Uncovering the deception behind Amendment 3
Missouri’s Amendment 3 seeks to legalize abortion up to the point of viability and threatens the sanctity of life created in God’s image. As conservatives or people of faith, we cannot stand by while innocent lives are discarded in the name of “choice.” Vote NO on Amendment 3 and uphold the moral call to protect the unborn.
The Abortion Language
Missouri Amendment 3 seeks to enshrine abortion rights into the state constitution, overturning the current near-total ban on abortion and legalizing the procedure, and potentially allowing abortion up to the point of birth, using vague language to leave the decision up to the opinion of a medical provider. If a professional medical provider decides that an unplanned pregnancy could be a threat to the “mental health” of an individual, they could steamroll past any legal restrictions to move forward with an abortion. This lack of clarity provides far too many loopholes for those seeking an abortion at any stage in pregnancy.
Beyond abortion, the amendment’s broad language on “reproductive health decisions” could allow for other significant changes, such as children accessing gender-transition treatments without parental consent. Voting NO on Amendment 3 protects the unborn, preserves parental rights, and prevents the amendment’s far-reaching implications from becoming state law. Download a detailed description of Amendment 3 below.
Gender Transitions for Minors?
Gender transition surgery as reproductive healthcare is a highly debated aspect of Missouri’s Amendment 3. Advocacy groups assert that limiting access to gender-affirming care, which includes surgeries, constitutes sex discrimination. They argue these procedures should fall under reproductive healthcare, even for children, aligning with the Biden Administration’s policies.
In May 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services expanded Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. This change mandates that healthcare providers and insurers cannot deny gender-affirming care, including surgeries. However, Missouri, along with six other states, has filed lawsuits against the Biden Administration, contesting the rule. Missouri’s Attorney General, Andrew Bailey, argued that these procedures are experimental and harmful, particularly to children, and that federal mandates should not compel doctors to perform them.
Amendment 3’s broad anti-discrimination clause may extend to gender-affirming surgeries, making it possible for minors to receive such procedures without parental consent, a point of concern for opponents. Subsection 6 of the amendment could be interpreted to prevent local governments from restricting access to these surgeries, framing them within the scope of reproductive healthcare.
Supporters, including WPATH and Planned Parenthood, argue that gender-affirming surgeries are essential parts of reproductive healthcare. WPATH’s standards view these treatments, including surgeries, as integral to reproductive health, while Planned Parenthood insists that transgender rights and reproductive rights are deeply connected. They advocate for protecting these rights from political interference, asserting that bodily autonomy and self-determination are fundamental to reproductive justice.
The National Women’s Law Center supports this perspective, claiming that gender-affirming care fits within the broader scope of reproductive justice, emphasizing the importance of individuals making personal decisions about their bodies, including access to gender transition surgeries.
For the Christian
For Christians and pro-life advocates, Amendment 3 poses serious concerns not only because it reinstates abortion rights but also because it has broader implications that may affect children, families, and the moral fabric of society. It is not merely a policy shift but a fundamental transformation of Missouri’s legal landscape regarding life and family, potentially undermining parental authority and expanding the state’s role in personal medical decisions. Voting NO on Amendment 3 is a stand for protecting the unborn, preserving parental rights, and ensuring that life and family are treated with the sanctity that Scripture upholds.