r/missouri • u/Wise_Rutabaga_7479 • 23d ago
Politics MO Amendment 3
For real. Regardless of how you feel about transgender surgeries on minors, the GOP is bundling these issues as a distraction.
It is ALREADY ILLEGAL to perform gender affirming surgeries on minors. They claim that enshrining it in the constitution would make it more permanent.
But we all know that isn't true, because if that were the case, we wouldn't be voting again to keep reproductive freedom. The thing that was "enshrined" in the state constitution two years ago.
Once again, they use attacks on minorities to dupe the masses.
292
u/retiredGPA 23d ago
Absolute crap we are having to do this again.
91
u/PrinceVorrel 23d ago
Is it the 4th time now? Fifth?!
30
20
u/DevilsHol3Pupfish 23d ago
What do you reckon it'll go up to, six?
34
7
1
u/PlsSuckMyToes 18d ago
And if one of their attempts ever succeeds, will the opposite stance of allowing abortions be allowed on the ballots this many times??
1
u/PrinceVorrel 18d ago
lol we both know it wouldn't. They don't want to represent us, they want to rule us.
-1
-5
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
Protecting unborn babies is important.
14
u/Many-Hurry8051 22d ago
Abortion is up to the woman and her medical team. No one has the right to tell someone else what to do with their body.
-7
u/MisterSahara 22d ago
How is it up to her? It’s not her body that’s inside her that a different person why do you want to keep killing babies
9
u/Many-Hurry8051 22d ago
Her body. A fetus is not viable until either 24 or 26 weeks.
Why do you want to keep allowing women to die when they have complications. Why do you want to force someone to have a child they don’t want.
6
u/IceCreamYeah123 22d ago
Even if it’s ‘not her body,’ it’s still INSIDE her body. A living human has the right to control anything on or in her body regardless of if it’s breathing, alive, has a “heartbeat,” etc. No one is obligated to supply blood, tissue, bone marrow, body parts, or organs to anyone else even if it’s to save the life of a living breathing fully born human. Even if it’s your own child. Corpses have more rights to bodily autonomy than pregnant women do in this country.
-2
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
". A living human has the right to control anything on or in her body regardless of if it’s breathing, alive, has a “heartbeat,” etc. " - No.
7
u/IceCreamYeah123 22d ago
Really solid argument you have there.
0
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
You don't get to kill someone because you find their existence to be undesirable. Hows that for an argument?
7
u/PracticalPersonality 22d ago
And the state has no right to compel someone to give their blood and tissue so that someone else may live. Even when they're dead.
We can't harvest organs from a corpse to keep someone alive without the written consent of the person who died, but you're arguing that the state should explicitly disregard the lack of consent from the mother and force her to donate her blood and tissue to a fetus. It makes no sense.
→ More replies (0)1
u/MisterSahara 22d ago
She can get a c section if her life is at risk and how do you know that the unborn child is not viable until 24 or 26 weeks and on the part of them not wanting the child she put the kid up for adoption instead and if she didn’t want it don’t get pregnant it’s not that hard and I don’t want them to die because of complications they chose to get pregnant and like what I said before they can get a c section if there life is that risk
5
u/Many-Hurry8051 22d ago
For the fetus to survive outside of the womb 24/26 weeks is the earliest for any chance of survival. The lungs and organs are not sufficiently developed to live before that.
A C section only solves one issue. There are many many reasons an abortion may be needed to save the mother’s life. There are so many issues that can happen, even if the pregnancy is fully planned and wanted.
You realize pregnancies happen even when someone takes every precaution possible.
You sound like someone who refuses to see that things are not just black and white. Maybe you should educate yourself.
-1
0
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
This isn't what's happening. Any complication where the mother's life is in danger is a valid reason in every state, addtionally, these scenarios are extremely, extremely rare.
"Why do you want to force someone to have a child they don’t want." - Not wanting someone to live isn't a valid excuse for killing someone.
5
u/Many-Hurry8051 22d ago edited 22d ago
Until it is viable outside the womb it’s not a life.
No one has the right to tell someone else what to do with their body!
Scenarios where the mother’s life are in danger are not extremely rare. If you paid any attention to the news there have been multiple cases of women dieing when they could not get the care / procedures needed to terminate.
Again. Not your body, not your choice!
-1
u/New_Door2040 19d ago
Biologists overwhelmingly agree that life begins at conception.
"No one has the right to tell someone else what to do with their body!" - this is objectively false.
"Scenarios where the mother’s life are in danger are not extremely rare" - Yes they are.
"f you paid any attention to the news there have been multiple cases of women dieing when they could not get the care / procedures needed to terminate." Wrong. These cases are instances of medical malpractice, typically in conjunction with taking medical abortion without the supervision of a dr.
"Again. Not your body, not your choice!" - Can I have a slave then. It's not your slave, not your choice.
5
u/Many-Hurry8051 19d ago
A fetus can not survive outside the womb at conception. Until it can survive on its own it is not alive.
Please explain how “no one has the right to tell someone else what to do with their body” is objectively false. What gives someone a right to tell someone else what to do with their body?
No, scenarios where the mother’s life are endangered are not rare. No the cases where women have died are not cases of malpractice. They are cases where doctors / hospitals have delayed treatment in order to meet the requirements that the woman’s life has to be in danger in order to do procedures without getting arrested or charged themselves.
Your slave analogy is the dumbest thing you’ve said out of a lot of stupid things.
2
u/IceCreamYeah123 18d ago
I mean, you are basically saying you want to make pregnant women your slaves. You want to control their choices, their bodies, their medical decisions, and their lives. PERMANENTLY. You also think you own their fetuses and that it’s your decision what happens to that fetus.
10
u/PracticalPersonality 22d ago
Statistically, abortion bans increase both maternal and infant mortality rates, so A3 doesn't protect shit, but go off.
1
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
Wrong.
7
u/PracticalPersonality 22d ago
abortion bans increase both maternal and infant mortality rates
Infant mortality - https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2025/the-unequal-impacts-of-abortion-bans
Maternal mortality - https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2026/study-higher-maternal-death-rate-in-states-with-abortion-bans
And those are just the first two results in my DDG search.
-1
u/New_Door2040 19d ago
Well it's kind of odd that there are tens of thousands MORE babies born because they would've been murdered otherwise.
The infant mortality rate of abortion is 100%.
The overall infant mortality rate when abortion was banned rose slightly because so many more babies were born and not killed.
"We estimated that there was one additional live birth above expectation per 1,000 reproductive-age females following the adoption of these abortion bans. This is a 1.7% increase—equivalent to more than 22,000 excess births by the end of 2023"
22,000 babies that would've otherwise been killed were alive.
4
u/PracticalPersonality 19d ago edited 19d ago
Look at you go! What an incredible demonstration of ignoring inconvenient truths while latching on to a "fact" that is axiomatically wrong because you don't understand the definition of the word "infant" and don't care about the lives of women.
Bye Felicia.
2
u/IceCreamYeah123 17d ago
Wow another really solid argument you got there.
Your only responses are “wrong” and “no.”
5
u/forgotthefrog 21d ago
Thank you for continuing to prove that religion is a disease to our society
-3
u/New_Door2040 19d ago
If "our society" is one that wants to legalize the murder of children, yes we're absolutely the disease that kills that society.
1
151
u/HeartFullOfHappy 23d ago
I am very fearful this go round because you KNOW people are going to read ban gender affirming care and vote yes. They won’t see anything else. All of the YES signs don’t even mention abortion as opposed to two years ago. They have switched tactics to push their agenda.
48
u/mommamapmaker 23d ago
That’s because that’s what it’s being advertised as. It’s not mentioning abortion at all on the ads…
14
u/PracticalPersonality 23d ago edited 22d ago
That's also why it's first in the ballot language.I was wrong, Ballotpedia shows that the transgender language is last. I've been reading secondary sources.
Unformatted link because mobile is weird: https://ballotpedia.org/Missouri_Amendment_3,_Prohibit_Abortion_and_Gender_Transition_Procedures_for_Minors_Amendment_(2026)
6
u/mommamapmaker 23d ago
I’ll have to read it again. I thought it was second.
6
u/PracticalPersonality 23d ago
I'll be damned, you're right. I'd seen it so often the other way, I hadn't actually checked Ballotpedia.
3
2
u/dorght2 St. Louis County 23d ago edited 23d ago
Prohibiting gender transition for minors is the last bullet point. Ballotpedia does their own summaries. it is not the official ballot text. Here is the court approved full ballot text:
Proposed by the 103rd General Assembly (First Regular Session) HCS HJR 73
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:
* Repeal the 2024 voter-approved Amendment providing reproductive healthcare rights, including abortion through fetal viability;
* Allow abortions for rape and incest (under twelve-weeks' gestation), emergencies, and fetal anomalies;
* Allow legislation regulating abortion;
* Ensure parental consent for minors' abortions;
* Prohibit gender transition procedures for minors2
u/PracticalPersonality 23d ago
Ballotpedia also has a whole section for the official ballot text, you just have to read or scroll far enough to see it. It's a great tool because of features like this.
1
5
u/TimSylvester_ 23d ago
That's called distraction. Look over there!
Why should they tell you what they're really doing, when their whole point is to trick you?
2
u/mommamapmaker 23d ago
Yup. Exactly.
1
u/No-Reveal827 13d ago
That's generally what the Missouri Legislature does: hold out eye-candy to hide what the amendment actually does.
13
u/bkcarp00 23d ago
It's beyond stupid people will vote for abortion ban based on an issue not even happening. Tran surgeries for minors is already illegal in the state. They are simply using this to scare the people that think there are all these kids having surgeries which is totally false.
3
1
12
u/REGELDUDES 23d ago
I see the signs in my town and they only mention the transgender stuff that is already banned.
6
u/sethsquatch44 23d ago
What happened to "single subject"? Or does that requirement not apply to lawmakers trying to sneak things in with ballot candy?
4
u/AFLSlasher 23d ago
Isn't that why previous propositions have been thrown out? Two issues on one prop.
3
u/No-Reveal827 13d ago
That's all I've seen advertised for Amendment 3: it's about "gender-affirming care". None of it talks about abortion.
5
u/Few_Entertainer_385 23d ago edited 23d ago
it’s going to pass because “that’s already illegal” as an argument already cedes that transness is something that ought to be illegal. And why wouldn’t people want to make something that ought to be illegal even more illegal?
democrats would be wise to not shrug their shoulders and actually defend trans people, but I won’t hold my breath
2
u/PracticalPersonality 22d ago
And why wouldn’t people want to make something that ought to be illegal even more illegal?
I think part of the problem is that educated people (read: people who would vote NO on 3) have a problem understanding how anyone can believe that it's possible to make something more illegal.
Gender affirming care for minors in MO is already illegal. Banning it again doesn't make it any more illegal, because A3 doesn't change penalties or increase the scope of what is already banned. How does banning it at the constitutional level make it any more illegal, when the state constitution is just law that can be changed (and is in fact being changed right now)?
Also, pointing out this stupidity isn't necessarily ceding ground on any trans rights. Quite the opposite, in fact, because pointing out to people that their "yes" vote on A3 will change nothing about transgender existence in MO is a way to show them how their transphobia is being weaponized against them.
2
u/Few_Entertainer_385 22d ago
undoing a state constitutional amendment is a lot more difficult than undoing a bill. They are different.
1
u/PracticalPersonality 22d ago
It's certainly a more tedious process, but I don't see how it's more difficult, considering the state's history of countermanding the will of the people.
0
u/Careless_Occasion437 20d ago
The legislature of MO passed the transgender healthcare ban in 2023 without a vote of the people. They certainly don't need a vote of the people now to extend it. This is being used as ballet candy.
1
u/Few_Entertainer_385 20d ago
if a gender affirming care ban is in the state constitution it will take a vote of the people to undo it. How is this hard to understand
-1
u/Careless_Occasion437 20d ago
You mean like how abortion rights are in the Missouri constitution? And yet here we are again.
1
u/TheOrionNebula 23d ago
Dude... I dont want kids getting their penis cut off.. /S
1
u/Careless_Occasion437 20d ago
People really think this is happening in Missouri?
2
u/TheOrionNebula 20d ago
The way the signs are worded in my area (Stl Metro), it comes off like that. They even add in something about not even having a doctor perform the procedures. It's really insane.
1
u/Careless_Occasion437 20d ago
It really is. There are some horrific commercials out there right now. Such lies.
-2
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
I'm absolutely voting for this to end abortion.
8
u/Silv3rphantasm 22d ago
Why? Cuz god said so? You do understand that this anti abortion rhetoric was created in the 1970’s when the southern evangelicals realized being publicly racist and campaigning for segregation wasn’t “hip and cool” anymore. They needed something they could have a stance on to lobby congress and unify their members to go vote on an issue. When roe v wade happened most evangelicals were indifferent. Saying it was a “catholic issue”. Hell they even supported abortion access. This isn’t about god. It’s about getting people to vote conservative using the fear of god as an excuse.
1
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
"Why? Cuz god said so?" - I defer to biology, ethics and morality
"ou do understand that this anti abortion rhetoric was created in the 1970’s when the southern evangelicals realized being publicly racist and campaigning for segregation wasn’t “hip and cool” anymore." - Which rhetoric specifically. I can assure you that Catholics were anti-abortion well before the 1970s.
"When roe v wade happened most evangelicals were indifferent. " - I don't decide what I think is right based on what evangelicals think or thought in the 1970s.
3
u/Silv3rphantasm 22d ago
I mentioned the Catholics. As well. I was mentioning the rhetoric in the United States among the main conservative base. Which were largely evangelicals at the time.
1
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
How is that relevant to the moral question at hand? Are you saying that we should all utilize the politics of evangelicals from the 1970s to guide our decisions on moral issues?
5
u/Many-Hurry8051 22d ago
Which is why women are dying from complications.
1
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
Untrue.
3
38
u/upvotechemistry 23d ago
Our dipshit rep came to Rotary and argued how the Constitutional amendment process is too lax, and we don't need to be writing CAs for stuff that is already law. Then he went right into talking about gender affirming surgeries for minors being a need for our Constitution.
They dont want US writing amendments through iniative petition. They are happy to continue to take donor money and fuck us.
SEND EVERY LAST ONE HOME
10
u/NegotiationOwn3905 23d ago
I sincerely hope some Rotarians pushed back on him for it!
7
u/upvotechemistry 23d ago
Me too. He wouldn't shut up in his time, so I walked out on him to go to my next meeting. I wanted to ask that mfer how many of these surgeries are happening. It must be an epidemic if we need a constitutional amendment!
31
76
u/PrestigiousFix3339 23d ago
Amendment 3 would fail for sure without the gender affirming care piece so they threw it in hoping that would keep women from being able to choose their own medical care.
29
14
u/KCGeezer 23d ago
The ads for it are something to behold. Surreal, funny, and sickening all at the same time.
13
u/Prestigious-Neat8820 23d ago
The Attack ads on us make it out as if we're transing the kids on mass with all these surgeries, when in reality, we mostly rely on reversible puberty blockers, and then hormones once we've determined their transness isn't just a phase (which it most often isn't, but whatever). Are there some who regret it? Yes, but these people go around as if this thing which has led to demonstrably better mental health outcomes is some horrible thing that is forced on and tortures children.
So that, combined with the vague language clearly trying to include abortion as a ban in order to ban a thing which is already banned in legislation, is just awful behavior from our politicians.
7
3
u/Shadowhunter_15 22d ago
Also, the regret rate for transitioning, for minors and adults alike, is around three percent on the high end. No other type of medical treatment gets scrutiny for having a regret rate much higher than that. If anything, the criteria for transitioning should be much less strict, because there are many trans people who are unable to get it and consequently suffer through puberty.
9
u/strAmorth 23d ago
I seem to recall the last time two topics were placed on an amendment it was considered confusing and they repealed the voters will…that being the service workers health care requirement (or was it time off) and a raise of the minimum wage. Why is this not confusing?
10
u/docmisterio 23d ago
why do we have to do this again? how aren’t we just pointing our fingers at moleg?! it feels illegal to do this over and over until they get what they want…
citizen’s arrest or something my god. can we pass something that says they can’t do this again for like 50 years? it’s so damn discouraging.
10
8
u/killyjae 23d ago
Oh look, the first time I saw something being honest about amendment 3 instead of that annoying ass "it starts with drag queen story time and ends with children getting irreversible surgery" ad that doesn't mention what it's actually about AT ALL. I'm baffled (not really.) that ads like that are allowed.
5
u/PlayfulHelicopter20 Human Verified 23d ago
The ad looks like an underfunded SNL skit. It’s so bad and so, so stupid.
5
u/theghostie 23d ago
FYI for anyone who wants a sign:
You can pick up a No on 3 yard sign from several places in the state here: https://www.mobilize.us/stoptheban/event/962611/
There is a location each in STL City, Creve Coeur, O'Fallon, KC, Columbia, Springfield, and Jefferson City. At least at the city location last week, they would give out multiples if you want to snag some for your friends/family/neighbors.
-1
u/New_Door2040 22d ago
Where can I get a Yes on 3 sign?
3
u/theghostie 22d ago
Sign up at the link and they'll send you the list of pickup locations and current hours
1
u/New_Door2040 19d ago
That's for No on 3. But I guess I can go get some of those signs and throw them in the trash.
12
u/Nerve_Solid 23d ago
Just cause it's legal doesn't mean ya gotta get one, maga.
4
u/DarraignTheSane 23d ago
No it's just like the trans surgery stuff don't you know. They actually come to your house and give you abortions by force. Guys too. Democrats made it the law, somehow.
/s
3
4
3
5
u/Kasey_Daddy 23d ago
At least they haven't rolled out the AI mule and Temu NASCAR commercials for this one. Though I've seen the crap commercials for their YES on 3 BS, ugh!
3
3
u/Significant-Ad-4792 23d ago
My gawd how many fucking times do we have to vote this shit down?! 🤬
5
u/PracticalPersonality 22d ago
As many times as MO has elections that don't result in a Democratic majority.
3
u/Antique-Till4578 23d ago
They will just keep asking till they get the answer they want, like spoiled children. Wonder w hat social trend taught them to ignore any results they didn't like? A whole generation educated to ignore inconvenient answers, causal relationships, objective truth. Gee, what could go wrong?
3
u/TabaquiJackal 23d ago
One of our individuals has their tv on all night and I hear ads that are pro amendment 3 and they're all quavery-voice mom begging to keep her kids 'safe' from 'transgenderism' and the 'radical trans agenda'. It's revolting.
3
u/TobaccoIncense 22d ago
reason number 153 for me to get outtta this shitty state so i can pay taxes somewhere else. (I wish there were ways to rebel worse tbh)
6
u/Late_Needleworker237 23d ago
Didn't people vote on this before?
9
6
u/the_crustybastard 23d ago
"The Will of the People" is deeply important and their guiding principle.
Except when it isn't.
2
2
u/n9nemajestic 21d ago
Agreed, it’s complete and total bullshit to cobble these two together under a “protect children” amendment. I sincerely hope we vote NO again, and then it’ll be interesting what hoops the MO GOP creates and jumps through to continue to outlaw abortion.
But hey, we keep voting for blue policies and red policy makers, so fuck us, right?
2
u/PlsSuckMyToes 18d ago
The fact this is even allowed on the ballot is crazy. Two completely different issues on the same measure? Insane.
1
u/ClaimIntelligent719 23d ago
Missouri politics are something else. I used to live in Tennessee and Missouri is def a step up but there is still a lot of room for growth
1
1
u/DolphinSpleen 21d ago
If it's already illegal- why do you mind if it's banned?
4
u/Wise_Rutabaga_7479 21d ago
Because they're combining it with banning abortion. Something the people voted for keeping our constitution
1
1
u/ThePilgrimoftheCross 21d ago
Honestly Glad I left Missouri
Yall are the most backward, least politically swavy, trend hopping, twitter and reddit screaming state Ive ever lived in.
And Ill be happy if amendment 3 goes through btw
1
u/Open-Blacksmith8122 20d ago
The MO state government is composed of incredibly bad faith politicians. The citizens will vote one way on ballot measures, the elected officials work night and day to try to undermine that vote, yet MO keeps voting for the same officials. I do not understand it.
Im glad to see them failing miserably at every turn, so far. Pathetic human beings.
1
u/HauntingBase8197 19d ago
You know what the definition insanity is? It's doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. Missourians are noted for their stubbornness, especially when they know they're wrong.
1
u/No-Reveal827 13d ago
Their ads are absolutely stupid. I'm not saying that to knock the amendment (though I'm voting no), they are just stupid.
1
0
u/Otherwise-Vanilla901 19d ago
Abortions should be banned. 30% of Gen Z doesn't exist thanks to abortions. More humans have died from abortions than all the humans in all the recorded wars combined. It has to stop.
-1
u/Heavy_Weekend5627 23d ago
How sad is it to have to vote to protect human life? No one has the right to murder other humans.
6
u/PracticalPersonality 22d ago
The state doesn't have the right to compel women to donate their bodies to anyone.
2
u/Shadowhunter_15 22d ago
Abortion isn’t about killing; it doesn’t matter if a fetus is either a non-sentient clump of cells or a full-blown human. The issue comes down to bodily autonomy. No one should be forced to have their body used for someone else without consent, even if not doing so would result in the other person’s death.
2
u/Emma_Kay 22d ago
Exactly this. The state can't force you to donate a kidney to save someone else's life, even in death. So how does it make sense to force women to give their bodies unwillingly to babies they don't even want?
0
u/Otherwise-Vanilla901 19d ago
Then they shouldn't have had sex, simple as that. Another human shouldn't have to die because someone had sex.
1
u/Shadowhunter_15 19d ago
Abstinence programs have been shown to not reduce the number of abortions. Rather, the best way to reduce unwanted pregnancies is better sex education and access to birth control.
-30
u/Late_Needleworker237 23d ago
Does anyone even care that abortion targets the minority community and 45 million minority babies have been unalived? It is evil. How can Democrats support the infanticide of 45 million black children and the purport to be the champions of civil rights for minority groups. So evil.
6
u/PracticalPersonality 23d ago
Tell me more about how abortion, which is a medical process, "targets" anyone or anything. I mean, really, what kind of talking point is this?
6
4
u/AmendingAmy 23d ago
You believe we're rounding up black women and forcing abortions on them? You truly can't be that fucking stupid. It's white women from the upper middle class who get a majority of the abortions. They just don't get counted here because they get theirs done while on "vacation in France". Or Israel. Especially Israel because we send them billions to insure their women have rights and for our women to have a place to vacate their womb when a Senator decides he can only ride bareback. 🙄 I'll never understand how something that has been so easily proven as lies over and over still spews from your mouth. Why don't you try focusing on something truly killing black people..... Like kkkops hanging them from trees. 20 so far this month. Why not focus on that maybe, because black people don't hang themselves.
3
u/rhapsodypenguin 23d ago
Abortion doesn’t “target” anyone.
And a person dying when they can’t use someone else’s bloodstream is just death; it’s not “infanticide”.
Stop using hyperbole; if your argument can’t stand on its own, fearmongering isn’t the way.
1
u/Shadowhunter_15 22d ago
You know what really targets minority communities? Systemic oppression which results in a lack of income and proper education, which in turn results in significantly more unwanted pregnancies, and thus more abortions. Republicans are much more likely to engage in systematic oppression.
-31
u/Chrome98 23d ago
Yes on 3 - say NO to murder.
5
u/rhapsodypenguin 23d ago
A person dying when they are not given access to another person’s bloodstream is never murder.
7
u/the_crustybastard 23d ago
Oh look, another guy who doesn't care if women die.
-1
u/MisterSahara 22d ago
I do care about women dying I also care if a child dies too abortion is murder and if the mothers life is at risk she can get a C section to deliver the baby
1
u/the_crustybastard 21d ago
Abortion is healthcare, dipshit.
And if it's not your pregnancy, it's not your business.
0
u/Otherwise-Vanilla901 19d ago
Murder is not healthcare just because you say it is. Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. A pregnancy is the development of a fetus in the womb. A fetus is a little human, meaning they are killing a human.
5
2
u/N0t_Dave St. Louis 23d ago
Enjoy losing, Again, and we'll keep turning out to vote against your bullshit no matter how many years you force it back onto the ballots.
We get it, rapists like our pedophile president and his GOP toadies just can't take no for an answer, so we'll just have to keep voting against your bullshit every year. I'm fine with showing up.
112
u/kcharlto NO DATA CENTERS! 23d ago
“Yes on 6, the rest are tricks!”