Vacationland Times

Ohio is currently facing a heated debate over Issue One, an amendment that has stirred up strong opinions on both sides of the abortion rights spectrum. While some argue that this amendment will restore the protections granted by the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, others believe that it goes far beyond that, with consequences that even pro-choice advocates may not fully comprehend.

Critics of Issue One argue that its language is misleading and aims to instill fear by suggesting that it protects care for miscarriages and the right to contraception, two issues that no one opposes. State Representative Sarah Thompson emphasizes this point, stating, "I’ve not heard a single person in the legislature advocate against contraception, not even once. If they did, they would be lonely in the legislature." She further warns that the inclusion of these issues as scare tactics raises questions about the honesty of those behind the amendment.

Under the current Roe v. Wade decision, reasonable safeguards such as parental consent or pain-capable protections can be established. Even those who support abortion under certain conditions recognize the importance of involving parents in critical decisions. However, Issue One raises concerns about protecting perpetrators of crimes such as incest or sexual abuse. Representative Thompson asks a thought-provoking question, "Do we really want to protect pedophiles? Who can support that?"

Another alarming consequence of Issue One is its potential impact on human trafficking. By forbidding interference in any manner with those who assist a girl having an abortion, regardless of the circumstances, the amendment inadvertently enables those involved in human trafficking to exploit vulnerable women. Representative Thompson points out, "You don’t have to be pro-life to hate the idea of empowering men to abuse women and cover it up. The unintended consequences are real."

Furthermore, while Issue One claims to grant the right for reasonable regulation at the point of viability, it undermines this protection by allowing exceptions based on the abortionist's discretion. The term "health" is loosely defined, potentially allowing for broad interpretations that could extend the legality of abortion up until birth. Representative Thompson argues, "When the abortionist defines the terms, you can’t pretend that there is an expectation of reasonable regulation. It will be legal all the way up to birth, including partial birth abortion. That is insane in any culture."

Proponents of Issue One argue that it is a necessary step to safeguard reproductive freedom and ensure that women have control over their own bodies. However, critics believe that the amendment is an overreach that fails to consider the potential consequences it could have on women's health, abuse victims, and human trafficking.

In conclusion, Issue One has sparked a contentious debate in Ohio, with both sides passionately arguing their positions. While supporters see it as a necessary protection of reproductive rights, opponents caution against its potential to undermine crucial safeguards and empower abusers. As the discussion continues, it is clear that this amendment has far-reaching implications that extend beyond the scope of the original Roe v. Wade decision.

To find out more, go to this link: https://ohiohouse.gov/members/gary-click/news/worse-than-roe-117185