The People Overwhelmingly Support Reproductive Freedom

Despite the wholesale submission to authoritarianism nationally, the People are asserting their reproductive rights, personal choice over state dictate:

Ten states considered adding language guaranteeing abortion rights in their state constitutions during this year’s elections.

Voters in seven of the states approved the ballot questions. Three rejected them.

The results mean a dramatic redrawing of the map for abortion access in parts of the country. Half of the measures cement existing abortion protections that were already outlined in state law...

In Arizona, voters approved a ballot measure to enshrine abortion rights up to the point of viability in the state constitution, likely upending the state’s 15-week abortion law.

The measure also allows exceptions for abortions beyond the point of viability to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person...

Colorado is already a regional hub for abortion access. Voters on Tuesday approved an amendment that would codify protections for abortion, including barring local governments from passing their own laws to try to restrict the procedure. It removes Colorado’s current constitutional ban against public funding for abortions, and it allows the state to cover the procedure under Medicaid and add it to state employee health plans...

In Nevada, abortion is one step closer to being constitutionally protected after voters approved a statewide ballot question, but the measure would need to pass again in 2026 to be fully approved...

In Maryland, voters there approved an amendment to make it extremely difficult for lawmakers in the future to pass a law that could limit reproductive care without violating the state constitution.

Montana’s approval of an abortion amendment won’t change the status quo — abortion access is already protected by a 1999 Montana Supreme Court precedent that found the state’s right to privacy protects the right to terminate a pregnancy...

New York voters approved an amendment designed to strengthen the legal backing for the state’s current access to abortion along with protections against various forms of discrimination.
https://www.npr.org/2024/11/06/g-s1-32962/abortion-rights-amendments-2024-election

​

In Florida, where the State dictates science, medicine, school curricula, library content, etc., restoring reproductive rights was favored by a substantial majority - over 57% - but authoritarian politicians enacted a law requiring that a 60% threshold be met before their repressive restrictions could be overcome.

The public rejection of politicians and bureaucrats seizing control of wombs on Tuesday follows the prevailing pattern:

Nov 9, 2022

Voters in reliably red Kentucky rejected a ballot measure aimed at denying any state constitutional protections for abortion while voters in battleground Michigan enshrined abortion rights in their state’s constitution — joining Democratic California and Vermont in taking that step.

The Kentucky result bucked the state’s Republican-led Legislature, which had imposed a near-total ban on the procedure and put the proposed state constitutional amendment on the ballot. It also mirrored what happened in another red state, Kansas, where voters in August rejected changing that state’s constitution to let lawmakers tighten restrictions or ban abortions.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politi...n-michigan-california-vermont-ballot-measures
​

 

No, you don't understand.

That's exactly why this democrat scare tactic of overturning Roe vs Wade ending abortion is total bullshit.

The democratic party tries to sneak into office hiding behind abortion, so they can allow illegals to flood into the country, give away freebies to their buddies, and move towards socialism so they remain in power.

It is now obvious that individual states will vote in favor of abortion, thereby taking the issue away from the democrats in national elections.

 

Overturning Roe turned out to be pretty good. Huh?

 

Ah glad you understand that abortion is a state issue.

Whew, didn't think you guys would ever get that!

 

Why do you have to hide behind the word salad instead of clearly stating what you are talking about

"The People are asserting the right of a healthy mother to kill her healthy unborn baby even the moment before it is born"?

 

They harp and harp about democracy and then win their pet issue is sent back to the states where democracy CAN play a part and the harp and harp about the people being allowed to vote on the matter.

 

Can you point out a single instance of a healthy mother aborting a healthy child in the third trimester? I'm sure it has happened half a dozen times or so, but I doubt you can find many cases. It is a strawman.

 

It's almost like they think certain rights should be individual rights, rather than subject to mob rule! The HORROR! The HORROR!

 

You're the so in love with democracy.

Is the right to life an individual right?

 

Why are you denying it ever occurs and my post wad not limit to third trimester.

 

The right to one's own body should be, yes. And your corrupted version of "democracy" is not anything I've ever accepted.

 

You specifically mentioned late-term abortions. Specifically. Why does a fertilized egg have the same rights as a human being?

 

Your perversion of the People's overwhelming support for the reproductive freedom that had pertained for half-a-century fails.

Regardless of whether authoritarian politicians want to proscribe or prescribe abortion, most people agree that the State should not be arrogating such a personal decision, even in states otherwise embracing authoritarianism, e.g.,

Proposition 139, the Right to Abortion Initiative establishes abortion as a fundamental right up to the point of viability, which is generally around 24 weeks. After gathering the most signatures ever submitted by a citizens’ initiative in Arizona history, according to Arizona for Abortion Access, Arizonans showed up for their bodily autonomy at the polls overriding their current 15-week ban...

According to CBS, the ballot measure rolls back on a 1984 Colorado constitutional amendment that banned state money from funding abortion. At the time of publication, over 61% of voters voted yes on this initiative, surpassing the required 55% approval it needed with only 73% of the states votes accounted for...

Needing 60% of the vote to pass, Floridians nearly ended the state’s controversial six-week ban and voted to prevent future laws from restricting abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health.

About 57% of Floridians voted to pass the amendment...

While abortion was already legal in Maryland, voters pushed through an initiative to further protect their reproductive freedom by amending the state’s Declaration of Rights. This measure, the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment, will protect both providers and patients from civil or criminal penalties, with over 74% of voters approving the measure​

[https://www.al.com/reckon/2024/11/y...hat-voted-to-protect-reproductive-rights.html]​

​

 

You still miss the point. States are determining for themselves the terms of Abortions for their owns states as required by the US Constitution. This is what the overruling the original Row v Wade SCOTUS ruling was all about. State rights. You will notice that all the measures did not outright outlaw all abortions like the DNC claimed it would. Neither did they make all abortions legal up to the day of delivery. Not a single born alive/murder bill was put forward as many Democrats have wanted. It would seem that the SCOTUS made the right decision this time.

 

States are not required by the Constitution to arrogate a woman's reproductive choices to politicians.

Most Americans had embraced and supported Roe v Wade for half-a-century, and its overthrow remains unpopular.

64% of U.S. adults oppose overturning Roe v. Wade
​

Yes, some had tried evoking "states rights" to justify slavery, but the U.S. Constitution upholds the right of an American not to be enslaved, even if a state's politicians were to endorse the practice.

​

 

Dobbs gave the power to regulate abortion to the states, not the Federal government.

 

Ideological politicians and anonymous bureaucrats should not be allowed to arrogate a woman's control of her womb, not on the state level, not on the national level, neither to require she abort, nor to prohibit her choice to abort.

 

Without a constitutional amendment, it CAN be regulated by the government.

Here's food for thought: propose an amendment protecting abortion and another amendment that bans gun control laws. You would get a lot of support for your agenda if you all weren't so greedy.

 

For WHOM???

 

NO ONE is trying to stop anyone from reproducing in fact it needs to be encouraged.You have complete freedom to reproduce.

It's healthy mothers having their healthy unborn babies killed even up to the moment of birth, NON-reproduction by killing your offspring, that is the issue.

 

I included the ENTIRE PRENATAL LIFE SPAN. Humans do not form fertilized eggs once an ovum, an egg, takes part in a conception it is a human being at the very beginning of its entire life before it. I have proven over and over to you YOUR life began the moment your were conceived nothing else was required except the very things you still require as an adult, shelter and nourishment.

And you and everyone else has full freedom to reproduce, your freedom to do so is not under some attack.

 

I'm talking YOUR Democracy where we vote on issues......suddenly you don't like the idea so much.

 

Fake argument. I've never argued that "democracy" should mean the ability to vote for the elimination of individual rights and liberties. Please learn that. After you do, we can have a conversation, but I feel that is years away.

 

THAT is what Democracy is the people voting on the issue but you don't seem to like it if it doesn't go your and this IS about protecting rights, an ACTUAL RIGHT, your self evident inherent right to your life as EXPLICITLY stated in our founding documents.

 

No. YOUR version of "democracy" is that no rights exist and that all rights are determined by the tyranny of the majority (Marx would be proud). That's not what I'm going with.