A proposed Equal Rights Amendment that would have enshrined protections for abortion and LGBTQ+ "rights" went down to defeat as the legislative session in St. Paul ended. If it had passed, it would have gone to the voters likely next year. Moses Bratrud of the Minnesota Family Council explains why he considers the language of the amendment deceptive.
"The voters would see the word 'sex', they would see the words 'sexual orientation/gender identity,' and they would see the word 'pregnancy' – but what voters would not see, would not understand is that this would have been a fundamental abortion and gender amendment," he tells AFN.
The Associated Press reports authors of the amendment opted not to include the word "abortion" – choosing instead language that would have protected the right to be "making and effectuating decisions about all matters relating to one's own pregnancy or decision whether to become or remain pregnant."
Thus, the deception, Bratrud adds: "We would have seen something go to the voters that was in my view dishonest and which would have put abortion and gender ideology into the [state] constitution."
The language of the amendment wasn't unveiled until three weeks before the legislature adjourned, resulting in pro-life and conservative religious groups mobilizing their supporters and contacting Republican lawmakers in St. Paul.
According to Bratrud, passage of the amendment would have made it very difficult for the pro-life, pro-family movement to counteract. He warns, though, that the issue likely isn't dead.
"We have every reason to expect that if they win the fall election, they will come back with this in January," he offers. "So, it's extremely important to us to win a pro-life/pro-family majority in the Minnesota House in November. If we do that, we can stop them from bringing this up."
Reportedly, Democrats are reluctant to ask Governor Tim Walz to call a special session to revisit the Equal Rights Amendment.
