Kansas voters block effort to ban abortion in state constitutional amendment vote

It's amazing you don't seem to remember what you've said.

 

For starters, I really don't care if the person is from Australia or Bali or Germany or China if they are debating this topic. I really don't care if they are American either. As for Australia, it is not oppressive at all. They are actually some guaranteed rights you cannot find here. Australia has adopted the UN International of Human Rights for instance. The US does have some rights guaranteed here that does not apply anywhere else in the world. And of course, we haven't begun about certain conservatives who will trash any nation that is poor, not white, and so forth on this forum if given the chance.

Second, unless you have been living under a rock for the past 5 or ten years, the GOP has introduced bills or are planning to deny abortion at any cost and for most with no exceptions like the Texas Heartbeat Bill and others. Some have even criminalized if a person was to have an abortion with one state even proposing for miscarriages. Furthermore, during the Trump Administration, Trump signed executive orders to roll back and deny birth control, along with LGBTQ health-related issues, for the dubious "religious freedom" doctrine. In the new rules established under the Trump Administration, it says, "Pharmacists and pharmacies might refuse to fill prescriptions that they see as related to contraception or abortion, even when required by state law because the rule explicitly adds them to its definition of health care entities;" It also includes, "Hospitals and individual health care providers might delay or deny emergency care related to abortion, ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage because the rule points to lawsuits involving such denials as potential violations of federal refusal laws." And there was a not too recent news article where a Walgreens Pharmacist used this rule to deny a valid prescription for birth control pills. He cited "religious freedom" as his reason. The woman uses birth control to help with her specific medical ailment and that is common among women.

The number of abortion clinics has dwindled in the past few years and at least 43 clinics have closed since the reversal of Roe v Wade as this article describes. And if you look at this map, a person in Oklahoma would have a three-plus-hour drive to Kansas if that person wanted to obtain an abortion because there are no more clinics in that state, very few in Texas, and that number may go down to zero if they decide to relocate. Sort of like needing to go to a Cardiologist or a Cancer Treatment center that is three hours away because all the medical facilities in your area don't perform those treatments.


https://www.mic.com/impact/how-republicans-plan-to-restrict-abortion-birth-control

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/24/abortion-laws-by-state-map-clinics

 

The women who vote (D) based solely on Roe being overturned we're never going to vote (R) anyway.

 

In Jewish society at that time, the woman, not the baby was the most important. More important than the woman was the male, the patriarch of the family, young boys, etc. The Jews got this from the Egyptians and their culture when they were in the land of Goshin prior and during their enslavement. Most of what the Bible says is an allegory, not literal. If you take Genesis Chapters one and two for instance, you will see four different "creation" stories. The first story never mentions a woman. The third one eventually does. And yet, some people want to take the Bible extremely literally.

However, premature birth was used as an example of "no bodily injury" in which a fine would be imposed. It was common in those days where a fight would break out between two or more men and other persons, including a woman, may get hurt. It does not address abortion in any sense at all. Even in those days, abortion was known and has been known. they just used herbs and certain plants to induce the abortion. We know this from Soranus, a Greek Physician. He would recommend fasting, bloodletting, vigorous jumping, and carrying heavy loads. And if you do that today, yes, you will more than likely have a miscarriage.

If was known during those times, and the Bible, especially in Exodus, Leviticus, or Deutornomy, does not mention abortion specifically, what do think that is?

 

You mean like the 10 year old girl who got pregnant because she was raped? Or the countless other women who are raped from ex-boyfriends to strangers? Rape is more common than you think, unfortunately, and you cannot force a woman, which is deny her rights, in order to carry a child that was "forced" upon her.

Or do you think rapists are now going to be concerned with putting on a rubber/condom or ejaculating outside of the vagina in order for the person not to get pregnant?

 

But isn't that what Evangelical Christians are doing when they introduce abortion bans with no exceptions whatsoever?

 

A citizenship test? No doubt it will exclude conservatives and blacks and everyone else who democrats think are subhuman?

 

You have support for that statement?

 

The idea that conservatives and blacks are subhuman was hatched in your brain. Please don't project that thought on others.

The Kansas vote raises the obvious question: Why do Republicans want to kill babies after so many years of hearing them say otherwise?

 

The idea of blacks being subhuman was created by democrats in order to justify owning them as slaves.

 

Blacks aren’t subhuman

 

In the USA, voter tests were used by democrats to prevent blacks from voting. That’s factual history 101.

 

Direct quote me saying the second amendment should be voted on by the people.

I probably own more guns than you do

 

Whatever you say. So, why do Republicans want to kill babies after so many years of hearing them say otherwise?

 

so you say, but we all know democrats have and will do whatever they can to win elections including voter tests to keep blacks from voting, just like they did for 100 years after the civil war.

 

Not what I say, that’s the facts.

 

Yeh them southern religious conservative democrats are tricky. They even removed one of their four affiliations to fool fools.

It makes for a neat talking point though!

 

The devil and significance is always in the details, and the article does not describe precisely what the proposed amendment said. I don't have any real problem with state citizens voting on such things if it is directly related to their constitution. Otherwise the legislature should decide and if the people do not like what the legislature does they can get rid of them. IMO state laws on abortion are appropriate but can be either reasonable or unreasonable. That is between the legislature and the state citizens.

 

Please show where I 'trivialized' SCOTUS rulings. I can disagree with just about anything, yet not be 'trivializing' it.

And IMO, and many others, not only should it not have been considered a Federal issue, the privacy considered in the 14th Amendment was not applicable.

And as humans, they make errors. I have disagreed with a number of SCOTUS rulings on their interpretation of existing laws and the COTUS. I have agreed with others.

So no one's records are accessible by the receptionist, the nurses, pharmacists, interns, hospital staff..... those 'medical professionals'? Shall we discuss inappropriate access, hacking, and access to computers? Insurance companies have access, so we can assume access by 'less than medical professionals'. The same 'privacy' Amendment applies across the board to your records, as applies to abortion.

If I am mistaken on this particular post, then so be it.

That is a false term. Coined or not, the rapist has no say if a woman chooses to abort, based on everything I could find on the subject. Only once the child is born do the 'rights' of both parents come into play. With visitation rights come support rights (support maybe even without visitation). So it is to the benefit of the accused rapist to make careful decisions.

 

Many states have made it difficult to replace the legislature due to gerrymandering.

Something as serious as a basic human right should be left of to the people if it is not going to be automatically protected.

 

Not willing to answer the question? How come?

Why do Republicans suddenly want to kill babies after so many years of hearing them say otherwise?

 

I'm starting to wonder if, going forward, Republican hopefuls are going to want to be seen as so closely aligned to the ardent pro-life position?

I'm sure for some it's a deeply held moral stance but for others I'm betting it's more of a "party line" thing. At one point I'm guessing it was a fairly neutral affiliation in terms of electoral success but, in the reality of a post Roe world and in view of Kansas's staggering "no" vote (which must have been supported by large numbers of red-state Republican voters), maybe that political calculus is going to be subject to some pretty intense revision?

 

Pipe dreaming is on full display^. I refer you to @submarinepainter 's avatar. Fear it.

 

That seems to be a projection. They voted against a ballot measure not for a measure stating anything like you've claimed.

 

Is a corporation sentient?