Posted on 11/02/2004 2:59:50 AM PST by Former Military Chick
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - Stymied in their efforts to pass a parental notice abortion law that can withstand court scrutiny, Florida lawmakers put out a call for reinforcements.
Polls indicated voters planned to respond to the call Tuesday by passing a ballot measure that limits the privacy rights of girls seeking abortions.
If approved, Amendment 1 would change the Florida Constitution to limit the privacy rights of girls under the age 18 so that the Legislature can come back and pass a parental notice law that will withstand a constitutional challenge.
---_
Both sides of the debate warned during the campaign that the safety and well-being of girls who are struggling with unplanned pregnancies was at stake.
Supporters argued that the measure was needed to restore the rights of parents to be involved in their children's lives. Parental permission, they argued, was needed for everything else, even mundane things such as ear-piercing and taking an aspirin at school.
Opponents said most girls already involve their parents and a parental notice law would inject the government into the most intimate family relationships. They warned it could even endanger girls who are afraid to tell their parents they are pregnant, including girls who are the victims of incest.
Although voters favor abortions rights by a wide margin, that support falls off some when it comes to issues such as parental consent.
Thirty-three states enforce laws that require parental notice or consent. Another 11 states have laws on the books but courts have blocked enforcement.
In Florida, the Legislature has passed laws requiring either parental consent or parental notice for minor three times since 1988. One law was vetoed and two were found unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court.
The Florida Constitution has a specific provision guaranteeing privacy rights.
Citing that provision, the state's high court overturned a parental consent law in 1989. In July 2003, Florida's high court struck a 1999 parental notice law.
House Speaker Johnnie Byrd, a Plant City Republican who mounted an unsuccessful campaign for the U.S. Senate, quickly announced plans to ask voters to change the state constitution.
The ACLU and Planned Parenthood went to court this summer in an effort to keep the measure off the ballot, arguing it was deceptive and misleading.
The state Supreme Court struck the ballot language but said the actual text of the amendment itself could go before voters.
Have been praying fervently for passage.
Bump! The convluted language of legalese, to the contrary notwithstanding, I will be voting YES for Amendment 1.
I'm voting YES on this one too. Several of these questions need careful reading- the legalese seems deliberately misleading. But then again- it was lawyers who probably wrote them...duuuhhhhh.
It is astonishing to me that the courts have consistently ruled that minors cannot be held legally liable to enter into a contract without their parentss' co-signature, but believe that it is ok for an invasive and, possibly deadly, medical procedure can be performed without their consent.
As long as i live, I will NEVER be able to comprehend that logic.
And, I hope that this amendment goes down to solid defeat so that I never have to again.
Exactly.
The smart party (Dems) likes to keep abortion issues, front
and center, cuz it gets them votes.
The stupid party likes to keep abortion issues, front
and center, cuz they are stupid.
that measure will add votes to the Bush column. 4% looks better all the time. THANKS FOR THE HEADS UP.
The article is misleading because the language of the amendment says the legislature SHALL provide for exceptions where the minor can go to the court and not have to notify her mother and father.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.