I saw a sign the other day in support of Issue 1 that read, “The hardest decision a woman can make isn’t yours.”
Exactly. Women have a fundamental right to make decisions about their own bodies. Not a bishop, a legislature, or anyone else.
The signs that frame Issue 1 as a question of parental rights are fear-mongering. There is nothing in the proposed amendment that changes Ohio laws around parental consent.
And those who fret that the amendment will allow pregnancies to be terminated at any point in a pregnancy? Read the amendment. It maintains the standard set by Roe vs. Wade — the one which we’ve been using for nearly half a century — which prohibits abortion after viability, except when the patient’s life or health are endangered.
Historically, abortion after viability is rare. According to the Centers for Disease Control, 93 percent of abortions in 2020 occurred during the first trimester. Just 1 percent were performed at 21 weeks or more of gestation.
CHERIE SPINO
West Toledo
Rights for women have been hard-won
My mother was born without the right to vote, without the right to birth control, without the right to own her own body, and more. Over the 20th century, we gained autonomy in many areas.
Now we have phony arguments being made as to why women should not have these rights (oh yes — they are coming after birth control next, ladies).
These arguments are on par with the 19th century belief women would grow beards if they were allowed to vote.
Issue 1 will protect our rights to emergency contraception, abortion up until fetal viability (and after that to protect the life and health of the mother), fertility treatment, and miscarriage care.
A “yes” vote is the only sane, responsible, compassionate option on Issue 1.
LINDA HOPKINS
Maumee
You can be pro-choice yet be anti-Issue 1
Opponents of Issue 1 caution it would allow abortion up until birth. Indeed, it would, as it has left the decision up to the treating physician, both before and after viability, if they deem it necessary to protect the patient’s life or health (precedent has established “health” to encompass physical, emotional, mental and familial).
However, few are talking about the removal of many safety standards if Issue 1 were to pass.
Michigan passed an almost identical amendment last year, and their Legislature is seeking to abolish many laws, including: a 24-hour waiting period, standardized procedure room sizes and hallway width, screening to determine coercion isn’t at play, requiring a physical exam for chemical abortions, written reports concerning complications or death from abortion, giving information on adoption, and bans against taxpayer funding and partial-birth abortions.
Is 24 hours consideration really too much to require before an irreversible, life-changing decision that can be made any time before live birth?
Is screening for coercion such a bad idea?
Issue 1 goes too far.
You don’t have to be pro-life to reject it.
VERONICA LEGUIRE
West Toledo
Higher education teaches victimhood
I used to be an optimist about our country and the rights in our Constitution.
That was before the world was privy to recent events so barbarous that I cannot recall anything more inhumane. I thought others would agree.
Not so. Around the United States, students attending college hailed this behavior, and the media shouted out their reaction.
A higher education used to be to prepare the student for the real world, but it now appears higher education is infused with victimhood.
I doubt that those students learned victimhood at home.
Who are the gatekeepers of that indoctrination?
JUNE GALVIN
Lakeside, Ohio
June Galvin is a retired Lucas County Domestic Court judge
End pot criminality by approving Issue 2
The date on the editorial, “No on Issue 2” is 2023, but it seems a better fit for the 1936 film Reefer Madness.
Despite what the editorial may have readers believe, many Ohioans support Issue 2 for non-financial reasons. It is time that Ohioans have access to a regulated market and stop spending resources on the enforcement and prosecution of marijuana-related crimes.
Adults who choose to use marijuana under the adult-use program will be buying from a regulated market, one where they know what’s in their purchase, and one they can use with the same level of privacy that the state grants to those consuming alcohol.
Even minor contact with our criminal legal system can have crippling effects on a person’s well-being.
Issue 2 will stem the tide of unnecessary criminal entanglement. I’ll be voting Yes on Issue 2 and encourage others to do the same.
PATRICK HIGGINS
Columbus
Patrick Higgins is policy counsel at the ACLU of Ohio
Give Ohio Issue 1 a little perspective
Consider the ugliness that confronts a preteen girl who is pregnant by her father or other rapist. Surely a second life — her own — deserves consideration.
Think about a pregnant single mother of two in a minimum wage job — without family leave, health care, or child care.
The family she already has can’t afford is about to grow; and she will lose income when the baby comes. There are three other lives that matter.
Consider a woman with a “tubal” pregnancy, an early “water break,” or another condition where the fetus has little chance to survive, but the mother’s life and fertility are at risk.
How close to death must she come before a doctor can end her pregnancy without fear of the law?
Imagine a well-off, middle-aged woman who finds herself inconveniently pregnant after a moment’s carelessness.
Even if hers is a no-abortion state, a few days in Toronto will solve her problem.
Is it fair for the law to apply only to women who lack this option?
Late-term abortions are very rare, and almost always because of some critical problem of mother or fetus.
After the Supreme Court’s Dobbs returning this decision to the states, the proper course is for states to settle the issue in free, fair referendums like Ohio’s Issue 1.
MICHAEL EHRICK
West Toledo
First Published October 29, 2023, 4:00 a.m.
