Why You Should Vote NO to C128 – The Abortion Amendment to Montana’s Constitution

What Is CI -128 ?

If you’re like most Montanans, you’ve likely been approached to sign a ballot initiative at public events recently. The language in these petitions can often obscure the true implications of what you’re being asked to support. Below, we provide some important details about Ballot Initiative CI-128 to help clarify what this measure entails.

 In Montana, the current laws governing abortion are outlined in the Montana Abortion Control Act. This law sets specific guidelines for how and when abortions can be performed in the state. Under the current law:

• Who Can Perform Abortions: Abortions can only be carried out by a licensed physician or physician assistant.
• Restrictions on When Abortions Can Be Performed: Abortions are prohibited on a viable fetus—one that can survive outside the womb—unless it is necessary to save the mother’s life. Additionally, abortions cannot be performed on an unborn child capable of feeling pain, except in specific circumstances detailed in the law. Violating these rules is considered a felony offense. Currently, abortions are allowed up to the point of fetal viability, typically between 21 to 24 weeks of pregnancy. The law also already includes an exception for late-term abortions to protect the mother’s life.

Constitutional Initiative No. 128 (CI-128) seeks to amend the Montana Constitution in ways that raise significant concerns from a pro-life perspective. Here are the main changes and their potential impacts:

• Right to Abortion: CI-128 would enshrine a constitutional right for individuals to choose an abortion before “fetal viability,” which is the stage when a fetus can survive outside the womb. This change could weaken protections for unborn children by making abortions more accessible up until later stages of pregnancy.
• Abortion After Fetal Viability: The initiative allows for abortions after fetal viability if a doctor determines it is necessary to protect the life or health of the mother. This could lead to situations where abortions are performed even if the fetus could potentially survive outside the womb, raising serious ethical concerns about the rights of viable unborn children.
• Limits on Government Involvement: CI-128 seeks to limit the government’s ability to regulate or restrict abortion practices by preventing legal action against individuals based on pregnancy decisions or those who assist in such decisions. This could reduce the government’s role in protecting the rights of the unborn and ensuring safe medical practices.

If passed, CI-128 presents several concerning implications:

• Parental Rights: The initiative would prevent parents from being informed if their minor child is undergoing an abortion or receiving gender transition treatments, undermining parental authority and involvement in critical health decisions.
• Women’s Rights and Safety: There is concern that women injured during abortions might lose the right to seek legal recourse for medical malpractice, compromising women’s health and safety.
• Facilitating Abuse: CI-128 could make it easier for individuals, such as human traffickers or statutory rapists, to coerce victims into having abortions to conceal crimes.
• Late-Term and Partial-Birth Abortions: The initiative would allow painful, late-term, and partial-birth abortions, which many view as morally and ethically unacceptable.
• Taxpayer Funding: CI-128 might lead to taxpayer-funded abortions, including late-term procedures, which many pro-life advocates oppose as a misuse of public funds.
• Pro- Life Laws- Bills to protect life would be struck down as “ Unconstitutional.”

 Overall, this initiative threatens to erode critical safeguards for the most vulnerable and eliminate parental involvement in life-altering decisions for minors. It raises profound ethical concerns about allowing late-term and partial-birth abortions, which many see as morally indefensible. Pro-life advocates argue that CI-128 undermines essential protections for both women and unborn children, stripping away safeguards that ensure the safety and rights of both. We strongly urge voters to reject this initiative and uphold the sanctity of life and the integrity of family involvement in such significant decisions.

The November 5th – vote NO to C128