Four State
Ballot Measures
Fr. Frank
Pavone
National
Director, Priests for Life
Fr.
Frank's Columns are Podcast
Listen to this column in MP3
format
Spanish Version
In using this year’s elections
“to participate in building the culture of life” (US Bishops, Living the
Gospel of Life, n. 34), we need to pay attention not only to the candidates, but
to the ballot initiatives and referenda in particular states. Whether we live in
those states or not, we can and should help to support the measures that should
be supported and reject those that should be rejected, because in each case the
outcome will have an effect on the entire country.
Measures that are brought
directly to the citizens for a vote enable the citizens to participate more
directly in self-government. Much of the ambiguity and unpredictability of
candidates is gone. No longer is it a matter of whether we can trust the
individual to support a particular piece of legislation. Here, the citizens get
to vote on the policy directly. And often a ballot measure will motivate voters
to come out more than a candidate will.
There are four states in
particular that have ballot measures especially important to the abortion issue.
First, in California, voters
should support the Parents’ Right to Know and Child Protection Initiative
(Proposition 85). This would require an abortionist to notify the parent of a
minor before performing an abortion on her. Over half the states have this kind
of law, and these laws reduce the numbers of abortions. California performs
about a quarter of the nation’s abortions. For Proposition 85 to pass would mean
the protection of parental rights as well as a major dent in the abortion
industry. For information, visit
www.yeson85.net.
Second, a similar measure is on
the ballot in Oregon. Voters should support the Parental Involvement and Support
Act (Measure 43), which would expand parental rights by mandating that written
or in person notice be provided to one parent of an unemancipated minor 15 years
of age or older at least 48 hours prior to performing an abortion on that
teenager. For information, visit
www.protectourteendaughters.com.
Third, voters in South Dakota
should support the Women's Health and Human Life Protection Act (Referred Law
6), which would simply ban abortions throughout the state. For information,
visit
www.voteyesforlife.com.
Finally, voters in Missouri
should reject the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative
(Amendment 2), which deceptively claims to ban “human cloning,” but only bans a
human clone from being implanted in a woman, not from being created and then
killed for research purposes. For info, visit
www.nocloning.org.
No matter where we live, we
should help voters in these states to be informed about these measures. While
Churches and other tax exempt organizations can never tell people to vote for or
against a clearly identified candidate, they are allowed to tell
people to vote for or against a particular ballot initiative or referendum.
Organizations should put this information on the front page of their website
between now and Election Day, because people in the states that have these
measures can access those websites.
Let’s work together on these
measures, for pro-life victory!