Legislative alert: beware the "privacy" amendment coming up this week in the New Hampshire House.
Back on February 26, I posted on the blog
that I was watching CACR 22, a proposed constitutional amendment being considered in the New Hampshire House. It's about "privacy" - and given what the U.S. Supreme Court did with the concept of privacy in order to justify abortion, I wondered what was up. I should have pursued the question further.
CACR 22 (the title stands for "constitutional amendment concurrent resolution") sounds simple and positive: "an individual's right to live free from governmental interference is fundamental and shall not be restricted unless the government demonstrates a compelling state interest." An amended version will be offered on the House floor: "An individual's right to live free from governmental interference in private or personal matters is fundamental."
Just in the past few hours, an attorney from a national pro-life group has contacted one of our fellow New Hampshire pro-lifers with an unambiguous message: state constitutional amendments like the one proposed for New Hampshire have been found by state courts to protect a broader "right" to abortion that what's already granted federally via Roe v. Wade.
I have not spoken to the sponsors, one of whom has a solid and lengthy pro-life record. When similar amendments have had pro-abortion effects in other states, however, don't you think it's a good idea to put CACR 22 on hold? I'm going to email my representatives and ask them to oppose or table the measure.
Best wishes to you!