Roe is dead

So Kansas put up to a vote tonight a constitutional ban on abortion. It lost 60-40. Now, the pro-life folks in the state house and senate have less leverage to enact a 8 or 12 or 15 week abortion ban. Way to go numb nuts!
 
mchammer said:
So Kansas put up to a vote tonight a constitutional ban on abortion. It lost 60-40. Now, the pro-life folks in the state house and senate have less leverage to enact a 8 or 12 or 15 week abortion ban. Way to go numb nuts!
Click to expand...

They overshot. Pretty rare that the Guardian has anything useful, but they have the actual ballot language. It expressly allowed the legislature to restrict in cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother. Very, very easy to demagogue that.
 
mchammer said:
I think the issue is how to win the long game. Life at conception believers need to understand that they don’t control how others think. Their actions (i.e., life at conception folks) could cause a reversal. Would that be pure or stupid as fûck? It’s the latter, believe me.
Click to expand...
Ain’t I prophetic? And the NRO agrees with me:

 
The good news is that the lesson was learned early in a non-November referendum in a small state.
 
I think what Kansas showed was that the majority of people, even conservative people, think access to abortion at least in some form or fashion is reasonable.
 
Pro-lifers are well-meaning, but very large numbers of them are politically braindead. They have no idea what the hell they're doing. That didn't used to be true. People like Phyllis Schlafly weren't always right, but they were pretty shrewd operators. The current batch is much less so.
 
I think a heartbeat bill is reasonable and leaving the door open when special cases arise. Incest, rape, and life of mother are exceptions that should be considered in order to get abortion limited. Get that. Then if you still want to push. Push. But you will have already ended 99% of abortions. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
 
FZRxIATWYAcqln4

I saw another one that had "Texas Longhorns" where Tiger was. :)
 
I did not follow the Kansas law because well because it was Kansas.
Did they really try to get a law passed that banned abortion even for rape incest and life of mother?:confused2:
 
Horn6721 said:
I did not follow the Kansas law because well because it was Kansas.
Did they really try to get a law passed that banned abortion even for rape incest and life of mother?:confused2:
Click to expand...

No, but they tried to pass a state constitutional amendment to overturn a state Supreme Court decision and giving the legislature the power to ban all abortion. It was a terrible move and an easy target.
 
The SPECIFIC language on the ballot was as follows:
Shall the following be adopted?

§ 22. Regulation of abortion. Because Kansans value both women and children, the constitution of the state of Kansas does not require government funding of abortion and does not create or secure a right to abortion. To the extent permitted by the constitution of the United States, the people, through their elected state representatives and state senators, may pass laws regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, laws that account for circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, or circumstances of necessity to save the life of the mother.

In other words, the Kansas lege would still very much have been able to draft laws with the rape and incest carve-outs.
 
Very confusing. Stupidly written.
I wonder if voters didn't understand.

I admit in some propositions I have to read slowly and sometimes block out extra info so I can understand for what I am voting
 
mb227 said:
In other words, the Kansas lege would still very much have been able to draft laws with the rape and incest carve-outs.
Click to expand...

They certainly could have, but I think it was dumb to expressly give them authority to pass laws without carve-outs. That language wasn't necessary, and it was asking for demagoguery and fear mongering.
 
Horn6721 said:
Very confusing. Stupidly written.
I wonder if voters didn't understand.

I admit in some propositions I have to read slowly and sometimes block out extra info so I can understand for what I am voting
Click to expand...
The wording WAS bad. And it allowed the pro-baby killing demographic to spread a lot of falsehoods through the advertising in the days and weeks leading up to the election.
 
mb227 said:
The wording WAS bad. And it allowed the pro-baby killing demographic to spread a lot of falsehoods through the advertising in the days and weeks leading up to the election.
Click to expand...
Our issue is that 70% feel very similar on the issue. it's the 30% outside of the mainstream who can't meet in the middle that are driving this. It helps the pro-choice movement that there are folks on the fringe of the right trying to go too far. Here's a good example:
 
OUBubba said:
Our issue is that 70% feel very similar on the issue. it's the 30% outside of the mainstream who can't meet in the middle that are driving this. It helps the pro-choice movement that there are folks on the fringe of the right trying to go too far. Here's a good example:
Click to expand...


Yep, this is how we lose the issue. Argue over the extreme outliers. The problem is that in GOP primary elections, the more hardline you are, the better. Huge numbers of voters will always choose the most rigid option rather than the one that can actually get something done.
 
OUBubba said:
******* around. Finding out.
Click to expand...

Few things:
1. Not unusual for white collar employees to travel out of state for medical care.
2. Who goes to work for Eli Lilly hoping to sleep their way to the top?
3. Maybe Indiana can install some road signs on the highway for folks crossing the border to inform them that abortion is not contraception in Indiana.
 
OUBubba said:
******* around. Finding out.
Click to expand...


Coach, a couple of things about this.

First, if someone is sincerely pro-life (meaning they believe in their hearts that abortion is murder), are they really going to sell that out for 30 pieces of silver from Eli Lilly or anybody else? No. It just makes Eli Lilly look bad to pro-lifers.

Second, we don't believe these sorts of statements, at least not in the long term. Businesses will make statements like these to please customers, shareholders, and employees in blue states, but are they really going to abandon a business-friendly state and move to a pro-abortion state (most of which are much more hostile to business and becoming even worse) over an issue like this? No, and if one does to try to make an example or look especially righteous to the Left, another business will quietly take its place in the business-friendly state. That's the beauty of being a state that favors entrepreneurship and commerce. It creates a lot of jobs, but if a business gets bad priorities, another can take its place pretty easily.

Texas now has a pretty strong abortion laws. Florida is going very aggressive on gender ideology. I'm sure some businesses have criticized it. How many businesses have left Texas or Florida for California or New York where abortion rights and gender ideology are safe (and children are not)? Not many. As much as they bitched about school teachers not being allowed to talk about dicks with 5-8 years olds, what are the odds of Disney closing Disneyworld and reopening it in New Jersey or Maryland? Zero.
 
So is Lily saying its'diverse and educated employees are too stupid?lazy?careless to use contraception so will be in frequent need of abortions and don't like the paid by Lily option of traveling for their abortions?
 
Mr. Deez said:
Coach, a couple of things about this.

First, if someone is sincerely pro-life (meaning they believe in their hearts that abortion is murder), are they really going to sell that out for 30 pieces of silver from Eli Lilly or anybody else? No. It just makes Eli Lilly look bad to pro-lifers.

Second, we don't believe these sorts of statements, at least not in the long term. Businesses will make statements like these to please customers, shareholders, and employees in blue states, but are they really going to abandon a business-friendly state and move to a pro-abortion state (most of which are much more hostile to business and becoming even worse) over an issue like this? No, and if one does to try to make an example or look especially righteous to the Left, another business will quietly take its place in the business-friendly state. That's the beauty of being a state that favors entrepreneurship and commerce. It creates a lot of jobs, but if a business gets bad priorities, another can take its place pretty easily.

Texas now has a pretty strong abortion laws. Florida is going very aggressive on gender ideology. I'm sure some businesses have criticized it. How many businesses have left Texas or Florida for California or New York where abortion rights and gender ideology are safe (and children are not)? Not many. As much as they bitched about school teachers not being allowed to talk about dicks with 5-8 years olds, what are the odds of Disney closing Disneyworld and reopening it in New Jersey or Maryland? Zero.
Click to expand...
I thought dumbocrats didn’t believe in free speech for corporations?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top