This involves cutting up the baby into small pieces in order to extract it — a baby with a fully intact nervous system. In my opinion, these are hideous procedures on an infant that could survive outside the womb. How can anyone support such a thing? Vote no on Article 22.

If “personal reproductive liberty” becomes a constitutional right, I suggest that could mean that laws banning prostitution become unconstitutional infringements on autonomy. That would mean that almost any town in the state could have its own “red light district.”

I cannot stick my head in the sand and be silent about what this ambiguous and weakly worded change to our Vermont Constitution may allow. Unborn children cannot speak for themselves, therefore I want to give them a voice.

Society’s subaltern unborn have no power to demand inclusion, so we must do so on their behalf, by raising public awareness of subaltern fetal intersectionality.

Prop 5 is not about securing the rights of any citizen. It is about giving your rights to the state. Take it for what it says, not for what the proponents say it says.

Although Till claims delivering babies is the most rewarding part of his medical practice, he seems to be bent on making sure many babies are not delivered.

It is perfectly legitimate, and I will argue sensible, to be pro-choice yet oppose the constitutional amendment Prop 5/Article 22 that is on the general election ballot, arriving now in our mailboxes.

Here are five unarguable facts that all voters should know about Proposal 5/Article 22 before they say yes or no.

The fundamental question is, do our Vermont beliefs and values support an unlimited right to a third trimester abortion, up until the time of birth, and locking that right into our constitution?