What Article 22 says, and doesn’t say

by Lee Clark

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.”

Supporters of the amendment say that this is a “simple amendment to protect a woman’s right to an abortion”.

But Vermonters have already codified unlimited abortion access in Vermont, through Act 47 (2019).

Let us say that we take them at their word and accept that this is just a “simple amendment to protect a woman’s right to an abortion”.

Proposal 5 not only makes abortion a right in “most cases,” it makes abortion a right in ALL cases, throughout all nine months of pregnancy. A large majority of Americans, even many who are pro-choice, oppose abortion on demand, favoring some limitations in the late term of pregnancy, especially after the unborn child is viable outside the womb. Proposal 5/Article 22 would make such reasonable limitations unconstitutional and illegal in Vermont.

This debate is about whether abortion should be subject to any legal government limitations.

Do we really want abortion on demand, up to and including 9 months?

The author is a West Newbury resident.

Categories: Commentary

4 replies »

  1. There are seven words that should make even the most ardent abortion rights activist cringe. ” unless justified by a compelling state interest”.
    But supporters of this ill-conceived amendment have no real fear of the state. The ‘state’ is their god, their moral compass and the blind allegiance they place in ‘the state’ will soon enough, cause regret for these words and their votes.

  2. I watched it!!! It was enlightening!!!! Everyone should watch it and pass it on!! Then go and vote NO on Article 22!!!

Leave a Reply