I was asked to make a statement on Missouri’s Amendment 3, which will be voted on in 2026. I believe that this amendment is a “bait and switch” strategy and that, as it is written, it is unacceptable both to Pro-Life people and to Transgender people.
Myself being Pro-Life but also understanding more about the experiences of Transgender people, believe the amendment would be better written if it were purely about abortion and was not mixed with a ban on Gender Affirming Care.
You can read about it from the following link, which I will be quoting from.
The following is the text as the amendment is written.
—
Missouri Amendment 3, the Prohibit Abortion and Gender Transition Procedures for Minors Amendment, is on the ballot in Missouri as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 3, 2026.[1]
A “yes” vote supports amending the Missouri Constitution to:
- repeal the constitutional right to reproductive freedom, which voters ratified in 2024;
- prohibit abortions except in cases of “medical emergency, fetal anomaly, rape, or incest,” and permit abortions in cases of rape or incest only through 12 weeks of gestation;
- prohibit gender transition surgeries for minors, as well as the prescription or administration of cross-sex hormones or puberty-blocking drugs to minors, with an exception for treatments “unrelated to the purpose of a gender transition;” and make other changes.
A “no” vote opposes amending the Missouri Constitution, keeping the existing constitutional right to reproductive freedom, and not adding provisions that prohibit abortion and gender transition surgeries and procedures.
—
I believe that the 3 bulletpoints describing a yes vote are all problematic and that Pro-Life and Pro-Choice people have reasons to oppose them.
- Point 1 repeals the right to reproductive freedom. I do not oppose reproductive freedom in a legal sense; I just oppose abortion, which is an act of murder that happens after people have already made their reproductive choices. I don’t like the way it is worded. I also believe we need more reproductive freedom, especially when it comes to sterilization that people want and are not able to access because their doctors refuse it or their insurance does not cover it. Those who don’t want children but still want to have sex should have access to expanded sterilization, and this falls under the category of reproductive freedom. Important to freedom is the freedom not to reproduce if you don’t want to.
- Point 2 is perhaps more concerning because the cases of “fetal anomaly, rape, or incest” allow for abortion based on these broad categories. Fetal anomaly can also be used to abort babies based on their genetic status as intersex, sexual orientation, or other conditions related to things like autism, which are able to be predicted more accurately as science advances. Therefore, if I were to vote yes, I would still be allowing for people like myself to be aborted.
- Point 3 should just be removed entirely. Gender transition surgeries and hormones have NOTHING at all to do with abortion and should be part of a separate amendment that people can vote on. Whoever wrote this amendment is poisoning politics by forcing people to vote on two unrelated topics.
I personally plan to vote no on this amendment if I vote at all. I cannot agree to this amendment as it is written, and I also support gender affirming care for everyone, no matter whether those people are transgender, cisgender, or intersex. Honestly, the topics of these surgeries or hormone treatments are for doctors, patients, and parents(in the case of minors) to discuss, because, unlike abortion, which always kills an innocent human being, the vast category of Gender Transition can mean hundreds of different things socially, surgically, or hormonally. I will support no bans on whatever helps people feel aligned with their body more when it does not harm an innocent third party.
Chastity White Rose 