My perspective regarding Proposal 3

on the Michigan ballot

for the election

November 8, 2022


I used to refer to myself as a "pro-life choice" person, but the so called "pro-choice" movement, which is just a nice sounding euphemism for allowing babies to be killed, started getting extreme, and making a lot of exceptionally bad choices. 

I believe there will come a day, from an historical perspective, when people will look upon the pro-choice movement with the same disdain as history looks upon the south for their mistreatment, and killing, of those human beings who had black skin. For 100 years after our American Civil War, a person with black skin could often still be killed by a white person without any consequence in the south because of lingering rationalizations from before the war. Those excuses included they were protecting States Rights (and an owner's rights during slavery), or that a "negro" was less than a real human being, something inferior (previously just a part of someone's property). The similarity to today's pro-choice arguments regarding the killing of babies (abortion) is so striking, it should make anyone cringe who has heard the admonition: 

Those who ignore history are destined to repeat its mistakes. 

I have been watching the pro-abortion ads on TV. They are very well crafted to play to a person's emotions, not their common sense. Focusing on things like rape, and government interference into someone's life, are always good tactics to distract people from the central, most basic questions. These were often used in the south for similar purposes. 

It is not about who wins. It is about finding the Truth.

I am a co-founder of the Teaching & Sharing Centers non-profit in Grand Ledge. The letterhead of the Teaching & Sharing Centers has the words "seeking wisdom" on it. I have often used the above statement about winning versus finding the Truth. For almost 45 years, I have not allowed any political signs on the Center's property, or my home property. About a week ago, I allowed a "vote no on proposal 3" sign to be placed at the edge of the property. Allow me to share with you why. 

This is being written before the outcome of the November 8, 2022 election, where the citizens of the State of Michigan will vote whether to make abortion a protected right in the state constitution. Although it has been highly politicized, I do not believe this to be a political issue. This is a critical cultural issue. People have lectured me that I should not be voting based on a single issue, but I do not see abortion as just one issue among many. It might just be the paramount issue in our culture. When we show disrespect for human life right from the start, and tell people anyone should be allowed to choose who is going to live, and who is going to die, we set the stage for disaster all across the span of life, and the breadth of our country. 

Ads often exploit our weaknesses, emotions, and vulnerabilities.

However, you indeed have a choice to make. You can teach that killing another person (in this case a baby) is a right you want provided for, and protected by the Michigan constitution. Or, you can vote no, and teach that every human life matters, is valued, and is worth protecting. Because, if we teach that killing is just a choice we are entitled to make, why do we then act surprised when someone walks into a public place, and starts killing other people? 

Of course pro-abortion (and pro-choice) people will argue that the baby is not really a person yet, just a part of the mother's body, like a finger, or a cancerous growth. A pastor recently explained the Jewish perspective to me, based on Genesis, that the baby is not a person until it takes its first breath. But, that is just one religious perspective among many. Science tells us a different story. Every part of a person's body has the same basic DNA. The baby, from its moment of conception, has its own distinct DNA. It may be currently dependent on the mother's body. Attached inside to her body. Her body, in most cases, contributed half the DNA to its own unique personhood. None of that makes it just an ordinary part of her body, as if it were some random organ, or appendage completely comprised of her DNA. The baby is not going to morph into something it did not start out as. The baby starts out as a real person with its own DNA, because it is a real person. 

Another big question in this constant debate is "when?" I have a grandson who is a toddler. The doctor's removed him from his mother's womb three months prior to the due date because his life was in danger. I have read of similar cases where the doctors successfully saved a baby's life as early as six months prior to the due date. 

Why would any civilized person want it written into our state constitution
that in Michigan you have a right to kill a baby?

That is the central, most basic question. All of the other questions can be addressed by those in our state legislature. We vote them into office to represent us. Preferably, to also show wisdom, and to seek the Truth (the one with a capital T, not all of our own little truths we like to argue about). 


The biggest danger is when we stop listening, and no longer make a real effort to discern the Truth. When we politicize a crucial life decision. When it becomes just another "compete and compare" game sweeping wisdom into the gutter, and out of the way of our emotions. 

The intentional killing of human babies is an evil action regardless of how we try to justify it. This proposal is very broad in scope. It will wholeheartedly embrace, and endorse, that evil if it passes. An old saying states all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. 

For hundreds of years, a great many people in the south had so thoroughly convinced themselves they were right, the only real consideration was how to "win." Shall we follow in their footsteps? 


Laws that could be affected by the anything-goes abortion amendment (source

• The 1931 law that protects unborn life
• Increased penalty for later term abortions, when babies are fully formed
• Requiring abortion centers to satisfy the same minimum health standards as other surgical centers
• Abortion procedures can only be performed by doctors, not nurses or non-medical professionals
• Babies that are born alive during an abortion procedure are protected and cared for
• Parental consent for minors considering whether to take the life of their child
• Law requiring that medical complications in an abortion procedure be reported to authorities
• Fetal trafficking ban
• The Partial Birth Abortion Ban, which prevents the partial delivery of a baby before taking its life
• Protecting the conscience rights of hospitals and doctors who decline to take unborn human life
• Taxpayer-funded Medicaid dollars cannot be used to pay for abortions
• The law that stops school employees from helping a minor take the life of their child.
• Informed Consent for abortion
• 24 hour waiting period
• Information on fetal development and abortion procedure
• Ultrasound viewing
• The prohibition on chemical poisons that take unborn life
• Health insurance does not cover abortion unless there is an opt-in
• Allocation of funds for family planning or reproductive services
• The Pregnant and Parenting Student Services Fund
• The Stillborn Tax Equity, a tax credit for those who lose their unborn baby due to natural causes
• The Michigan Surrogate Parenting Act, restricting payment for renting someone’s womb
• Ultrasound grants to family planning providers currently prohibit the use of those ultrasounds for abortions
• Advertising restrictions on centers that perform abortions
• Any city or county law prohibiting abortion in their health insurance coverage
• Statutory rape laws
• Prohibition on human cloning
• Elliot-Larsen law that prevents discrimination of employees for pregnancy
• The Prenatal Protection Act
• Search warrants for DNA of terminated unborn child in connection to solving a rape
• Reporting of dead body by medical examiner including those who died from attempted abortion
• Prohibition on experimentation on living embryo, fetus, or neonate for non-therapeutic reasons
• Respectful disposal of fetal remains
• Restriction on wrongful birth lawsuits

For Further Analysis of the Abortion Amendment Click the Below Link



Return to Pro-Life Main Page


Return to TIP Newsletter Main Page


Go to Newsletters, Letters & Emails Index