Abortion ban amendment shot down in Kansas doesn't bode well for Repubss

It's how much it lost by, in a RED state. with 87% votes counted, it's about 60/40 in favor of voting it down. Repubs thought they were going to slip in a new law to put it in the state constitution that abortion is banned. Women said to repubs, 'take a hike'.

I thought it might get shot down, maybe, and if it did, I thought it would be by a slim margin.

But it lost by a wide margin, which, to me, doesn't bode well for Repubs.

Moreover, well over 800.000 ballots were cast, about twice as many expected, tells us that women are mad repubs took away a right, (the so-called 'arguments' used to kill R v W don't matter at all ) and all the crazy stuff repubs are doing in various states, all this talk about women whose lives were endangered because doctors feared prosecution and wouldn't do a life saving procedure, and that the state was going to go after doctors, etc., the voters said 'enough' with all this crazy town stuff.

Rest assured, Dems are going to make sure that abortion is on the ballot in the midterms.

Maybe the so called 'red wave' that everyone is prediction might be a ripple, we shall see.

https://www.npr.org/sections/2022-l...bortion-legal-reject-constitutional-amendment

Voters in Kansas decide to keep abortion legal in the state, rejecting an amendment

Voters in Kansas rejected a proposed state constitutional amendment Tuesday that would have said there was no right to an abortion in the state, according to The Associated Press.

Kansas was the first state to vote on abortion rights since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson's Women's Health Organization.

The vote, for now, preserves access to abortion in Kansas and serves as a rebuke to the regional trend of states significantly restricting access. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, Kansas has become an abortion destination for people from other states.

"This vote makes clear what we know: the majority of Americans agree that women should have access to abortion and should have the right to make their own health care decisions," President Biden said in a statement following the vote. "Congress should listen to the will of the American people and restore the protections of Roe as federal law."

 

I'm a bit surprised - but heartened - that the middle road Republicans might be realizing that too much crazy has infiltrated
their ranks, and they need to shift back to the middle.

 

Or maybe, this is exactly the result the "red wave" sought. Federalism at its best. Controlling abort is not an enumerated power in th Constitution, therefore it's up to the states. Kudos to Kansas for taking the lead.

<Extraneous BS deleted. >

 

That's fine. The point was to leave the choice and decision up to the states giving the power back to the people.

If the majority want to kill babies then they can kill babies

 

That's why we have elections, to find out where the voters stand.

 

You ought to forward that concept to Trump and other republicans who don't understand that when you lose, it's over.

 

Serving as further proof of my assertion that the left is making a mountain out of a molehill. Most all states will opt to have legal abortions, and for the few that dont, it will be reasonably easy to come up with a solution as to how the truly indigent in those states can get a subsidized ride to the next state over if they want an abortion. For everyone else, having to drive for a few hours to get an abortion is merely an inconvenience and little else.

Being pro abortion, I am happy that the activist Roe V Wade decision was overturned, and equally happy that the people in Kansas have spoken. This is an example of the system working as intended.

 

Don't give me tasks you can just as easily do yourself.
It looks like you'll have an opportunity to demonstrate those abilities in 2022. Right now the mind is filled with the Left's sedition against Trump after they refused to recognize him as the duly elected President in 2016. Hopefully you'll have an opportunity to do better in 2024.

 

That was never the point. They just say that because it chips away at the national right to an abortion.

If they ever get full control of presidency / house / senate. They WILL pass a nationwide ban on abortion. You know its true.

They only wanted it put back to the states as a means of breaking Roe. It was never about leaving that power in states hands.

 

Liberty shouldn't be left up to the states.
Body autonomy is an enumerated right, what you guys state is also not the point of the OP. The point was because the republican party wants to ban abortian, their prospects arnt looking to bright.

Will voting for republican state leadership lead to the state banning abortians? Why do you pretend your party isn't trying to strip away a woman's right to choose via state laws now that they can.

Overturning Roe gives states the power to regulate liberty, no libertarian would applaud that.

 

Making laws should not be left up to the Supreme Court.

The legislature is tasked with making laws. The intent of the judiciary is to interpret the laws made by the legislature, not make them.

 

It didn't make the law, but ruled on a case dealing with the violation of liberty.
Not every right need be written down.

 

Which law did the Supreme Court make?

 

I've been telling you guys on the Left that many (MANY) of us on the Right fully support a woman's ownership and control over everything involving, inside, or attached to her own body!

You see this more clearly now in Kansas, which, after all is a RED state. Not all of us want to see women be "barefoot and pregnant", chained to a kitchen stove, or any that other nonsense that a lot of far-Left radicals like to propagandize about.

It is also fair to add that a lot of us on the Right are very well familiar with the old saying that's been around in this country since the 1970's -- "ABORT 'EM OR SUPPORT 'EM!" So, if "Mama" doesn't want the responsibility of kids, why would any of the rest of us want to have to pay to raise them, either...?

 

And the bodily autonamy of the person you willfully created doesn't matter?

Here's a clue;

Not everyone agrees with your bullshit hot take about life. When it's created when it can be aborted. The rights of the mother in this situation. Both women and men disagree with you. A good chunk. A good enough chunk that you will likely see certain states using their right and power to protect the child.

Thankfully it's a topic that can rightfully be desputed.

 

Which can be regulated as it begins to impact the rights of another.

Fake News. The American People broadly support first trimester abortion during the first 13 weeks, with support dropping to just the extremists after that and only the total nutjobs in the final trimester, which is the official position of elected Democrat Leadership.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/393104/pro-choice-identification-rises-near-record-high.aspx

I think this Kansas regulation was simply stricter than folks support, which is exactly the kind of feedback elections are designed to provide. Why you see electoral feedback as bug rather a feature, I'll leave you to sort out for yourself.

​

Kansas just reached further than their consensus. Dobbs allows free choice abortion to 15 weeks, a more permissive standard than Roe, most of Europe, and all of France. Something like that would likely pass in Kansas in a jiffy.

Currently Kansas law is that abortion is legal until viability and illegal thereafter, perhaps the best explanation is the simplest, that Kansasians are satisfied with the law as it stands.

 

abort em or support em. That’s the truth. Bringing them into a life of misery is not saving anybody.

 

It doesn't give power back to the people, it gives power back to the government. Roe v Wade and Casey v Planned Parenthood prevented the government from outlawing abortion access before 23 weeks. The repeal of these rulings gave that power back to the state governments

 

Yeah this is actually democracy in action..the thing that the left tried desperately to prevent.

 

Well, unfortunately here it is still the Kansas Supreme Court making the law that there is a constitutional right to abortion and the Kansas legislature is prohibited from interfering with that right. On the other hand it would seem the voters of Kansas are OK with that arrangement.

 

No it doesn't.

 

So no one took away any rights as you can clearly see here. You can drop that hysterical exaggeration anytime you get ready

 

A fetus at 13 weeks would look something closer to this




Don't worry, that's just a plastic model


The issue with abortion restrictions is the infringement to one's right to ownership over their own body. The argument in favor of abortion access is to protect the right of the woman as the owner of her own body, but then the argument against abortion is to protect the fetus's right to ownership of its own body. Ultimately both sides are for the most part looking to protect individual rights in their own way. So the question then ought to be, when do we draw the line to give a fetus and a woman their own separate rights?

The most reasonable answer in my opinion would be based on consciousness(note, I mean "consciousness" in the medical term, as in being sentient, not merely someone who is awake from sleeping). I can not logically or morally justify taking the rights away from a woman over her own body in favor of something that isn't even conscious. We don't even give adult bodies their own individual rights when they are no longer conscious, if a patient on life support is brain dead, the decision is left to someone else as to whether or not they should be removed from life support. We do not consider it a crime to remove someone from life support if their brain is no longer conscious

So the big question is when does a fetus become conscious? The answer is around 24 weeks, that is the scientific answer as to when a fetus becomes medically conscious. Conveniently, Casey v Planned Parenthood only protected access to abortion at 23 weeks or earlier, which is also the earliest stage that a fetus could be born and have a chance of survival. It was a ruling based on our medical knowledge of a fetus's development

 

Your projectionism aside, Do better? The right hasn't won the popular vote in decades.

Trump didn't win the popular vote. and to advocates of democracy. you win the electoral college, but you don't win the hearts and minds of the people, you are the legal president, but you are not the legitimate president. Well, Biden won the popular vote by 8 million, so the right has no leg to stand on, and now the right are whining that the election was stolen. Dems never did that, not like repubs are doing. Hillary conceded, Trump did not.

Therefore, your effort to equate dems with repubs who voted for a guy who inspired an attack on the capitol and disallowed the peaceful transfer of power is hollow.

 

the court does not make laws. R v W wasn't a 'new law', which is what you re implying, it was an interpretation of the constitution.

SCOTUS rulings, which, as stated, are interpretations of the constitution and law, have the effect of law until the rulings are overridden by legislation or future court rulings.