Readers debate Kansas abortion amendment and reveal how they're going to vote on Aug. 2

Vote 'No' so the Kansas Legislature can't subjugate women

As I am finishing my vote at Shawnee County Election Office today, an interesting story from my past comes to mind. The constitutional amendment on our ballot is not about justice for women and children, but it is about power and control. Six Supreme Court justices overturned Roe v. Wade because they value political power, ignoring their sacred duty to follow the facts and the law without prejudice or improper influence.

Voting yes for this amendment is voting for Kansas legislative power and control over our lives, not Freedom and Justice for all. I'm remembering several years ago my mother informed me that she persuaded my dad to vote for the Social Security Act in 1935, and it passed! Thank you, mother!

Women across this country continue to make vital decisions in all of our lives. Please vote no on the constitutional amendment. Do not give the Kansas Legislature the power to subjugate women (especially the needy and marginalized) to control by the state.

Young women in difficult and dangerous medical circumstances, their friends, family and their physicians (under the shadow of lawsuits) will suffer greatly if this amendment passes.

Therefore all of us will suffer. Vote NO, and thanks again mother (who would be 105 this year), for reminding me women are never and will never be helpless. Every day we continue to influence our communities, not for power but justice for all. Vote NO on Aug. 2.

Charlotte McCollough, LPN, Topeka

'Yes' vote recognizes that unborn children are precious

To my Black Brothers and Sisters (and anyone else who’s listening): I encourage you to vote YES on the Value Them Both amendment on Aug. 2.

We, of all people, can relate to the injustice and brutality of being considered non-persons or 3/5 of a person as our ancestors in slavery were. The question: What is the unborn, human or not? (Hint: Humans produce humans.) If it is not human, what is it? If it is human, is it OK to kill it? Using arguments condoning abortion, is it acceptable to kill a 1-month-old If he/she is causing problems, or, since a 1-month-old is not fully developed and cannot live on its own, is the child disposable?

No one has to tell us how precious that child is — even if he/she is a stranger! The federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 defines “child in utero” as a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.” Sounds like a person to me! If the embryo/fetus is killed during the commission of certain crimes, the defendant may be charged with homicide, as when Scott Peterson was convicted of a double homicide for the death of his wife and unborn child.

Voting yes will keep current regulations in place: parental notification for minors, the ban on late-term dismemberment abortion, women’s rights to be informed of health risks after an abortion and more. And, no, it does not ban all abortions.

Asking my people and all who agree to vote yes!

Victoria Hysten Stone, Horton

This vote is for women's autonomy. Value women by voting 'No'

On Aug. 2, I urge every woman who values herself, her own autonomy and those of other women to go to the polls and vote no to HR 5003. I also challenge every man who actually values the women in their lives that they show their love and respect for these women by going to the polls to vote against this obvious assault on women and their rights.

I understand that there has been some disinformation being spread around that needs to be addressed. These are currently laws and are not addressed in the amendment currently being considered. The amendment can be read at the Kansas legislature website.

Kansas law generally prohibits abortion at 22 weeks LMP and post-viability. It prohibits D&X and D&E procedures, and abortions sought for reasons of sex selection. Pregnant people who seek abortion care must undergo a mandatory 24-hour waiting period and biased counseling. Kansas also limits public funding for, and private insurance coverage of, abortion. Kansas law generally requires that both parents, the legal guardian, or a judge consent to a minor’s abortion.

As for inspecting abortion clinics, SB 36 is a TRAP law that establishes licensing regulations for abortion clinics in Kansas. KDHE very carefully monitors and inspects facilities, staff and procedures. Any facility in violation of these strict laws can be fined or have their license to operate denied, suspended or revoked.

Amendment HR 5003 clearly states that women will no longer have the right to an abortion. This totally unnecessary amendment will hand our personal health care decisions over to politicians in Topeka. Our state constitution should not be a vehicle to take away the rights of over 50% of the population.

This constitutional amendment will be on all ballots regardless of one’s party affiliation. Even if you’re an unaffiliated voter, please go vote, because it’s your constitution. Unaffiliated voters will be mailed or given a ballot at the polling place with only the amendment question on it.

Sandra Burton, Frankfort

Keep abortions safe and legal in Kansas by voting 'No'

It is urgent for all Kansans to vote this August. Independents, Republicans and Democrats will decide whether to amend our State Constitution so less than 100 legislators can ban all abortions in our state.

Let’s be honest. Thousands of fertilized eggs are aborted every month in Kansas by sexual partners who claim to be pro-life but use oral contraceptives or IUDs to keep from getting pregnant. However, some of these people are now trying to amend the state constitution to force any woman who could not afford these same contraceptives, to give birth to a child for which they and their sexual partner will be financially and emotionally responsible for the rest of their lives.

Kansas legislative leaders call their amendment Value Them Both. But they obviously do not value or respect Kansas women to make a responsible decision about their own health or financial ability to raise a child.

The only reason they put this on the Aug. 2 primary election is because they knew that is usually when only 12% of voters show up. If they really wanted most Kansans to decide if the Constitution should be amended, they would have put this issue to a vote this November when 65% or more will cast a ballot.

These are also the same legislators who repeatedly voted to demand their own right to choose whether to wear a mask, get a COVID vaccine or let 18-year-old kids buy an AR-15 assault rifle. It is hypocritical for them to be against government mandates designed to prevent the spread of diseases and guns which kill innocent people yet insist that any woman and their sexual partner should be denied a choice about whether to be parents.

Let’s get real. Raising a child in Kansas costs $21,201 per year or a total of $382,000 dollars by the time they are 18. For fathers, court ordered child support payments are required whether the mother will allow him to see and help raise their child or not. And as all parents know, we are financially and emotionally connected to each of our children until we die.

But with low wages to pay rising rent, food, fuel, utility and health care costs — most Kansas young women and men cannot afford to care for themselves — let alone an unplanned child. So, it is the rest of us who have our taxes increased to pay the welfare costs of feeding, clothing, transporting and providing healthcare for them and their children.

Back-alley abortions and pregnancy caused health emergencies will kill thousands of women if this amendment is passed. So, if you truly value women and are pro-life as I am, then it is up to each of us to Vote NO on this amendment to keep abortions safe and legal in Kansas.

Walt Chappell, Ph.D, Wichita

Vote 'No' and let women make health decisions instead of Republican men

In the August primary election, Republicans hope voters will support changing the Kansas Constitution so essentially all abortions in Kansas will eventually be illegal. This will deprive women and their health care providers of being in charge of women’s health care decisions.

A no vote on the ballot will leave the constitution unchanged and allow abortions to be provided in the present manner. Kansas women and others interested in their welfare will be well-advised to vote no on the question, so women remain in charge of decisions on this issue instead of transferring decision-making authority to the Kansas Legislature, which is dominated by Republican men.

Richard Schutz, Topeka

A vote 'No' lets women keep their constitutional rights

Keep your constitutional rights — don’t turn them back to the Kansas Legislature. The Kansas Supreme Court ruled in 2019, based on the Kansas Bill of Rights Article 1, that a woman had a right to an abortion.

On the Aug. 2 election ballot, a proposed constitutional amendment states there is NO constitutional right to an abortion in Kansas.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 24, that a woman doesn't have a right to an abortion, overturning the 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade, that a woman’s right to an abortion was protected by the 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Court reasoned that those amendments did not specifically mention abortion when those constitutional amendments were written in 1791 and 1868.

The Court did site Sir Matthew Hale’s opinion, a judge in 1600s England, that abortion was a crime. Hale also wrote an opinion that men could not be charged with rape of their wives and presided over a witch trial that sentenced two women to death.

Vote NO Aug. 2 and keep your constitutional rights. Turning your rights over to judges and legislatures, have through the centuries shown to result in a loss of rights.

Bill Stumpff, Topeka

Vote 'No' to political whims regulating women and girls

The amendment Kansans will vote on Aug. 2 has been referred to as “value them both.”

But consider, how does opening the door for more stringent abortion rules actually “value” the Kansas women who seek an abortion?

1. How does the amendment really “value” women/girls like the 7,849 who received legal abortions in Kansas last year — more than 200 were minors.

2. How does it “value“ a woman in a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy (1 in 50 pregnancies: ref. March of Dimes)?

3. How does it “value“ a young girl forced to carry a pregnancy to term?

Current Kansas abortion law restrictions include prohibiting abortions after 22 weeks, prohibiting government funding of abortions and requiring a 24-hour waiting period and parental consent for minors. These regulations are a compromise for both sides.

The abortion issue is complicated. To truly “value them both” women and men are challenged to look beyond the catch phrases and consider what makes sense to protect women’s health.

It makes sense to keep the Kansas Constitution as it is and vote “No” to allowing political whims to regulate the bodies of women and girls.

Donna Neufeld, Lawrence

Vote 'No' on Aug. 2 to maintain equality for females in Kansas

A vote of NO on the Kansas Constitutional Amendment on Aug. 2 will maintain equality for females in Kansas.

In the 1960s and earlier, women were identified primarily as “wives and mothers.” My mother was paid two-thirds what her male counterparts were paid in the public school system. My days at a state university were filled with protests and bra burnings that marked the rise of equality of females in society. My career as an emerging educator in the 1970s realized the influx of equality for girls’ athletics.

In the past 50 years, women have found varied and beneficial niches in society as they have managed corporations, maintained the “breadwinner” status in some family units, achieved positions with equality of benefits to their male associates and spouses, competed successfully in a multitude of endeavors, and been named to the U.S. Supreme Court while continuing to serve their own interests and, for some, the choice of raising families.

Now in 2022, the Kansas male-dominated Legislature of 165, as well as male-led religious groups, has decided to erase women’s equality by concealing and promoting unclear language that will remove a female’s right to individual freedoms while it remains unchanged for men.

A majority of YES votes on Aug. 2 will make females “second-class” citizens and place any female — a victim of incest, a raped adolescent’s family, an ignorant teenager, an abused wife, a career women, a financially struggling mother — from being able to make personal decisions in regard to her health and emotional, financial, and mental well-being.

If Kansans want to own deadly automatic weapons, not wear masks for their health and others’ benefits, and not vaccinate against deadly viruses, why must Kansas women not be free to make choices of serious consequences for themselves without the interference of 165 elected officials?

The Kansas Senate and House have revealed their intent if a YES vote occurs: restrictions on a female’s health care, medications and procedures and penalties of such will be their judgment call — not the woman’s. The general public will not be voting on the future restrictions — only 165 politicians.

Women for years, whether as mothers, wives, employee, or executives, have been making wise decisions for themselves and others. Vote NO on the amendment, and continue to give women their personal rights to autonomy without the interference of church or government.

JoLene Rae Bloom, Seneca

Trust independent decision making by voting 'No'

The upcoming primary election has a twist this year because every voter ― even Independents ― can vote on a Constitutional provision that would give the Kansas Legislature full authority to restrict abortion in Kansas.

Since you don’t vote in primaries as a rule, this may all seem a bit strange. I checked, though, and you can indeed vote on Aug. 2 without becoming a member of any party. You can remain independent!

Please keep in mind that this proposed change to our Constitution is on the ballot because Republicans put it there. And they need it to use their veto proof majorities in the Kansas House and Senate to pretty much outlaw abortion as a choice for women.

When you vote NO on this amendment, our state’s current laws on abortion will stay in place. They give women a choice when faced with an unwanted pregnancy. Let’s trust independent decision making.

Ken Grotewiel, Lawrence

With much thought, reader is changing his vote to 'No'

SCOTUS's ruling overturning Roe v. Wade was exactly correct. SCOTUS essentially found that there is nothing in the Constitution or constitutional law governing reproduction, let alone any associated "rights." SCOTUS found that abortion is a state issue and NOT up to the federal government.

The Supreme Court of Kansas ruled that the Kansas Constitution allows abortion. As a result, a proposed amendment to the Kansas Constitution would remove the judiciary from the equation and allow the Legislature to pass legislation governing abortion. The vote is Aug. 2.

I have a problem with the Legislature defining and/or legislating abortion. I am skeptical of the (male-dominated) Legislature's ability to decide something that clearly is a personal matter between a woman and her doctor.

I do have a problem with abortion-on-demand for "convenience." Assuming the fetus is healthy, and the mother's life is not in danger, shouldn't the fetus live? If a woman doesn't know she's pregnant by the third trimester, there's a problem. If the mother decides she just doesn't want a baby, well, there's always adoption. My point is that I don't trust my legislature to make this kind of medical decision for women.

I previously intended to vote for said amendment. Not now.

I would have no problem with abortion being limited by states with exceptions for the life and physical health of the mother and/or the viability of the fetus.

The vast majority (roughly 90%) of "voluntary" abortions occur in or about the first trimester of pregnancy. True, extreme examples of, say, partial birth abortions exist, but these are very rare and are used to promote one-size-fits-all legislation.

The abortion-on-demand crowd insist a fetus is part of the mother, to be kept/eliminated at the whim of the mother. Isn't the mother really just a host to a separate human being? Isn't the mother's (physical) life better after "purging" her body of the (parasitic) fetus?

Roe v. Wade turned abortion-on-demand into big business, often nasty and gruesome, and beginning a debate that will go on and on. SCOTUS' decision will not stop it.

Terminating a pregnancy is clearly a medical procedure. Redefining it as a moral or social issue is way outside the purview and expertise of lawyers, politicians, courts, or even religion. It is clearly a very personal matter to be decided only by the woman and her doctor.

Men have no dog in this hunt.

I will leave this issue up to women and their doctors.

I will change my vote on Aug. 2 to "No" and hope abortion rights remain in the hands of women and their doctors.

Oren Long, Hoyt

This article originally appeared on Topeka Capital-Journal: Here's what Kansas voters say about Aug. 2 abortion amendment