Michigan Is Hiding A Children's Constitutional Right To Genital Amputation In Its Abortion Amendment

https://thefederalist.com/2022/10/12/michigan-is-hiding-a-childrens-
constitutional-right-to-genital-amputation-in-its-abortion-amendment/

Prop 3 isn’t about codifying Roe. It’s about sacrificing the children of 
Michigan — both born and unborn. 

In less than one month, if Proposal 3 passes, children will have a right 
under the Michigan constitution to walk into one of Planned Parenthood’s 
12 so-called “gender affirming” facilities in the state and, without 
parental knowledge or consent, obtain puberty blockers. And with Planned 
Parenthood of Michigan promising “gender affirming” care “via telehealth 
in the coming months,” Michiganders’ kids won’t even need to leave their 
house to obtain these sterilizing drugs. 

Passage of Prop 3 will also give boys a constitutional right to be 
castrated and girls the right under Michigan’s constitution to be 
sterilized by way of a hysterectomy or the removal of their ovaries — all 
without their parents’ consent.

Deceptive marketing by Planned Parenthood and far-left politicians, such 
as Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, hides this reality from Michigan voters, leading 
Prop 3 to be uniformly referred to as “the abortion amendment” even though 
the expansive language of the proposed constitutional amendment reaches 
far beyond abortion. And on abortion alone, notwithstanding proponents’ 
claims that “passing this amendment simply restores the same protections 
that Michiganders had for five decades under Roe v. Wade,” Prop 3 goes far 
beyond the controlling Roe-Casey precedent: If passed, the constitutional 
amendment would create an extreme regime in Michigan of abortion on 
demand, at any time, for any reason, without informed or parental consent, 
and paid for by taxpayers. 

The expansive and legalistically worded language of Prop 3, crafted by 
Planned Parenthood and left-wing backers, however, extends beyond abortion 
to create a constitutional right to several aspects of what transgender 
activists call “gender-affirming care,” despite it being neither affirming 
nor caring. And Prop 3 extends that right to all individuals, including 
children. 

This is not merely a political point, and it is not a worst-case-scenario 
argument based on how some liberal activist judge or justice might 
interpret Prop 3. This reality flows from the plain language of Prop 3 and 
rests on general legal principles of constitutional construction.

It’s Right in the Text
Here is the pertinent language Prop 3 would etch into the Michigan 
constitution as Article 1, Section 28, with the key language underscored:

“(1) Every individual has a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, 
which entails the right to make and effectuate decisions about all matters 
relating to pregnancy, including but not limited to prenatal care, 
childbirth, postpartum care, contraception, sterilization, abortion care, 
miscarriage management, and infertility care. An individual’s right to 
reproductive freedom shall not be denied, burdened, nor infringed upon 
unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least 
restrictive means. …

(2) The state shall not discriminate in the protection or enforcement of 
this fundamental right.

* * * 

(4) For the purposes of this section:

A state interest is “compelling” only if it is for the limited purpose of 
protecting the health of an individual seeking care, consistent with 
accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine, and 
does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision-making.

* * * 

(5) This section shall be self-executing….

Prop 3 Applies to Men and Women AND Boys and Girls
By its express terms, Prop 3 applies to “every individual” and guarantees 
an “individual’s right.” The proposed constitutional amendment further 
provides that “the state shall not discriminate in the protection or 
enforcement of this fundamental right.” 

As a matter of constitutional interpretation, then, the rights guaranteed 
by Prop 3 would be rights that both adults and children possess as 
“individuals,” and the rights apply equally to males and females.

This proposal represents a huge demarcation from controlling Michigan law, 
under which minors must have parental consent to obtain medical treatment 
or receive prescription medications, with the only current exception being 
the judicial bypass provisions governing minors seeking abortions. 
Specifically, Michigan law currently provides that to obtain an abortion, 
females under the age of 18 must have the written consent of one parent or 
legal guardian, but the law allows a girl to seek permission for an 
abortion from a judge, called a “judicial bypass.” A court must grant a 
judicial bypass if the judge finds either that “the minor is sufficiently 
mature and well-enough informed to make the decision regarding abortion 
independently of her parents or legal guardian,” or “the waiver would be 
in the best interests of the minor.” 

In the context of abortion, Prop 3 guts Michigan’s requirements for either 
parental consent or a judicial bypass, first by declaring that the 
amendment applies to all “individuals” and second by expressly providing 
that “the state shall not discriminate in the protection or enforcement of 
this fundamental right.” Treating females under 18 differently than those 
18 or over is a textbook example of discrimination.

Section 4 of the amendment further cements the reality that minors must be 
treated equivalent to adults for purposes of the rights Prop 3 would 
establish. That section of the proposed amendment expressly limits the 
justifications allowed for regulating abortion or the other rights Prop 3 
would inscribe in the constitution. 

Under Section 4, the state may only regulate abortion and the other rights 
covered by the proposed constitutional amendment if it is necessary to 
“protect[] the health of an individual seeking care,” and “does not 
infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision-making.”

The rights of parents do not matter; Mom and Dad have no rights. And even 
the health of the girl does not matter because, under the plain language 
of the amendment, the state’s interest cannot “infringe” on the 
“individual’s autonomous decision-making.” 

This legal analysis flows straight from the plain language of Prop 3, but 
case law from other states where a state constitutional right to abortion 
exists confirms this analysis. For example, in Alaska and Florida, courts 
have declared parental consent and parental notification statutes 
unconstitutional. And courts in California, Massachusetts, and New Jersey 
have struck parental consent statutes.

Prop 3’s grant of such “autonomous decision-making” is not limited to 
abortion, however. Rather, the plain language of the proposed 
constitutional amendment provides that the right to “reproductive 
freedom,” “entails the right to make and effectuate decisions about all 
matters relating to pregnancy, including but not limited to … 
sterilization … or infertility care.”

Under Michigan law currently, minors cannot be chemically or surgically 
sterilized (or rendered infertile) without their parents’ consent, and 
even then most physicians would refuse to sterilize a minor — except in 
the case of transgender-identifying patients. 

The modern medical community has embraced the transgender ideology that 
teaches that human beings can be born “in the wrong body,” and that the 
appropriate treatment for such individuals consists of making their bodies 
appear to conform to their “internal sense” of gender. 

The first step in such wrongly named “gender-affirming” medical response 
consists of prescribing puberty blockers to children. Puberty blockers, at 
a minimum, render children temporarily infertile by preventing them from 
maturing sexually, and a longer-term use renders them sterile. The 
surgical procedures used under the guise of “gender confirmation” — 
castration, hysterectomy, and the removal of ovaries — likewise sterilize 
the patients. 

In fact, it is this very destruction of children’s future fertility and 
the medical rendering of them sterile that has led to several states 
banning the use of puberty blockers and surgical “gender confirming” 
procedures on minors. For instance, in Iowa, the Legislature made these 
legislative findings to explain its proposed ban on puberty blockers and 
surgical procedures that sterilize children:

Puberty blockers prevent gonadal maturation and thus render children 
taking these drugs infertile. Introducing cross-sex hormones to children 
with immature gonads as a direct result of pubertal blockade is expected 
to cause irreversible sterility. Sterilization is also permanent for those 
who undergo surgery to remove reproductive organs[.] … For these reasons, 
the decision to pursue a course of hormonal and surgical interventions to 
address a discordance between an individual’s sex and sense of gender 
identity should not be presented to or determined for children who are 
incapable of comprehending the negative implications and life-course 
difficulties resulting from these interventions.

But in Michigan, if passed, Prop 3 guarantees children the right to “make 
and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to … sterilization,” 
and without “discrimination,” giving boys and girls the right to obtain 
puberty blockers and surgical sterilization without parental notice or 
consent.

If passed, Section 4 of the proposed constitutional amendment will further 
guarantee that the Michigan Legislature cannot interfere in transgender 
minors’ decisions to obtain puberty blockers or surgical “gender 
reassignment” through castration, removal of ovaries, or a hysterectomy. 
That section, as excerpted above, provides that the state may only 
regulate such procedures for the limited purpose of “protecting the health 
of an individual seeking care, consistent with accepted clinical standards 
of practice and evidence-based medicine,” and then, only so long as it 
“does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision-making.” 

But the “accepted clinical standards of practice” by the supposed 
“mainstream” medical organizations is, at a minimum, to provide puberty 
blockers to children, with a steady movement toward the cash cow that is 
surgical interventions for minors.

Planned Parenthood Targets Kids One Way or Another
Again, these conclusions flow directly from the plain language of the 
proposed constitutional amendment. But here the public would be wise to 
note two significant facts: Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan 
helped lead the ballot initiative to amend the Michigan constitution 
through the passage of Prop 3, deceptively described as the “Reproductive 
Freedom for All” amendment, and Planned Parenthood now represents “the 
second largest provider of ‘gender-affirming hormone therapy.’” In fact, 
less than two weeks ago, Planned Parenthood launched an ad marketing 
puberty blockers to minors. 

What Planned Parenthood and its extremist political partners don’t want 
publicized, however, is that a “Yes” vote for Prop 3 will not merely make 
abortion-on-demand, for any reason, at any time, and without informed or 
parental consent the law of Michigan: It will guarantee that children have 
an unfettered “right” to “transition” by obtaining puberty blockers and 
surgical sterilization, parents be damned.

With less than one month to go before Michiganders cast their final 
ballots, little time remains to give proof to the left’s lie that Prop 3 
is about codifying Roe. It is not. It is about sacrificing the children of 
the state — both born and unborn. 


-- 
"LOCKDOWN", left-wing COVID fearmongering.  95% of COVID infections 
recover with no after effects.

No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.  
Officially made Nancy Pelosi a two-time impeachment loser.

Donald J. Trump, cheated out of a second term by fraudulent "mail-in" 
ballots.  Report voter fraud: [email protected]

Thank you for cleaning up the disaster of the 2008-2017 Obama / Biden 
fiasco, President Trump.  

Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the 
The World According To Garp.  Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood 
queer liberal democrat donors.

President Trump boosted the economy, reduced illegal invasions, appointed 
dozens of judges and three SCOTUS justices.