Ohio voters reject measure aimed at blocking abortion rights amendment

lol at Republicans trying to take away the will of the people as they see the way it's been going in other States

 

yep, most Republican are pro-choice, that is why republican States do not want their people to decide, they want to force it on them

 

With abortion, there is death every single time.

 

Democrats want to keep the Privileged Class in power.

 

It looks like republicans will be slaughtered again because of their morals. Its a waste really, abortion laws won't save one single baby. Women that wanna get one are gonna get one no matter what.

 

Anti-abortionists would win a lot more favor if they decided to be pro-child instead of just pro-birth.

 

Reasonable attitude.. pay that one forward..

 

Conservative thinks no matter what is the argument if you use the term “ baby killer” against liberals , you win the argument.

This post is perfect example of the use of “baby killer” .

This thread is about authoritarianism by conservatives in OH which was defeated by majority vote. But you think calling liberals “ baby killer” you scoring point. Very cute!

 

At the end of the day OH voter went to poll and voted. CA resident didn’t go and vote in OH.

 

Hail? Like really? Democrats just love their world full of Eugenics. And this is you clapping.

 

Sorry to hear that hip lingo flies over certain people's heads...
It's all good, though...
Anyway, it is good to know that Ohio Voters have blocked this Draconian RW attempt to thwart the Pro-Choice Crowd...

 

My prediction too. The pro-choice amendment will win but by a slightly lower margin.

Some, I'm sure, voted against issue 1 because:

A) The way it was sold was a dirty trick.

&

B) A 50% +1 margin has been traditional in their state and might serve to their advantage on other issues going forward.

 

This is exactly the point.

I am a Christian and I believe abortion is sin. However Biblical teaching again and again is taking care the poor, taking care the orphan , taking care the widow, feed those who are hungry, give water to those who are thirsty. But the evangelicals who cries in the church for unborn babies , they have absolutely no interest helping those who are in need, taking care the poor , taking care the widow. You bring those up to them then they quote the verse “For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption”.


Dave Barnhart wrote about the Pro-life movement


"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.”

“Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.”

 

Banning abortion, increases the statistic of younger, poorer women, who, unlike the affluent, cannot travel to places where abortion is legal, and opt to do it themselves, self abort, and that is the reason for increased injury and death.

We should have a reasonable period, say 18 - 22 weeks (which would be negotiated as the actual time frame) to allow abortions.

 

No, because your point is rooted in philosophy. that a fetus is a human organism can easily be surmised by science.

However, when a fetus becomes a 'person' , which is to say, achieves personhood, is matter for philosophy, and can only be ascertained
by judicial decree, which is dependent entirely upon the judicial philosophy of the justices participating in the decree, and that is determined
by justice appointments by the President, approved by the Senate, which is ultimately determined by the vote.

 

I rarely like to talk about my personal abortion stance (since its much more fun AND productive to talk about the "ban at conception" radicals), but my personal motto is:

"Unlimited through 24, with doctor approval for 12 more" (sorta catchy).

Does that mean some casual late term abortions could be denied and women not have unlimited choice? Sure... but since that number is ridiculously low, I'm not too worried about it...

 

I support legal abortion-and it cuts down on the number of potential Democrat voters. "Freakanomics" concluded that legal abortion has helped the GOP in many close elections

 

It is nothing but human. Science shows that. You dehumanize it so you can devalue life and end it.

 

Cool story. My post stands.

 

They are.

 

That works both ways. The idea it isn’t a person and therefore no different than like a kidney is also philosophical.

 

I know part of this is tongue and cheek but you hit the nail on the head. Godless Citizens put the collective over the individual every time because they think there are a few elite ones that can dictate and run things correctly. That is why they try to phase out the word "Republic" and completely emphasize "Democracy". We are all individuals but not all want to be governed by a given centralized collective. That is why we have Family, Township County State and then least of all, Federal Government.
In this case the Federal government and the State of Ohio wants to dictate life or death over the unborn.

 

I won't even bother trying to figure out how you got the Feds "in this case"

But remember, the "State of Ohio" is trying to protect women's health choice rights because the "State of Ohio" has tried to take them away...

Also, allowing that choice doesn't "dictate life or death"...

Overall, you seem a tad confused on what's going on here.... a little research might be in order...

 

No one is cheering anyone's death. What we're cheering is a step in the right direction towards safety, security, privacy, and wellbeing of women.

The "right choice" according to whom?

 

Democrats are not the only ones who are pro-choice.

Reversing the Roe v Wade decision put this issue back into the hands of individual states. Since then, states rights and the will of the people in each state has been touted by the right as justification for the SCOTUS decision. It's only now that those people are being heard from that the tune is changing. Now, the right is noticing that having people vote on this issue is backfiring.

Newsflash: the anti-choice contingent is the minority on this issue, and always have been.