Virginians are going to the polls to vote on an amendment to their state constitution that enshrines abortion on demand through all nine months of pregnancy in the Old Dominion. Even people who favor abortion, however, should vote “no” on Amendment 1, the “Right to Reproductive Freedom” Amendment.

Americans are ambivalent about abortion.  Many find it morally problematic but are also uneasy about comprehensive bans against it. That doesn’t mean they support abortion on demand.

The pro-abortion lobby has long profited from that ambivalence, using ambiguous wording to write legally meaningless “restrictions” into law that in practice have no impact on abortion on demand. At the same time, they portray any real restrictions as draconian coercion that endangers women while studiously avoiding any discussion of the unborn child.

This is exactly why those who have reservations about abortion on demand should vote “no” on Amendment 1, even if they generally favor abortion. Abortion is currently legal in the Commonwealth of Virginia.  That fact will not change regardless of whether Amendment 1 is approved or rejected.

Virginia has very few restrictions on abortion.  The most important one is a law that requires parental consent for a minor to obtain an abortion. That law would be gone if Amendment 1 passes.

Passage of Amendment 1 will not make abortion per se any more legal in Virginia than it already is. But it will prevent the state from considering any commonsense limits on abortion, including limits many people ambivalent about abortion support. Like parental rights.

Amendment 1 says “an individual’s right to reproductive freedom shall not be directly or indirectly denied, burdened, or infringed upon.”  What exactly does that mean?

It means that a minor can get an abortion without parental approval or arguably even without parental consent. Having to tell one’s parents one is pregnant does “burden reproductive freedom.”

I’m a Virginia parent. Every year in August I’ve had to fill out medical forms for my local school district to indicate whether staff can administer any medications to my child. A Virginia school district won’t give a kid an aspirin without parental consent.  The paradox is, under Amendment 1, educators still won’t give my daughter an aspirin without my consent but could help facilitate her abortion without my knowledge.

Now, should a parent be deliberately kept in the dark about a medical procedure as significant as surgical abortion?  Or the administration of pharmaceutical abortions that generally leave their “results” — delivering one’s dead baby into a toilet amid a pool of blood — to a minor teenager alone? Is that responsible “medical care?” And, if complications ensue, how does a parent know what to tell an emergency room doctor when the Commonwealth conspired with abortionists to keep that knowledge away from parents?

The truth is the abortionists make the money, the politicians get their votes, and parents are left facing the rest of the consequences.

Pro-abortionists complain there are “too few” doctors willing to perform abortions.  What most people don’t know is that even many physicians who perform abortions are not OB-GYN specialists. The infamous and late Kermit Gosnell, who ran an abortuary in Philadelphia until he was convicted of first-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter, was not an obstetrician or gynecologist. Many are just general practitioners who freelance. Still, in many states, pro-abortion politicians have led the charge to allow non-physicians to perform abortions, and there’s no reason to assume Virginia wouldn’t follow suit, especially with its current governor and legislature. Do we really want nurse practitioners performing abortions?

And, again, when complications ensue, are you going to succeed in going after your junior nurse practitioner for malpractice? Amendment 1 even explicitly writes a shield into law for them: “The Commonwealth shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against any individual for … assisting another individual … with such other individual’s voluntary consent.” Botch the abortion today, try to do better tomorrow! (Meantime, try to get civil penalties for the injuries your wife/daughter/girlfriend suffered because Virginia isn’t going to, and can’t, prosecute the person responsible.)

Do you want to pay for abortions out of tax dollars? Amendment 1 says the state will not “indirectly burden” abortion “rights.” If a woman can’t afford an abortion, isn’t her “right” then “burdened” unless the taxpayers of Virginia come to her rescue? If a court decides that — and there are precedents in other states — then the decision for taxpayer-funded abortions will not be a democratic decision, a choice made by lawmakers you elected (who could then change positions). It would be forced into law without your consent by judicial decree.

Finally, Amendment 1 allows abortion on demand.  Yes, it contains cosmetic language about possible restrictions on abortion in the “third trimester” (the sixth to ninth months of pregnancy). The language is cosmetic because it says any doctor can set them aside if he certifies the abortion is “medically indicated,” without either defining what that means and making that certification unreviewable: If any doctor says it, the limit disappears.  Do you believe not one doctor can be found in the whole Commonwealth of Virginia to sign off on any abortion somebody wants, even in the eighth month of pregnancy?

So, even if you support abortion in general, do you agree lawmakers’ hands should be permanently tied, barred from being able to enact any limits — no matter how sensible — on any abortion?  That’s what Amendment 1 does by removing abortion regulation from the normal policymaking forum and turning it into a magical, inviolate “Constitutional right.”

I don’t believe the average person, even if he generally supports abortion, thinks that’s good policy.  That’s why even those generally in favor of abortion but divided should vote “no” on Amendment 1. The safety of women, minors and grown-ups, is at stake.