Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft has proposed asking voters whether they are in favor of allowing “dangerous and unregulated abortions until live birth.”
What a dumbass.
It’s a fun twist to see GOP campaign logic dumped on their head. Ten years ago the specter of abortion got the religious fundies to the polls with monotonous regularity. Now that Roe was struck down, abortion rights on the ballot leads to clear Democratic victories.
On the bright side, Republicans already tried fucking with the language in Ohio, and we all saw how well that went.
Give it up, you troglodytes. Nobody wants your anti-choice bullshit.
Nobody wants your anti-choice bullshit.
A majority of Americans favor regulations limiting access to abortion.
Citation needed.
64% to be precise, per Gallup.
You made that number up. I read the entire article, and not only does it not say that anywhere (and in fact, 64% isn’t a figure used for any metric), it says 49% support some form of restriction versus 47% who want expansive abortion rights.
The problem is “some form of restriction” is a terrible metric to categorize people. Does that mean FDA regulating mifepristone? Because 63% support having at least prescription access to it. Does it mean having better laws? Because 61% think the overturning of Dobbs was a bad decision. Does it mean preventing first trimester abortions? Because 69% support abortion access in the first trimester.
I don’t know where you got “64% support some form of restriction” from, but it certainly wasn’t your source.
My friend, are you illiterate? From the article:
51% say it should be legal “only under certain circumstances,” and 13% say it should be illegal in all circumstances.
Now add them and tell me what you get…
The 47% and 49% figures that you’re reading are made from a subdivision of that 51% “certain circumstances” category. Like, it says that right above those figures. To that end, that 47% doesn’t mean no abortion restrictions – it means “legal in all or most cases.”
That’s not how this works. That’s not how any of this works.
now do gun regulation
Too bad Republicans are incapable of controlling themselves, and want to completely ban abortions – either explicitly or implicitly (6 week bans, when you can only just start to detect pregnancy). That majority you describe wants limitations to a legally accessible procedure.
I’m afraid Republicans have turned this into a debate of if abortion should be legal at all, not if it should have restrictions. And when you insist that a young girl, barely a teenager, gives birth to an incest baby? Kinda hard to think Republicans want any exceptions.
So yeah, Republicans are anti choice, and a majority of Americans don’t like that bullshit, as shown in the article that your shared.
This argument makes zero sense. Wouldn’t a legal abortion tend to have more regulation then an illegal abortion, or for those in the know a back ally abortion? And the gall to back it up with intention to be the clearest explanation on the ballot, what a douche nozzle.
The problem is that they don’t want abortions to be safe, rare, and legal. They want abortions to be non-existent. If women need to go to back alleys where some guy with a hanger will perform a dangerous abortion on them, then “that’s their punishment for having sex.”
They ignore that some women get abortions after being raped - when they literally had no choice in sex occuring. (Or, they blame the woman for the rape ala “she shouldn’t have been drinking and shouldn’t have worn that dress, it’s all her fault.”) They also ignore that some women WANT to have the baby, but things go wrong during the pregnancy and the choices are either abortion or carry a dead/dying fetus inside them until they both die.
The details don’t matter. All that matters is that they control women’s lives (and likely deaths).
when dark comedy just isn’t funny
Every word uttered by a conservative is deception or manipulation. Every word.
Biden would be the same if he could actually string together a comprehensible sentence.
Bootlicker
Based on their other comments, you nailed it.
Nah I just think having a dementia patient in office is kinda mid
Yeah you better vote for trump who says nothing but incoherent word salad.
Have you watched a Biden speech, lmfao.
Have you?
Yep. And if you can’t tell an ocean of a difference between him (who is perfectly coherent) and Trump (who is completely incoherent), you may need to check if your own mental faculties are all there.
Why’d they have to put a picture of him in the article?
I’m trying to eat here.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Missouri lawmakers have already banned abortion except in cases of medical emergency, but proponents of broader access to the procedure are seeking to put a question about it directly before voters next year.
Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft has proposed asking voters whether they are in favor of allowing “dangerous and unregulated abortions until live birth.”
Ashcroft, who is running for governor in 2024, said his wording “fairly and accurately reflects the scope and magnitude” of each of the six proposed abortion rights ballot measures.
“My responsibility as secretary of state is to make sure the people of Missouri have ballot language that they can understand and trust,” Ashcroft said in a news release.
Earlier this month, Ohio voters approved a constitutional amendment that ensures access to abortion and other forms of reproductive health care.
There are efforts to protect or expand access in Arizona, Florida, Nevada and South Dakota; and to restrict it in Iowa, Nebraska and Pennsylvania.
The original article contains 581 words, the summary contains 159 words. Saved 73%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
So this would allow safe, regulated abortions and also allow dangerous, unregulated abortions after live birth. That’s a little extreme for me. I can’t support post-birth abortions.
I also hate post-birth abortions which is why I don’t like people shooting up my kid’s school.
^ Found the dumbass who didn’t even read the article and has zero understanding of how abortions work.
I think it was a not especially good attempt at a joke.
Not even a joke so much as a literal interpretation of the proposed law. It only bans unsafe and unregulated abortions, and only up to the point of live birth. If it became a law with that language, how is that going to be interpreted by the courts? This attempt to inject partisan language cuts any actual meaning from the law. He’s trying so hard to manipulate the vote that the resultant law doesn’t even do what he wants it to. Irony is the humor here.
allow dangerous, unregulated abortions after live birth
This is not a thing that exists.
I’m shocked to learn this!
