I believe in personal privacy. That’s why I’m voting ‘no’ on Amendment #2.

I know this is a hot button topic, but I am going to speak my piece on the subject.

While mandating a complete ban on constitutionally guaranteed abortion rights in Kentucky looks good on paper, it would create a situation where women — impregnated through non-consensual sexual assault, adolescents and girls impregnated through sexual molestation and/or incest, mothers with non-viable fetuses, and mothers with life-threatening medical conditions related to the pregnancy — would be forced to carry the fetus to term, or until they became “dead enough” to MAYBE qualify for an emergency termination of the pregnancy. Whether it would be a medical professional or a politician who would be making that determination is unknown. These women would have no other legal option available inside Kentucky. And could eventually be subject to criminal prosecution for seeking services outside of Kentucky as well.

The “party of small government” could eventually implement some sort of menstrual cycle tracking and/or mandated reporting by medical providers for your own or your wife, girlfriend, daughter, your granddaughter, or any other females you know to make sure that all fertile females are fully complying with the government decrees as Texas seems to be trying to implement.

Even miscarrying a wanted pregnancy could land a mother in jail or facing criminal charges or fines if the mother to be couldn’t prove that the baby was lost through a natural process instead of being an intentionally aborted fetus. This has already happened to 26-year-old Lizelle Herrera in Star County Texas, who was charged with fetal murder after the hospital treating her for her miscarriage reported her miscarriage to the Texas authorities. The charges were later dropped.

Women could also be subject to harassment by Texas-style abortion “bounty hunters” trying to collect a $10K bounty paid to anyone who successfully sues someone providing or assisting a woman seeking an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, either in or out of state. Even religious leaders who provide emotional and spiritual counseling to patients considering abortion could be liable under the Texas law, which could be implemented in Kentucky as well if Amendment 2 is passed.

The medical decision-making process should include as many options as possible, and be between a woman and her obstetrician or medical professional in private, not be as limited or unavailable as our politicians can make them, or be between a woman and people with little or no obstetrical experience such as elected officials.

The real reason legislators are seeking a constitutional amendment eliminating access to abortions appears to be because Attorney General Daniel Cameron keeps having to fight court battles regarding eliminating the availability of ALL abortions (including for rape, child molestation, a non-viable fetus, and maybe even to save the mother’s life). That’s because judges have already granted emergency motions against Kentucky’s “trigger laws” eliminating all abortion access immediately upon Roe v. Wade being overturned because it appeared to be in violation of Kentucky’s constitutionally guaranteed rights. The EMW et al v. Cameron case regarding our “trigger law” constitutionality is currently scheduled to be heard by the KY Supreme Court on Tuesday, Nov. 15, or one week after this ballot initiative is voted on during the midterm elections. This ballot measure appears to be Daniel Cameron and our state legislators wanting to eliminate our constitutional rights to guarantee that Cameron can’t lose the November hearing instead of not implementing unlawful legislation that conflicts with our state constitution as it exists.

The constitutional amendment as proposed on the ballot is extremely broad and vague. All manner of reprehensible legislation could eventually be lawfully implemented as a result of the single sentence constitutional amendment as it is proposed and worded on the upcoming ballot.

I simply cannot support this vague and shortsighted constitutional amendment as it is written, will be voting “NO” on it, and hope that others reading this will do likewise.

Ron Hargrove is a freelance political activist from Georgetown.