations became the pretext for a cascade of violations: breaches of medical privacy, the undermining of reproductive autonomy, and the illegal seizure of a child.
Reproductive freedom and the right to self-defense share a common enemy. Red flag laws. But in this case, the ACLU (believe it or not) is outraged.
According to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Vermont and Pregnancy Justice, DCF maintains a clandestine “high-risk pregnancy docket” to track expectant mothers it deems unfit. This sinister ledger includes women flagged for reasons as discriminatory as homelessness, disability, or choosing a natural birth over medical intervention. Rather than championing bodily autonomy, Vermont weaponizes pregnancy as a tool for control, turning the womb into a battleground for bureaucratic intrusion.
Such practices underscore a chilling trend: the redefinition of pregnancy as a condition requiring state oversight. This is the same Vermont that touts itself as a bastion of reproductive freedom, having enshrined the right to abortion in its constitution. Yet when a mother chooses life, the state’s zeal for autonomy evaporates, replaced by an insatiable appetite for control.
It seems like a suitable time for some adult language. These assholes are all bunch of fucking hypocrites for violating Sec. 2 Article 22 of the Vermont Constitution.
Sec. 2. Article 22. [Personal reproductive liberty] That an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life course and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.
And none of that is surprising. The same government that ignores the right to self-defense, free speech and association, the right to travel, bodily autonomy, and just about every other right isn’t going to honor the right to reproductive freedom. Nor, do I suspect, will they find relief in the courts of Vermont. Same people, same problem.
They are primarily partisans on the taxpayer’s payroll protecting big abortion and big government, and the new amendment was window dressing. Reproductive freedom has nothing to do with reproduction, but it could.
Steve is a long-time New Hampshire resident, award-winning blogger, and a member of the Board of Directors of The 603 Alliance.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary, Life&Death
The amendment was just a tactic to get out the vote. It doesn’t mean anything except that your rights are second to “compelling state interest”.
State needs more babies? no abortion….
State wants population control or fetal tissue for research? Coerced abortion/sterilization ….
State wants to force dads to pay for unwanted pregnancies – no reproductive rights for you, boys.
State wants to shut down pregnancy centers – that’s OK –
Cos It’s all covered in the “compelling state interest” clause.
The only shocking thing about the amendment is that so many were fooled into voting for it.
The “compelling state interest,” would be the child support payments that the state gets a cut of, which, of course, is overwhelmingly paid by men. Reproductive freedom really only exists for women, who can abort, abandon, and even steal men’s sperm, impregnate themselves, and force him into 20 years of indentured servitude, while the man has zero say either way.
No state can ever force boys to pay for “unwanted” (according to you, not to God) pregnancies —- they simply choose to keep their pants up & engage in moral personal conduct. According to whom? Good question: GOD.
Any women who become pregnant got that way through ONE method – two parties. Two sexes. Two decisions.
Joan, (or whoever,) there’s numerous cases of women raping underage boys, who are then forced to pay their rapist child support. The NBA had to warn players to flush used condoms, and even refrain from unprotected oral sex because women were stealing sperm for payouts. Women ROUTINELY lie about fertility to get men to marry them or get money. The State 100% forces men to pay for these pregnancies. I don’t know why this is hard for you to understand.
I agree with S.Lowry. There is a tiny minority of women who use the birth of a child to get court mandated freebies every year. The state will never allow a man to say “I don’t want this child so I won’t pay for it” because otherwise the state will have to step up. The state does allow women to say that in many many ways.
But that is just the current iteration of it. It could change any time. For instance, that story of how a child was removed from a first time mother because DCF decided that she couldn’t be an adequate parent is scary but not surprising.
The ACLU lawsuit states
“ ….with the assistance of multiple direct service providers and without her knowledge, DCF surveilled A.V., lied to a state court about her pregnancy status, obtained legal control of A.V.’s fetus, tried to force her to undergo an involuntary cesarean surgery, and then took and retained custody of her newborn baby for seven months while attempting to sever A.V.’s parental rights.”
That is the mindset of all governments. In their mind, your children belong to them. if they approve of you, then you are granted the privilege to keep and raise children. If not, well tough. It’s just “compelling state interest”
And the “keep it in your pants” argument is laughable when our whole system is designed to get boys laid. In fact, the so called “incel” problem and “MGTOW” scares even the FBI. They believe that boys who are not dating represent a potential terror threat. What they mean is that it’s hard to control them if they aren’t out there competing for poon. So a man who does “keep it in his pants” is ridiculed, labeled and shamed for exactly that. It doesn’t work on older men, but the social pressure on boys in the teens and twenties is huge.
“and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.” makes it all legal.
Be glad you reside in New Hampshire. The majority of Vermont residents are either tuned out and disgusted with politics or rabid liberal marxists, eager to have the “state” rule their lives.
Excellent commentary. I’m surprised you got away with the language! However, the general public of Vermont dope know and dope care. They keep inhaling the THC and the lies. Weeeeeeeeee!!!
Historian a hundred years from now: “Well would you look at this. They added an amendment to their constitution to protect the right to reproduce and if they succeeded they could discard the prenatal baby. They thought of that as freedom.” I guess the logic of that didn’t give them pause. I’m continually surprised at how primitive they were.
Good Lord! Abortion is murder, pure and simple…regardless of the atheist outcries of satanic partnerships. Do not mock God…the consequences are eternal.
AGREED! And any male on here whining about women “becoming pregnant” & their being “forced” to pay for a child they had a hand in creating instead of being allowed through the use of the law to have them aborted (i.e.: murdered) is indeed toying with sanctity of whatever soul they may have left.
ABORTION is MURDER!
ABSTINENCE PREVENTS ABORTION!
LOVE PREVENTS ABORTION!
S.Lowry – With his usual tales of sinister females “stealing men’s sperm”! The REALITY is women are raped in the USA by men to the tune of well over 500,000 ANNUALLY dependent upon year.
Number of women “stealing sperm” annually as per court convictions? Several.
Don’t want to impregnate a woman? Try a moral code, use birth control YOURSELF, and be prepared to accept responsibility for a human being you potentially may have in creating. Otherwise, keep them drawers up.
You again? Seriously Joan, or whoever you are. Women kill one million babies a year and you’re arguing moral superiority and telling men to be more responsible? 😂
Steve, your so called “adult language” is really adolescent language. It adds nothing to your arguments (which are good) and, in my opinion, decreases your chances of being taken seriously. Let’s clean up our language and send the message to the other side that we are the ones who are on the right side of civilization.