Blog

Some amendments to the Virginia state constitution are being introduced that we want our church body to be aware of.

The issues raised by Ballots 1 and 2 touch directly on matters Scripture speaks to clearly: the value and dignity of human life, God’s design for marriage, and the meaning of our God-given identity as men and women. These issues deserve careful consideration through the lens of biblical conviction before the lens of party or politics. For that reason, we encourage believers to thoughtfully and prayerfully consider a vote of “No” on Ballots 1 and 2, while recognizing that Question 3 involves a separate set of issues on which we are taking no position. The text below outlines each Ballot Question and includes the full text of the amendments.

BALLOT QUESTION 1

Question: Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to (i) protect the freedom to make personal decisions about prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion, miscarriage management, and fertility care; (ii) protect doctors, nurses, and patients from being punished for these decisions; and (iii) allow for restrictions on access to abortion during the third trimester of pregnancy except when the patient’s health is at risk or the pregnancy cannot survive?

Comment: Currently under present law, the Virginia Constitution does not explicitly provide to its citizens a right to reproductive freedom nor does it explicitly protect or prohibit certain kinds of health care procedures or decisions.

Please click here for a document from The Family Foundation and Students for Life to read why this abortion amendment is particularly deceptive. Note that Amendment 1 is supported by Planned Parenthood, the ACLU and many other abortion rights advocates. This amendment is opposed by all pro-life organizations.

FULL TEXT OF AMENDMENT: ARTICLE I, BILL OF RIGHTS

Section 11-A. Fundamental right to reproductive freedom.
That every individual has the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including the ability to make and carry out decisions relating to one’s own prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, contraception, abortion care, miscarriage management, and fertility care.
An individual’s right to reproductive freedom shall not be, directly or indirectly, denied, burdened, or infringed upon unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means.

Notwithstanding the above, the Commonwealth may regulate the provision of abortion care in the third trimester, provided that in no circumstance shall the Commonwealth prohibit an abortion (i) that in the professional judgment of a physician is medically indicated to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual or (ii) when in the professional judgment of a physician the fetus is not viable.

The Commonwealth shall not discriminate in the protection or enforcement of this fundamental right.

The Commonwealth shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against an individual based on such individual’s own exercise of this fundamental right or such individual’s own actual, potential, perceived, or alleged pregnancy outcomes, including miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion. The Commonwealth shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against any individual for aiding or assisting another individual in exercising such other individual’s right to reproductive freedom with such other individual’s voluntary consent.

For the purposes of this section, a state interest is compelling only if it is for the limited purpose of maintaining or improving the health of an individual seeking care, consistent with accepted clinical standards of care and evidence-based medicine, and does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision making.

This section shall be self-executing. Any provision of this section held invalid shall be severable from the remaining portions of the section.

BALLOT QUESTION 2

Question: Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to (i) remove the ban on same-sex marriage; (ii) affirm that two adults may marry regardless of sex, gender, or race; and (iii) require all legally valid marriages to be treated equally under the law?

Comment: The proposed amendment is deceptive. Any two adults can already be married in Virginia today regardless of their race. Two same sex individuals can get married today without hinderance. There are only two genders, male and female. Any male and female of age can marry in Virginia today. The wording is used to manipulate others into thinking that two people of different ethnicities cannot marry.

What is the current status of same-sex marriage in Virginia? In 2006, Virginia voters decided a constitutional amendment that established the definition of marriage in the state as “the union of one man and one woman.” Voters approved the amendment, with 57.1% voting yes.

U.S. District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen struck down the amendment as unconstitutional by on February 13, 2014.^[2] The decision was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on July 28, 2014.^[3] Additionally, on June 26, 2015, the United States Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision (Obergefell v. Hodges) that same-sex marriage is protected under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Due to Obergefell v. Hodges, constitutional bans on same-sex marriage in Virginia and other states have been inoperative since 2015.

• The Family Foundation: “If passed, the repeal-and-replace marriage amendment would enshrine gender ideology into our state constitution, threatening girls’ safety and sports, as well as basic religious liberties.”
• Victoria Cobb, president of the Family Foundation of Virginia: “By separating the terms sex and gender in this constitution, they are implying that one can be a different gender than their sex, and what that does is open the door for the entire commonwealth, all its institutions, and businesses, and all the things that have been under dispute, girls’ sports, etc, it opens the door for that battle to begin all over again.”
• Former State Del. Tim Anderson (R-83): “Make no doubt about it — the gay marriage amendment is NOT about legalizing gay marriage. That has already been settled by SCOTUS. Any two gay men can legally get married in Virginia right this minute — no fuss — no obstruction. This is about transgender rights becoming protected classes in family law, school law and custody cases. This is about boys in girl’s locker rooms. This is about CPS being able to remove children from your homes if you don’t affirm their gender identity. This is about divesting parents of their rights … all cloaked under the ‘gay marriage’ banner.”
• Heritage Action: “[The amendment] would not only repeal Virginia’s constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman, but it would also replace it with dangerous, precedent-setting language that distinguishes ‘sex’ from ‘gender’ in Virginia law for the first time. This would enshrine flawed legal standards that could be used to justify policies that threaten women’s safety and privacy

A “yes” vote supports amending the state constitution to:

• remove a provision that states marriage is between one man and one woman;
• add a provision stating that “marriage is one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness;” and
• prohibit the state from denying a marriage license to two adults based on their sex, gender, or race.

A “no” vote opposes amending the state constitution, thus maintaining that marriage is defined only as a union between one man and one woman.

FULL TEXT OF AMENDMENT: ARTICLE I, BILL OF RIGHTS *[Proposed new language is underlined. Deleted old language is stricken.]

Section 15-A. Marriage. That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions marriage is one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness.

This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage deny the issuance of a marriage license to two adult persons seeking a lawful marriage on the basis of the sex, gender, or race of such persons. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall recognize any lawful marriage between two adult persons and treat such marriages equally under the law, regardless of the sex, gender, or race of such persons.

BALLOT QUESTION 3

Question: Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended (i) to provide for the fundamental right to vote in the Commonwealth, (ii) to revise the qualifications of voters so that a person convicted of a felony is not entitled to vote during his period of incarceration but is automatically invested with the right to vote upon release from incarceration, and (iii) to update the existing prohibition on voting by persons found to be mentally incompetent to instead apply to persons who have been found to lack the capacity to understand the act of voting?

Comment: Under current law, Virginia’s Constitution provides that a person who is convicted of any felony loses the right to vote for the rest of their life unless the Governor of Virginia takes administrative action to restore that specific person’s right to vote. This is the only means of getting back the right to vote after a felony conviction. The current constitutional provision also imposes a broad restriction, while using outdated terminology, on voting by persons found to be incapacitated. A person who is determined by a court to be incapacitated, regardless of the kind of incapacity, loses the right to vote, and only a court can restore the person’s right to vote later.

While this amendment carries important implications and deserves thoughtful consideration, we take no position on this question as a church. We encourage each individual to prayerfully consider the issues, examine the available information, and vote according to their own discernment and conscience before God.

FULL TEXT OF AMENDMENT: ARTICLE II, FRANCHISE & OFFICERS *[Proposed new language is underlined. Deleted old language is stricken.]

Section 1. Qualifications of voters.

(a) In elections by the people, the qualifications of voters shall be as follows: Each voter shall be a citizen of the United States, shall be eighteen years of age, shall fulfill the residence requirements set forth in this section subsection (b), and shall be registered to vote pursuant to this article. Every person who meets these qualifications shall have the fundamental right to vote in the Commonwealth, and such right shall not be abridged by law, except that:

(1) No person who has been convicted of a felony shall be qualified entitled to vote unless his civil rights have been restored by the Governor or other appropriate authority. during any period of incarceration for such felony conviction, but every such person, upon release from incarceration for that felony conviction and without further action required of him, shall be invested with all political rights, including the right to vote; and

As prescribed by law, no (2) No person who has been adjudicated to be mentally incompetent by a court of competent jurisdiction to lack the capacity to understand the act of voting shall be qualified entitled to vote during such period of incapacity until his competency capacity has been reestablished as prescribed by law.

(b) The residence requirements shall be that each voter shall be a resident of the Commonwealth and of the precinct where he votes. Residence, for all purposes of qualification to vote, requires both domicile and a place of abode. The General Assembly may provide for persons who are employed overseas, and their spouses and dependents residing with them, and who are qualified to vote except for relinquishing their place of abode in the Commonwealth while overseas, to vote in the Commonwealth subject to conditions and time limits defined by law. The General Assembly may provide for persons who are qualified to vote except for having moved their residence from one precinct to another within the Commonwealth to continue to vote in a former precinct subject to conditions and time limits defined by law. The General Assembly may also provide, in elections for President and Vice President of the United States, alternatives to registration for new residents of the Commonwealth.

(c) Any person who will be qualified with respect to age to vote at the next general election shall be permitted to register in advance and also to vote in any intervening primary or special election.