Última edición:
US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians
- Iniciador del tema SeniorFuckFace
- Fecha de inicio
-
🚨 DDoS attack. Tor is stable: https://kiwifarmsaaf4t2h7gc3dfc5ojhmqruw2nit3uejrpiagrxeuxiyxcyd.onion/.
🔎 Please read my article, How to Dox Anyone: A Liz Fong-Jones Story. (Xitter), (Substack). -
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Estado
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
On that issue, Issue 2 in Ohio is pot legalization, and guess what's tracking almost 1-to-1 with Issue 1 in Ohio? Edit: For proof. Guess the Ohio Dems finally decided to stop being mouthbreathing dumbfucks. I'm guessing they had outside help.
Kentucky fucking loves the Beshears. They're all affable morons, so there's that.
- Registrado
- 16 de Oct, 2020
Abortion is a whirlwind topic. It's to the left a solid, thing that they can say 'you see??. Most women want abortion, that's just a fact. Abortion drives women to the polls. Democrats win. The dumb right loses. Pikachu shocked.
And ETA. Weed, dumb, idiots, stupid, and so on. Just modern life.
And ETA. Weed, dumb, idiots, stupid, and so on. Just modern life.
- Registrado
- 12 de Abr, 2021
If that is the actual wording, then all it takes to make abortion illegal again is a judge ruling that abortion is a reproductive decision that affects both the mother's and the baby's bodies and since the baby can not consent, then the amendment actually bans abortion instead of protecting it because the baby did not consent to a reproductive decision affecting their body.
The amendment is meaningless for all but the most extreme pro-lifers though as it contains this text:
I bet the state legislature will ban abortion after fetal viability and I suspect they'll also define exactly what "necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health" means.
This exact sort of thing is why most laws have pages of definitions, but the only terms the amendment defines are "fetal viability" and "state".
Article I, Section 22. The Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety
A. Every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to decisions on:1. contraception;
2. fertility treatment;
3. continuing one’s own pregnancy;
4. miscarriage care; and
5. abortion.
B. The State shall not, directly or indirectly, burden, penalize, prohibit, interfere with, or discriminate against either:
1. An individual's voluntary exercise of this right or
2. A person or entity that assists an individual exercising this right,
unless the State demonstrates that it is using the least restrictive means to advance the individual's health in accordance with widely accepted and evidence-based standards of care.
However, abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability. But in no case may such an abortion be prohibited if in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health.
C. As used in this Section:
1. “Fetal viability” means “the point in a pregnancy when, in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient's treating physician, the fetus has a significant likelihood of survival outside the uterus with reasonable measures. This is determined on a case-by-case basis.”
2. “State” includes any governmental entity and any political subdivision.
D. This Section is self-executing
Última edición:
Potatoherder
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 28 de Jun, 2020
I'd like to remind everyone what we missed out by not getting more republicans elected. Only the most important issues are being resolved.
- Registrado
- 23 de Dic, 2022
We know why a 10 point red state voted in that amendment then.
Abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability...
At this point "fetal viability" is 5 months
babies born at 6 moths have a 70% survival rate
- Registrado
- 18 de Jun, 2019
voting Dem for my local representative now
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
I would not be surprised to see the state push back against it, but we'll see, Ohio judges are a mixed bag.\
All the advertising in support of Issue 1 was framed as "Get government out of your reproductive choices," or "It's just Roe v. Wade." So horseshit, but smarter horseshit. So it's definitely out of state influence.
- Registrado
- 3 de Jul, 2021
Abortion is dumb.
- Registrado
- 17 de Ago, 2018
I'm not upset that abortion is an issue regarding Republicans, just that it's the ONLY issue they can consistently push to their base. If you're running, the only thing you should excise towards the people are taxes. You're taking away ONE thing, what are you adding in place of it for the benefit of your citizens.
Personally, I'd have it focused more on the migrant crisis, crime rate and a parent's right to be involved in their child's education. Abortion is a non-issue for me given the current state of this country's ever growing issues.
- Registrado
- 16 de Oct, 2020
I've seen Republicans and the right actually do what they said they'd do. Make it state rights thing and just bitch if they lose at that level.
I see the women act like it's the end of the world, along with banning school children seeing gay porn in school libraries as the big social things now.
ETA Abortion isn't much of an issue to me, I think it's bad, and should be a state thing, but those women..
Illegals, crime, and the economy like you said, those are the main issues that the Democrats have no answers for at all except to make them worse.
- Registrado
- 22 de Nov, 2021
From a pragmatic standpoint after looking at the data from Ohio, if you're a Republican just assume abortion is a losing issue if you have a number of these factors:
1. Mostly young population, especially a college educated one and if there are more young women then men.
2. Lack of Born-Again or Evangelical Christians.
3. Somewhat politically significant in size minority population.
4. Far larger urban voter base then rural ones.
5. People generally aren't married.
If you're a pro-life politician and don't support pro-abortion just aim to be discrete because it may just anger single issue voters to take action if you're loud about the topic. Minimize effects from its legalization as much as possible as well. Frankly on a state level if you're outside the Bible Belt restrictions on aborting may not last all that long if there are citizen-initiated constitutional amendments involved. It seems also that more Republicans could be in favor of the issue then Democrats are against it relatively speaking. Young people may potentially always support legalization of it if liberal educational control is maintained outright in schools and universities.
1. Mostly young population, especially a college educated one and if there are more young women then men.
2. Lack of Born-Again or Evangelical Christians.
3. Somewhat politically significant in size minority population.
4. Far larger urban voter base then rural ones.
5. People generally aren't married.
If you're a pro-life politician and don't support pro-abortion just aim to be discrete because it may just anger single issue voters to take action if you're loud about the topic. Minimize effects from its legalization as much as possible as well. Frankly on a state level if you're outside the Bible Belt restrictions on aborting may not last all that long if there are citizen-initiated constitutional amendments involved. It seems also that more Republicans could be in favor of the issue then Democrats are against it relatively speaking. Young people may potentially always support legalization of it if liberal educational control is maintained outright in schools and universities.
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
Ohio's a weird one, we're not so much a Red state so much as we're a Purple state where the majority of Dems are blue-collar rust belters or their immediate families. It's a Trump state more than a Red state, but it doesn't hurt that the state Dems are massively incompetent in general.
MrJokerRager
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 2 de Nov, 2019
Talib is a pussy ass bitch whose district is majority nigger. She panders to niggers to get her seat.
And doesn't stand up for my Hummus homies.
And just say it.
Hummus is better than juice.
Lurch won an election by being retarded literally.
He can handle screeching imbeciles who will vote for him anyways in the next election.
- Registrado
- 23 de Dic, 2022
Or maybe savvy pro-life voters saw that it actually enshrines the ability to BAN abortion if the fetus is viable, and voted for it.
Current 50% success rate is about 5 months.
In the clinton era it was more like 6.5
By 2050 it will be down to 4.
Now they can pass a bill that defines "fetal viability" as empirically defined by the data saying when a baby has 50% survival chance if delivered.
Then, with every advancement in neo-natal care that ban gets stricter and stricter.
I'm extremely happy with an amendment that is worded this way.
It enshrines a compromise and removes abortion from the table in future elections, fucking democrats permanently from now on while baby killers still go to jail.
Possibilities include the state
1 - instituting licensing criteria which include an objective measure of fetal viability, set by an appointed board of physicians, that, if violated by a physician, causes them to lose their license.
2 - establishing a state medical board comprised of appointed physicians which are legally defined as the "treating physician" for all citizens of the state.
Última edición:
Uranus Pink
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 6 de Mar, 2019
Were Kentuckians all affable morons before or after they started or stopped fucking horses?
MrJokerRager
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 2 de Nov, 2019
After October 7th, its pretty clear both parties don't give a rowdy poopy about this nation.
Also this news is topkek as well.
Republicans push separate packages.
Democrats want them all combined.
- Registrado
- 25 de Jul, 2019
If soft pro-lifers voted for it, it's much more reasonable to assume they think viability is earlier... And the language is "significant possibility" Which is a literal judgement call on the doctor's part, meaning activist doctors would just say a fetus is non-viable well past the point of reasonability. Probably not 9 months, but certainly some will push past that 50% mark, especially if the pregnancy is anything but perfect.
- Registrado
- 30 de Sep, 2020
Might be a bit more interesting this time around, considering that Biden was a spring chicken in 2020, compared to where he is now/will be by that time.
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
Given that they keep voting for the Beshears? I don't think they've ever stopped being affable morons, God love them.
Useful_Mistake
Fire Nation sympathizer
Miembro del personal
Global Moderator
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 4 de Mayo, 2020
“Special counsel prosecutors said Monday they plan to show at trial that Donald Trump lied repeatedly about the results of the 2020 election as part of a conspiracy to subvert the legitimate results. But they also said they don’t need to prove whether Trump believed he lost the race.”
“The Justice Department weighed in on the debate for the first time, saying that what they need to prove is not that Trump believed the “Big Lie” of the election being stolen but that he knowingly spread associated lies in a criminal scheme to stay in power.”
I wouldn’t recommend reading this (further) if you don’t want to get MATI
“The Justice Department weighed in on the debate for the first time, saying that what they need to prove is not that Trump believed the “Big Lie” of the election being stolen but that he knowingly spread associated lies in a criminal scheme to stay in power.”
I wouldn’t recommend reading this (further) if you don’t want to get MATI
- Estado