Article 22 is the key that picks the lock, a Trojan horse, taking advantage of the emotionally volatile issue of reproductive freedom to codify the right of the STATE to interfere with reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy.

The problematic phrase is: “…shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means,” (whatever THAT means…).

Had they not explicitly desired to grant this power to the state, the Article would have read, “…an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life course and shall not be denied or infringed.” Period.

This language codifies, ironically, the ability of the state to remove bodily autonomy and reproductive choice, should it deem such action “justified”. Maybe there’s another “pandemic” and they say it’s too dangerous to bring infants into the world. Perhaps having and raising a child is extremely carbon-intensive, and in order to meet its carbon emission reduction targets, the state can restrict the number of children born and raised here. It can be argued that with this amendment, the Chinese one-child policy would be possible in Vermont. Thus I am emphatically against this measure.

The same personal SOVEREIGNTY applies to the unconstitutional mask and vaccine mandates. The State cannot tell you what to put on or into your body, where you stand, and/or whom you touch. MY BODY, MY CHOICE is not selective. To argue otherwise is disingenuous.