Wednesday, November 01, 2006

A View of amendment #2

(published in the Nov 1, 2006 edition of the "Bullseye")
I prefer not to get involved in politics anymore than I have to. I do try to become informed about election issues, and I exercise my right to vote, but that’s about as far as it goes for me. It’s not that I don’t care or that I’m indifferent – debating political issues is just not something I’m passionate about. Thus, I’m treading rather new and awkward territory, but here goes.

Some very valid points have already been pointed out by the editor of this paper in recent weeks, which have helped clarify some important facts about the upcoming Amendment Two decision. I agree with him, and won’t labor to repeat what he’s already said.

I have recently learned an interesting fact that, though…a fact I had not heard mentioned amongst all of the “stem cell initiative” hype and publicity.

Did you know that the very opening paragraph of Amendment Two lists 45 sections of the constitution of Missouri that it will either repeal or change. Forty-five!

This is the exact wording of the beginning of the proposed amendment, taken from the Missouri Secretary of State’s government web site:
Constitutional Amendment 2
Stem Cell Initiative
Submitted October 11, 2005
NOTICE: You are advised that the proposed constitutional amendment may change, repeal, or modify by implication or may be construed by some persons to change, repeal or modify by implication, the following provisions of the Constitution of Missouri – Sections 2, 10, 14, and 32 of Article I; Section 1 of Article II; Sections 1, 21, 22, 23, 28, 36, 39, 40, 41, and 42 of Article III; Sections 1, 14, 36(a), 37, 37(a), 39, and 52 of Article IV; Sections 5, 14, 17, 18, and 23, and subsection 17 of Section 27 of Article V; Sections 18(b), 18(c), 18(d), 18(k), 18(m), 19(a), 20, 31, 32(a), and 32(b) of Article VI; Section 9(a) of Article IX; Sections 1, 6, 11(a), 11(d), and 11(f) of Article X; and Section 3 or Article XI.

I know it’s all technical sounding; and please don’t ask me anything about all of those specific articles and sections of the constitution…but I counted and re-counted, and that’s 45 sections, folks. Is there not something wrong with this picture?

Even if I didn’t know anything at all about Amendment Two, I wouldn’t vote for it simply because it seems there must be something fundamentally wrong with any amendment that would have to change THAT much of our current constitution in order to be legal.

It appears that no matter how you slice it, Amendment Two is much more, and affects much more, than what its proponents are telling us.

No comments: