That’s what happens when you overturn 50 years of precedent – a swing in the opposite direction. And it will probably pass (requires 2/3rds). What I don’t understand is how/why it will “face numerous lawsuits and court challenges”. SCOTUS decided that it’s all up to the states, did it not? Is there any other federal protection for the unborn, or any other claim that could be made about Prop 1 being “unconstitutional?”
Yes, let’s not kid ourselves. 2 not-even-campaign-proposal “suggestions” from 3 and 6 years ago. Not exactly something that’s on the brink…
But this is my main takeaway:
We must preserve the fundamental reproductive rights of women here in California because they are under attack elsewhere.”
Yes, there is obviously such a nationwide push for sexual slavery, legalizing rape, and/or the forced sterilization of women. Because that is what would infringe on a woman’s reproductive right.
Abortion only enters the equation after a woman has exercised her reproductive rights, and has zero to do with protecting or attacking those rights…
2 Likes
Selective enforcement. Biden’s AG grilled by the House
2 Likes
Ah abortion. My thoughts became clear on it once i realized this.
Proaborties DECIDED first it should be allowed. Then grasp at anything n everything to justify their already made up minds.
Thats why their arguments are so illogical.
There really is only one moment that humans become humans. Conception. Everything else is just n attempt to allow a crack thats later to be used to support anytime abortion.
Ps the actual law in new york is anytime abortion. There is no actual argument on this what so ever. If she claims mental health reasons shes allowed to kill her baby. At any moment before birth n it seems shortly post birth as well according to some including a Virginia governor.
2 Likes
The only illogical thing is thinking that the arguments you DECIDED against are illogical.
Grasping at straws …
Its plainly illogical. Either its ok to kill all babies or it isnt. Anything in between is illogical. No ?
Thats what canada said. So the drs got together n decided what they would allow.
… any argument that decides its ok to kill a baby at one point and not another IS illogical.
That is why (conception begins life) killing babies isnt right thus … logical. Every single argument for killing babies is illogical. You know it deep down. Everybody knows it deep down. But there is a lot of power is fighting.
2 Likes
No, and already covered upthread.
Deep down I’m totally OK with my current opinion not matching your opinion, and I’m OK with the logic I followed to arrive at that opinion. I’ve reevaluated the logic many times. While you draw a hard line between black and white, I see a shade of grey between them. That shade is where the organism is not yet a protected member of our society, and the interests of the woman prevail all other interests.
1 Like
What’s illogical is claiming banning abortions is denying women their reproductive rights, when it’s quite obvious an abortion is only an option after a woman has already exercised her reproductive rights.
The whole pro-abortion argument is about regrets, not rights.
3 Likes
Equating sex with an exercise of reproductive rights is beyond ridiculous. It’s totally absurd.
Only if you dont understand where babies come from. The pregnancy may be an unintended consequence of your choices, but it’s still a very direct and forseeable consequence.
You seem to subtlely agree with my conclusion that the argument is about regrets rather than rights.
3 Likes
I do not agree with your conclusion. Saying that “abortion is only an option after a woman has already exercised her reproductive rights” implies that sex is the only reproductive right any woman has. It’s absurd.
There’s no implication, it [rather specifically] says that after a woman has reproduced, you cant argue that her reproductive rights are being denied. Abortion is pretty indisputably a day-after issue, only applicable to reproduction with the benefit of hindsight.
Unlike the arguments over what exactly constitutes life, there’s no denying that the process of creating that new life has in fact been initiated long before the time abortion is on the table. Thus, arbortion isnt about reproductive rights, it’s about being entitled to a mulligan.
I understand your position - you want to be entitled to the joys of sex without being stuck with the unwanted consequences. I want the joys of driving fast without being stuck with the consequences. After all I didnt intend to have an accident from driving fast any moreso than you intended to get pregnant from having sex. Why are you entitled to a free pass for your choices while I’m stuck bearing the full brunt of my choices?
3 Likes
CA punishing Walgreens for following other state laws
- Gov. Newsom: California Won’t Be Doing Business With Walgreens $WBA
https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/03/business/abortion-pills-mifepristone-walgreens-pharmacies/index.html
“We intend to be a certified pharmacy and will distribute Mifepristone only in those jurisdictions where it is legal and operationally feasible,” the company said in a statement.
1 Like
I’m with @glitch99 on this one. The right to have an abortion is the right to have an abortion. Calling it a reproductive right belonging to women doesn’t really mean anything, it’s just a rhetorical tactic. Just because mammals were created unfairly and one sex has to bear the brunt of propagation of the species doesn’t automatically give that mammal a natural right to end the life of its offspring. If abortion were a “reproductive right,” in a society like ours which has equal rights between men and women, the male that had just as much to do with the creation of that new life could drive his partner to the clinic and force her to undergo an abortion just as rightfully as the woman can do it by herself.
Are you still sure you want the ERA to pass AND call abortion a right?
2 Likes
CNN is trying to throw a legitimate business under the bus and it’s working because California is a whacko state. Imagine publishing the article “Kroger will not sell lottery tickets in 5 states” and then writing a dozen paragraphs to explain why a legitimate business in the 5 states that statutorily don’t have a lottery isn’t going to sell something that is illegal in that state. And then imagine being the governor of California and being so proud about your state lottery law that you slam a legitimate business for following the law in states that chose not to pass a lottery law.
3 Likes
Hmm … Please overlook by absurdity, and explain how else a woman can reproduce?
2 Likes
You’re claiming that “reproduction” is complete the moment an egg is fertilized. My understanding was that “reproduction” is a long process which begins at fertilization and ends with a birth.
2 Likes
Yeah, it does.
You took quite a leap in your next implication about equal rights, so I’m not even going to address it.
1 Like
I can even call that absurd. Just curious if you donated to the Casey Anthony defense fund. 