Constitutional amendment, part 4

In conclusion, the proposed constitutional amendment treats a serious issue as a political football. By doing so, it shows no respect for families, women, children, or potential babies.

Any legislation that took this issue seriously would address the responsibility of government under the amended Constitution. It would discuss government funding to provide counseling, health care services — both pre-natal and post-natal — and mechanisms to enforce appropriate penalties for violent rapes that will now result in pregnancy, including pregnancy of children.

For example, serious legislation would need to ask, as a fundamental question, “What price should a rapist pay to society for an act of violence that will now lead to children bearing children?” That person’s criminal act will, after any such amendment, result in a huge financial burden on everyone.

In addition to any other charges, shouldn’t the criminal be declared, under the amended Constitution, financially responsible for all of those costs? And if he can’t pay those costs, shouldn’t he be forced to pay his debt to society in other ways?

I agree that there is a reasonable conversation to be had around regulating abortion, just as we now regulate handguns, automobiles, medical prescriptions and many other situations in which human lives are at risk.

But this is not that legislation. This seems like a bunch of old men in Topeka acting like scared little boys, lacking the decency and courage to treat a serious issue with the seriousness that it deserves.

The way this sham “amendment” is worded, nobody in Kansas is being treated with any respect or compassion. Except maybe rapists.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *