California Law Gives Abortion RIghts to Men

California has a ballot proposition:

The state shall not deny or interfere with an individual's reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and their fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives. This section is intended to further the constitutional right to privacy guaranteed by Section 1, and the constitutional right to not be denied equal protection guaranteed by Section 7. Nothing herein narrows or limits the right to privacy or equal protection.

The ballot info says that it just affirms existing law.

The main funding, $5 million, comes from a defunct Indian tribe with only 1,000 members. Something is fishy there.

The first thing that struck me about this amendment was how it avoids saying "woman" or female pronouns.

Next is that an "individual" has a right to "choose or refuse contraceptives", but only a right to choose abortion. So no right to refuse one?

The way I read this, if a man gets a woman pregnant, he has a right to demand an abortion, and she has no right to refuse.

I assume that it will pass, as the pro-abortion forces are strong in California. The last abortion referendum was to notify parents of a minor getting an abortion, and it failed.

A Catholic site argues:

Because these Constitutional Amendments reference individuals, the “rights” bestowed are not limited to adult individuals. The “reproductive freedom” language would turn current sexual felonies involving minors into matters of personal choice. What is now illegal as statutory rape would be perfectly legal. It would be illegal to place restrictions on selling or furnishing pornography or sexually explicit pictures, films, sexual devices etc., to minors.

Criminal sexual trafficking laws protecting minors from sexually predatory adults will be unenforceable because minors would have the legal capacity to “consent” to any sexual behavior with any number of people of any age. Parental consent requirements for birth control, abortion, and “transgender” drugs or surgeries which cause permanent sterilization would be prohibited. Sexually “progressive” school counselors, administrators, or social welfare employees could groom minors and “affirm” sex and gender changes behind parents’ backs.

That may be overstated, but the courts could decide those things.

Abortion used to be against the Hippocratic Oath, but medical students do not say that anymore. The Oath has been changed to be unrecognizable. Here is what the University of Minnesota uses:

With gratitude, we, the students of the University of Minnesota Twin Cities Medical School Class of 2026, stand here today among our friends, families, peers, mentors and communities who have supported us in reaching this milestone.

Our institution is located on Dakota land. Today many indigenous people throughout the state of Minnesota, including the Dakota and the Ojibwe call the Twin Cities home.

We also recognize this acknowledgment is not enough. We commit to uprooting the legacy and perpetuation of structural violence deeply embedded within the health care system.

We recognize inequities built by past and present traumas rooted in white supremacy, colonialism, the gender binary, ableism and all forms of oppression.

As we enter this profession with opportunity for growth, we commit to promoting a culture of antiracism, listening and amplifying voices for positive change.

We pledge to honor all indigenous ways of healing that have been historically marginalized by western medicine.

So they promote to promote anti-Whitism, sex mutilation, and witch doctors.