Deceptive “Reproductive Rights” Ballot Initiative Language Exposed

by Chris Maurer

Editor’s Note: This post is an adaptation of two of Chris Maurer’s recent Facebook posts, graciously shared with us. Chris is an Ohio Republican State Central Committee Representative from District 29. Please find more of her excellent content on Ohio politics, the Ohio Republican Party, and the State Central Committee on Facebook at Ohio Rising/Chris Maurer for State Central Committee. Chris writes:

…under this proposed amendment, SCHOOL DISTRICTS (recognized as part of the “STATE”) will be able to help your child transition to a different gender. If the writers of this amendment intended for this to just be about “choice”, they would not have used the language they have.

I will present the full text of the proposed “Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment”; calling attention to key words that signal that this amendment is about much more that what the presenters of the amendment are telling you.

Be it Resolved by the People of the State of Ohio that Article 1 of the Ohio Constitution is amended to add the following section:

Article 1, Section 22.
The Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety.
A. EVERY INDIVIDUAL has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO DECISIONS ON:
1. contraception
2. fertility treatment
3. continuing one’s own pregnancy
4. miscarriage care; and
5. abortion

B. THE STATE shall not, directly or indirectly, burden, PENALIZE, PROHIBIT, interfere with, or discriminate against either:
1. AN INDIVIDUAL’S voluntary exercise of this right
2. A person or entity the ASSISTS AN INDIVIDUAL exercising this right

KEY WORDS:
1. “EVERY INDIVIDUAL”
These two words indicate that there is NO distinction between adults and under-age children in this amendment. In other words, children of any age will be able to make decisions regarding their “reproductive freedom”, whether or not their parents support those decisions.

2. “INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO”
This language strongly indicates that this proposed amendment will also apply to other “reproductive decisions”, including the ability of children of any age, to surgically or chemically alter their gender.

3. “THE STATE”
At the end of the proposed amendment, the writers provide their definition of “THE STATE”. Here is their definition: “STATE INCLUDES ANY GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIY AND ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION”. Hmmmm…so, what is a political subdivision? According to Ohio Revised Code and law.cornell.edu, 90.304, “The term political subdivision includes any subdivision of a public unit (a) The creation of which subdivision or department has been expressly authorized by state statute (b) To which some functions of government have been delegated by state statute, and (c) To which funds have been allocated by statute or ordinance for its exclusive use and control.”

IT INCLUDES…SCHOOL DISTRICTS and other special districts created by state statute. That means, under this proposed amendment, SCHOOL DISTRICTS (recognized as part of the “STATE”) will be able to help your child transition to a different gender. If the writers of this amendment intended for this to just be about “choice”, they would not have used the language they have.

4. “THE STATE SHALL NOT…PENALIZE OR PROHIBIT…AN INDIVIDUAL’S EXERCISE OF THIS RIGHT”. In other words, “The State” as defined by them, will not allow ANYONE to penalize or PROHIBIT an individual of ANY AGE (even if that individual is a young child, pre-teen, or teen) form making “reproductive decisions”; and those “reproductive decisions” may include altering one’s gender surgically or chemically. In addition, “THE STATE”, as defined by them, will not penalize any person or entity who assists “an individual” from exercising this “right”. This means that ANYONE, (it could be a teacher, doctor, hospital) who assists “an individual” will not be penalized.

One thing to remember: Vote NO in NOvember!

It’s Not Just Abortion

5/16/23, by Tiffanie Broadbent
When dealing with a document that seeks to define and shape our rights, ALL possibilities need to be considered; and when dealing with a political ideology that constantly redefines terms like “woman” “racist” and “truth”, we are absolute fools if we do not expect the most extreme interpretation.

Beware “Reproductive Freedom” Ballot Initiative

5/22/23, by Sharon Madger
There are many nice looking, pleasant people all over asking registered voters to sign their ballot initiative for what they call “Reproductive Freedom”.  I had one of these people come up to me for a signature. They politely made the above statement about “reproductive freedom” and a statement like “this initiative is only to get this on the ballot”.  I declined to sign…