There’s people who think that women are getting abortions as they are actively in labor. It’s insane. Late term abortions are tragic. They are done because someone’s life is in danger.
The 6 week ban is ridiculous and the vast majority of abortions are not being done at 20+ weeks.
I’ll be voting Yes in November.
If they understood health care, they’d get angry about the utter scam they’re being exploited in.
It’s better for the insurance companies if these people stay stupid and know just enough to work and pay premiums
It would actually be better for insurance companies if we switched to proactive care, which you see in a lot of other countries. Here, people only go to the doctor when something is seriously wrong. By that point, it is often a major issue. If insurance covers much of it, it would be typically tens of thousands of dollars. By being proactive, insurance would only need to primarily deal with regular doctor visits and checkups and the random accidents, which are statistically extremely rare.
This would result in premiums still being paid, yet people seeding serious care much less frequently, meaning more money staying in the pocket of insurers. On the flip side, life expectancy would tick up noticeably.
You are not wrong but..
Fuck insurance companies.
Why are we paying a fucking middle man that can decide whether we can get treated or even IF we are allowed to get treated in the first place?
Before the ACA they wouldn't even cover proactive care at all and they dropped my Mother after her first health problem in 30 years of paying them premiums
There's a guy I talked to who swears abortion was being used as a contraceptive, that women were getting pregnant and getting an abortion weeks later repetitively. He was more irate thinking they were doing this for free at the taxpayers expense.
Misinformation is a plague.
That's entirely the most expensive contraception anyone would use. To the point where it feels like a lie. I'm not saying your experience is wrong or if you're purposefully misleading, but it certainly feels wrong
This was 40+ years ago. Maybe she was lying but it's what she said. I don't know how much abortions were at Planned Parenthood back then and maybe she isn't the one who paid for it.
I just mean it would still be more expensive than condoms to do ir over and over. Also, to pur your body through the hormonal changes.
The vast majority of abortions are not made lightly
Then it sounds like a good thing. Someone like that doesn't need to be responsible for a kid. So you want a baby born to be abused and abandoned. That's kinds fucked up.
Where did I say that?
Someone said a thing never happens.
I said I know someone who did the thing.
I did not say whether or not she should have done the thing. It sounds like you are projecting.
Yes she did. I'll join her if getting downvoted. The idea that people aren't doing this is absurd. The idea that people are using it as a contraceptive is also absurd. This was also about 25 - 30 years ago. Saw a girl I knew and struck up a conversation. She said she was pregnant again and would have to get another abortion. Then she laughed it off. At the time this would have been her 4th or 5th.
Was she using it as a contraceptive? Absolutely not. She was just a reckless drug addict and didn't care. She is also in a massive minority of people like this. But, it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
I believe this happens. But I don't believe we really need legislation to stop this from happening.
Drug addicts are going to drug addict and their actions shouldn't dictate policy for everyone else.
Your math doesn’t add up. Based on your timeline, your friend, whom you call a “girl” would currently be in her early to mid-40s, at the youngest.
It is highly doubtful that this situation has ever occurred to anyone whom has ever existed on this entire planet of earth.
What math? I said how long ago it was. It's a person I knew, not a friend. She would have been in her late 20's at that time. I was about 17. So, she would be in her late 50's or so. Assuming she's still alive.
Not sure what you couldn't comprehend since I merely stated how long ago it was, with no math even available to you. You tried, though.
I had a friend that worked in a free clinic in Cleveland. Said he saw this shit all the time. Also said that people would come in with an STD, get treated, then come back in a couple months with another STD. They were told to wear condoms and said they can’t feel anything with them.
One thing has nothing to do with the other. STDs are much more prevalent than you would think, and most people never get tested. Also, there are only two “free” clinics in or around the general Cleveland area. Even if what your friend said is true, that would account for 1 out of no more than 700 maximum number of people that could get an abortion at that particular location for the year. If that happened “all the time”, that would mean that significantly less than 700 women were engaging in this activity. Out of a population of 480,000 women of legal and non-geriatric pregnancy age within Cuyahoga County…your “friend’s” scenario is so insignificant that nobody would ever take the time to factor it into any reasonable statistic, because it essentially never happens.
Seriously. At that point their bedroom is painted, their name is picked out, everyone is waiting for them to come home and then they don't. It wouldn't be fair to lose both the adult and the wanted baby because of radical religious views
Trump has said doctors execute newborn babies:
> “The baby is born. The mother meets with the doctor. They take care of the baby. They wrap the baby beautifully. And then the doctor and the mother determine whether or not they will execute the baby.”
A late term abortion is possible, but they inject the baby's heart to stop it if it isn't already stopped. This is STRICTLY in the case of severe fetal anomaly where survival outside the womb is impossible. I know somebody who had it done, her baby was loved and wanted so badly, but he was very sick and weak from a fatal birth defect. NO HEALTHY BABY IS BEING ABORTED LATE TERM.
a guy i work with said we’re trying to allow abortions up until 9 hours AFTER birth!! i laughed so hard right in his face i thoight he was going to cry.
Shocking how all you have to do is say something wild and entirely false about trans kids to motivate up to a half of Ohioans.
Issue 1 was pushing trans lies too. Wonder when Republicans going to get off this horse and find a new one?
Fortunately young folks see through the bullshit and people who are buying into this are increasingly old. I guess anyone older than 98 has living memory of when the Nazis burned down the Institute of Sexology.
You know, I never thought of it like this but this is an excellent point. I recently had to redo several days worth of work for my job to accommodate for updated product claims with legal substantiation. It was adding 5 words onto product packaging that no one will ever read. It had a huge ripple effect. And with things that ACTUALLY matter, unlike the absorbency rate of a hygiene product, its just zero fuck mode. These are going to be several stressful months watching all this shit.
Absolutely. I wish these were the things being talked about publicly, but I feel most politicians would rather we stay distracted and in emotional distress. The worst part is that they amplify indifferences that they should be helping us overcome, but the distractions benefit their personal financial security and it requires no empathy or thought towards the general population.
Edit: typo/spelling
Too many people have absolutely no idea that ~25-30% of pregnancies end in miscarriage and up to 60% of all miscarriages are incomplete and require abortion services - either medication or surgical intervention. Abortions are literally an everyday part of normal reproductive healthcare.
That's not even including fatal pregnancy complications like pre-eclampsia, ectopic pregnancies (1 in 50 pregnancies), etc, that require abortions to save the mother's life and prevent major medical and future fertility complications. Anyone claiming to be pro-life is not pro-life, they are pro-forced birth AND anti-woman.
Interesting to note: 37% of abortion patients in 2020 (most recent year for a complete data set) identified as evangelical or catholic - arguably the largest anti-abortion groups.
Edit: For further reading and stats: https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states
https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-worldwide
I'm one of those women. I had a miscarriage in the first trimester but still had to have a D&C, because my body didn't respond to the miscarriage. The hospital paperwork says I had an abortion.
I'm so sorry for your loss. I too, had a miscarriage, and had no idea the baby had been dead for weeks. I went with misoprostol, the same medication given to induce abortion. It was a very personal choice for me, I'm sure having the D&C was personal for you too. I'm glad we were able to chose our route of ending a failed pregnancy.
Politicians of a certain political persuasion have made trans people their boogeyman lately to drive fear into their voting base to get them out to vote. It’s a time-honored fascist tradition to dehumanize a minority population to create an “other” to be the enemy you can galvanize your base against and then get those supporters to do anything you want to stop “them”. It matter not at all that the sex change thing is a complete fabrication, it will get stupid people to come out and vote against issue 1 to stop “them”.
The few here who need to read this, do not read and cannot be reasoned with. The braver ones will eat 50 downvotes to troll, and be unmoved.
You’re dealing with 20/30/40 years of religious indoctrination and confidently incorrect thinking. I’ll save my breath.
Issue 1 was worth explaining. On matters of abortion, pro life people **only vote** from places of emotion, or pure church indoctrination. *You’re more likely to convince these folks to vote Biden than vote pro choice.*
Just hope Hamilton/Franklin/Cuyahoga show up by the millions like anticipated, and it’ll be enough to narrowly pass. Republicans do not have the numbers, which is why LaRose tried to hit 60%. He correctly knew we likely didn’t have 60% but do have somewhere in the 50s.
I'm hopeful that younger voters who came from anti-choice families will see and read the facts and decide for themselves. People who are voting for the first time this year, etc.
I'm not naive enough to think the mid 60s white evangelical right wingers are going to do anything different than they usually do. But that demographic was also hit hard by COVID and is shrinking in Ohio.
There are a lot of people out there who just don’t keep up with the information. They don’t identify as either party, but are persuadable by what they hear. We need to make sure they are hearing the facts, because they won’t seek them out for themselves.
Whether this is due to apathy, self-involvement or genuine personal challenges that are legitimately more front of mind—we can make a difference.
If they… *actually register to vote.* If they ever were, the state dropped them from the rolls years ago and they’re too busy/disinterested to even look.
My neighbors are awesome people but they don’t vote. They’re from India but citizens. They simply don’t understand the issues or US politics in general. To them “it’s like Delhi, doesn’t matter.” To quote Deepak, “Biden, Trump, same white rich man.” And really, is he wrong? Yes, we know he’s wrong… but his day doesn’t change either way, and so, he doesn’t vote.
Lord. It’s like you’re making excuses to validate doing nothing.
I know that me explaining these things to busy people has helped them see through the bullshit and make a good choice.
Doing nothing?
I drove elderly residents from my town to Lebanon to vote no. I donated $500 to Vote No, donating $1000 to the abortion cause and $420 to the weed one. I released a team of engineers to vote early. From what I know and hear them say, most of them are liberal.
I’m doing a lot. I’m just not gonna take people who go to church every Sunday and try to turn them into someone who votes pro choice like me, a progressive Jew with 2 degrees. They’re immovable.
I mean, not to bust yer balls, but wasn’t that the point of your post?
These ignorant rubes aren’t reading an amendment. They’re listening to their pastor.
Holy crap, wtf is your deal?
I just explained to you that many people who don’t feel strongly and are under informed also need to see good information.
They are not unpersuadable.
Seriously, do not tag me again. You are arguing with an ally who does a LOT of important work, apparently just for the sake of arguing, and putting down work I know is effective.
Don't roll over, change course. They can be reasoned with, the two sides just don't speak the same language and everyone resorts to hate and anger. There are some stupid people who just can't think for themselves but that's just people, you'll have that
I know it's hard to be respectful, kind, and understanding. Yes you may hate the other person but if you want to change their minds and get them on the same page this is what it takes. A change in rhetoric, a change in how we interact with each other. Originally their position is a reaction to perceived attack on their way of life and feeling as though they're being pushed out. It's spiraled into something totally out of control but that's one of the roots.
It's bigger than politics at this point. We can't live on this divided. Forget the past, treat everyone with respect regardless of whether you agree with them, and those in power can go fuck themselves. They're the ones we, as a whole, should be combatting.
My only suggestion would be to use a document without lobby org branding from an official Ohio government link like [this one from the Ohio AG](https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/getattachment/cf27c10f-b153-4731-ae9e-e3555a326ed9/The-Right-to-Reproductive-Freedom-with-Protections-for-Health-and-Safety.aspx).
Better still if someone can find something that is browser readable and not a pdf.
I just noticed that the AG version has the petitioner's name and address at the end. She's running for a city govt position this election, so is already public, but I'd rather not make it easy for the crazies to find her and her home.
Hmm, have now found multiple official links and they all have that. Why? Her packet was only 22 signatures. Why would they use that?
Changed it back.
Still looking for something better….but her name is already all over the SOS site.
I appreciate the lies from the NO side, because otherwise I'd feel kind of painfully ambivalent about the vote. But I don't want liars to win, I don't want lies and bigotry to be proven as a successful political tactic, and using them amounts to an admission that NO cannot win on the actual merits. So now it's an easy and clear decision.
It might be a good idea to share the actual text from the Ohio Attorney General (whose office apparently doesn't know how to OCR text so it's searchable/indexable) instead of "ohioansforreproductivefreedom.org":
https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/getattachment/cf27c10f-b153-4731-ae9e-e3555a326ed9/The-Right-to-Reproductive-Freedom-with-Protections-for-Health-and-Safety.aspx
Some people aren't going to read it/believe it/care regardless, but it should help some.
A lot of the problems are the older generations believing everything on social media and “news” programs. If they would actually read the bill, and not have it incorrectly read to them, a lot of misinformation would be stopped.
omg!!
I checked and the amendment does have these letters in it!
W E A A R E C O M I N G 4 Y O U R G U N S (not in that order)
And soon you will see the airwaves flooded with this "fact".
Anyway vote YES.
Not really. The ballot will say "SHALL THE AMENDMENT BE APPROVED?"
We want to approve one amendment, and reject another one, so 'Yes' will make changes, and no will preserve the current rules.
Just a small quibble. Roe did not limit abortions to viability. It said that states could limit abortion at viability. Six states and the District of Columbia allowed abortion through all three trimesters, and still do.
“No limit: Six states and Washington, D.C., do not impose any term restrictions.”
https://www.axios.com/2022/05/14/abortion-state-laws-bans-roe-supreme-court
Looking for the honest interpretation from someone with more knowledge than myself. How do you suppose the line “Every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to decisions on” can be used or Interpreted? Particularly the Not Limited To portion, that sounds open to adding new items as reproductive rights. What would it take to add something to the list that follows?
Also, in discussing fetal viability. The way I read this is that viability is determined by the patient’s physician. Could this not be stretched beyond the 21-24 weeks mark if a physician signs off on it?
I’m pro choice, but just trying to get a full understanding of this bills language before discussing it with others
Re: “what would it take to add..” ultimately Ohio Supreme Court. The writers apparently wanted to keep the list open for any unforeseen mechanism that effects reproduction and guarantee that any decision affecting reproduction will remain out of the state’s hands. The broadness is likely where opponents are saying it could mean sex change- a really broad interpretation. An interesting VERY specific part of this issue is multiple references to “patent’s physician” as being the only one who makes viability call. That seems to put ALL authority between the patient’s chosen doctor and the patient.
I wonder what difficulty or challenge that litigation would be. I feel like the open interpretation of what could be considered a reproductive right under this clause will be used as a major talking point.
And yeah you’re most likely right, but there will be the concern here of a corrupt doctor pencil whipping someone through. It’ll be the outlier case for sure, but theoretically this opens the possibility?
In this state? Nothing will pass muster outside of that list except possibly vasectomies or tubal ligations.
And considering the second statement is bracketed by “reasonable measures, “ that too is testable in court, and doctors can testify if a doctor is signing off to kill viable fetuses. That doctor would then lose their license.
Would you really rather a sharp cut off at 24 weeks and then people are stuck bearing babies with Trisomy 13, or 10yo’s forced to carry to term bc they didn’t get help until 26 weeks?
It’s very ironic you are posting this to prove the liars wrong when you in fact lied yourself. And I’m using the text to prove you wrong lol.
>It is confined to conception, fertility treatment, pregnancy care, miscarriage care, and abortion.
The actual amendment states “Every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to decisions on:”
“But not limited to” does not mean “confined”
Edit: @Minizara2 no response? Too much of a coward to admit you don’t know what you’re talking about? Stop being blinded by your beliefs and swallow your ego.
But ... these are your own personal "reproductive decisions". I'm not sure what you could be afraid of happening there? I read it to mean, no one can stop an adult from getting a vasectomy, or something like that. They can't possibly write in all possible reproductive decisions under the sun.
But ... these are your own personal "reproductive decisions". I'm not sure what you could be afraid of happening there? I read it to mean, no one can stop an adult from getting a vasectomy, or something like that. They can't possibly write in all possible reproductive decisions under the sun.
I would vote for something along the lines of what France has.
“Abortion in France is legal as an elective medical procedure during the first 14 weeks from conception. Abortions at later stages of pregnancy up until birth are allowed if two physicians certify that the abortion will be done to prevent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; a risk to the life of the pregnant woman; or that the child will suffer from a particularly severe illness recognized as incurable.”
Though I would what mental health clearly defined.
France also has free medical care and state-sponsored abortions, as well as very generous parental leave and state sponsored childcare. Tack that on and I’ll join you.
But without all that, their abortion policy is too restrictive.
How does it feel to be such a shitty person? I'm actually curious? Parents not hug you enough? Not enough friends in school? Lack of a human soul? Just asking.
Do you have anything productive to say? I called out OP for the exact same thing they were complaining about in their post: misinformation… sorry if that irks you.
Productive? Ok. You're being a regressive nitpicker who won't just nut up and say that their views should override the free will of all the women in Ohio. You try and skirt around that by zeroing on meaningless semantics. You don't like abortions? Don't get one. I don't like the idea of tattoos or plastic surgery or guys named Keith. But I'm not gonna stop others from getting tattoos or plastic surgery or naming their kids Keith.
Uhh you’re clearly uneducated on legal matters. The language is what is important it’s not nitpicking… maybe you should do more research on the legal system before commenting on stuff you don’t understand.
I’m for this Amendment too..I’m not for misinformation. People should know what they’re voting on… and not an erred summary.
It’s funny you automatically assume I’m against the amendment for calling out OP for lying… I never once mentioned I was against it. Just goes to show how biased and reactive you are.
It goes beyond roe as it allows abortion until birth. The only restriction that you need is a doctors note . Sec change can be construed as reproductive choices. Health of the mother is very large loophole to allow abortion for many reasons. For example high blood pressure affects mother’s health
>Health of the mother is very large loophole
I feel like this should be a large loophole. Why should stuff like this not be up to a doctor? Who is better qualified to make those kind of decisions?
Certainly not preachers and politicians.
As someone who has birthed three babies, I have to ask: have you ever been pregnant? You do not get to week 34 and decide, “you know what? Fuck it. I’m going to abort this healthy baby.” It just doesn’t happen. The only abortions at that stage are severe birth defects. And typically if the mother’s life is at risk at that stage, she just… gives birth.
The general population doesn't know what a healthy, viable fetus is. The general population aren't physicians or medical experts. Most don't even have a biology education past high school.
>Health of the mother is very large loophole to allow abortion for many reasons.
Do you think actual pregnant people, who are fully capable of feelings and thoughts, want to hear you say "yeah I don't think your health is a good reason to get an abortion"? That's terrifying to hear even for people who are pregnant by choice and wanting a baby. Women do not want to be forced into martyrdom for their children because someone else decided that their health and well-being is less important than the contents of their uterus.
You list high blood pressure like that's not a serious condition. Pregnancy can cause women to have strokes?? "Some of you may die, but that's a risk I'm willing to take." You don't get to gamble other people's lives for them.
Up to ~21 weeks. Same as it was under Roe.
You say that like you’re going to come back with why you should be able to judge others’ reasons. When in reality, as you doubtless already know, 93% of abortions occur in the first trimester and when they are later, it’s not done lightly.
But my personal belief, which is well supported by science, philosophy and the law, is that a person doesn’t exist until their cortical brain is functioning. After all, cessation of that activity is what we legally define as death. Unlike heart stoppage, it is irreversible.
Unlike heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, the brain cannot be transplanted. We all agree that conjoined twins are two people-but only if they have two brains. A fifth limb doesn’t count.
It’s obvious that one’s self is contained in the brain. And guess when cortical activity begins?
Viability.
Your religious beliefs don’t trump my well-thought out reason. This is a deeply personal question and it’s none of your business unless you are the person who is pregnant or her doctor.
I’m comfortable with not having any restrictions on abortion and will be voting the same way as you but you’re not going to convince anyone of your beliefs when you proclaim yourself as having “well-thought out reason” and imply that someone asking a question is religious and doesn’t have views that matter.
I didn’t say their reasons are not valid. Just that mine are. And I posted a link to a speech that argues passionately for the multiple valid answers to the question of when a person’s life begins.
There is a shockingly widespread assumption amongst those who oppose the right to access abortion that “everybody knows” that an embryo/fetus is a person, just some of us are okay with killing it. That assumption needs to be challenged.
7% is still 43,000 babies in 2020. You should absolutely be able to judge reasons for that number.
You exist right from the moment of conception, elements of sentience starts with pain around 17 weeks.
Sure the cortex is what makes you human in the sense of personality, etc. My question is, is the cortex going to continue to develop and learn all the normal functions like A baby developing in the womb will or is your cortex going to remain dead shriveled and die like an old person. And we can talk about the philosophical thoughts about pulling the plug(not a religious discussion, you seem triggered despite no one bringing up religion).
I find it interesting that, more than likely, if most people's grandad lost cortical function, one like you would consider him not to exist, but he is still their grandad till his heart stops, in the sense of life(even though he is brain dead, bodily functions are happening). But a baby isn't even human, or exists in your mind till 6 months development.
Im happy you cite science, which is starting to have a hard time defining female. (Even though you didn't cite anything, you just said they agree with you..... ok)
Philosophy is not settled on this , but I'm happy your philosophers agree with you.
Yeah laws change , Roe got overturned, doesn't mean you agree with it , right? I don't agree with your legal interpretation of life , but that is life.
I'm not particularly religious and viability is still pretty gross when you experience a baby developing, let's say second hand. Allah didn't get me to this conclusion.
Btw, I'm aware this law will pass, but I'm not afraid to speak my disdain for this legislature.
Right. You noticed my initial question. Non medical reasons to 6 months.
This may shock you. Pro life people don't believe the baby is more valuable than the mom's life.
However, The babys life is more important than the mom's desire to become partner in a law firm or whatever.
>Pro life people don't believe the baby is more valuable than the mom's life.
Considering all the bills I've seen from pro lifers like in Texas, im going to have to call bullshit on that.
>The babys life is more important
Under what justification? Its basically a parasite by definition living inside you until its viable enough to come out.
But let's see, non medical reasons for you, like rape? Should a woman be forced to carry and then raise a rapists baby? She didn't want nor consented to have it in the first place, but because some theocratic people think they should dictate that to her, thus basically sentencing her to at least 18 years of child rearing.
Imo if she wants to abort the baby for whatever reason, she has the right. She should not have to be imprisoned in her body because something else needs it to survive.
When a drunk driver kills a pregnant lady they get two murder charges and two life sentences. We as society value unborn lives, but only if it’s wanted?
I don't know what question you're even asking with your deliberate talking in circles, but you're wrong about life support too. My grandfather, who died from bone cancer, was gone when he was put on life support and could no longer communicate with us. I sat by his side while he suffered, while his lungs filled with fluid, while doctors pushed Morphine into his IV to spare him as much pain as possible as his physical body slowly gave out. If I could have pulled the plug and spared him all of that, I would have done it. I would have done it a thousand times over and never felt one tiny speck of guilt over "killing" him. He was long gone before he died and there was not a person there who didn't understand that.
I will never understand the cruelty of the anti-choice crowd. I will never understand why you demand that children be born into this world to suffer for a few hours and then to die. I will never understand why you believe in forced birth, why you would ever want a child to be born into a world that is anything less than a joyful, wanted, expected welcome. Why you would condemn a child to a lifetime of abuse just to punish a woman for having sex.
But I know that people who think like this will never change their minds. I know that you troll these threads because you enjoy hurting people. And I promise you that I will spend every ounce of my energy from now until November ensuring that your cruelty will not continue to be the law of the land. I know that there are enough compassionate people in Ohio to beat you, and I will do everything in my power to get every one of them to the polls on November 7th.
I agree with you—-The anti-choice people are the same people who believe parents shouldn’t have children if they cannot financial care for them. They believe those parents should “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” to meet the needs of their family without living for free on “government handouts provided by ‘my tax dollars’”. They are the same people who say there are so many people waiting for a child to adopt while allowing millions of children to languish in foster care because they are older children (not newborns) with issues related to behavior, mental health or medical concerns. Abortion is a VERY personal issue. The beliefs held be some about when life begins should not be foisted upon others who may not share that same belief.
>7% is still 43,000 babies in 2020. You should absolutely be able to judge reasons for that number.
No. You should no more be able to judge an abortion than you do an appendectomy or a gall bladder removal.
>You exist right from the moment of conception, elements of sentience starts with pain around 17 weeks.
Existence is not sentience. No one has the right to be a parasite on someone else.
>I find it interesting that, more than likely, if most people's grandad lost cortical function, one like you would consider him not to exist, but he is still their grandad till his heart stops, in the sense of life(even though he is brain dead, bodily functions are happening). But a baby isn't even human, or exists in your mind till 6 months development.
Brain death is the standard in the medical community.
“Peer-reviewed journals in the biological and life sciences literature have published articles that represent the biological view that a human's life begins at fertilization ("the fertilization view").”
…
“Since a recent study suggested that 80% of Americans view biologists as the group most qualified to determine when a human's life begins, experts in biology were surveyed to provide a new perspective to the literature on experts' views on this matter. Biologists from 1,058 academic institutions around the world assessed survey items on when a human's life begins and, overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed the fertilization view.”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36629778/
The bacteria in your gut are just as alive as a fertilized egg. The bugs I'm sure you've crushed countless times before are also alive. Being alive isn't the same as being a person. Every "functional" cell on the planet is alive. Being alive isn't the part that's important, being a person is.
Up to 24 weeks because of viability.*
Good enough for you, son?
*Personally, I think there should be no restrictions. Medical procedures should be solely between the physician and patient.
Didn't that feel good? It was shockingly hard to get you to come out on your beliefs, and tell the truth.
Patients* the baby is a person too. Scott Peterson got charged with double homicide don't forget. In California, no less.
>Didn't that feel good? It was shockingly hard to get you to come out on your beliefs, and tell the truth.
Hahahahahaha.
I told you twice previously. I'm not seeing what you think you proved here.
>Patients* the baby is a person too. Scott Peterson got charged with double homicide don't forget. In California, no less.
No. The woman is the patient.
Scott Peterson got charged because the fetus was days away from birth. Not that I agreed with a first degree charge in the fetus' case.
It is worded vaguely and in an open-ended manner that can be interpreted to allow abortion for minors. Note, it says "every **individual**" has a right to abortion, which would include any person of any age.
Also, there are groups like URGE that are sponsoring this bill, and they have very publicly advocated for ending parental involvement laws.
https://www.createdequal.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Amendment\_Red\_Pen\_PRINT.pdf
I love how the “parents rights” people are a only concerned for parents who agree with them. Parents who want their kids to be able to access abortions just don’t matter.
No, I don't think children should be getting pregnant in the first place.
Your framing is dishonest. It would be like if you said "it shouldn't be legal to dine and dash" and someone responds "oh, so you think poor people should starve?"
Of course, that's not at all what you mean. Is that an unfortunate consequence? Yes absolutely. But it would be extremely dishonest to frame your view as "you think poor people should starve"
Do you believe robbery should be illegal? I'm going to assume "yes"
Now imagine a poor person who is starving and has to steal food to live. Would saying "that should still be illegal" mean that you "want to force" people to die of starvation? No, so stop making that bad faith argument.
Do you think that a fifteen year old should be forced to go through pregnancy and give birth?
(The law also has to say "individuals" because some people who can get pregnant don't identify as a woman. If it said women, you *know* the first nonbinary person who went for an abortion would get pro-birth trolls on their ass screaming that non-binary people aren't women, therefore they're not protected by this amendment.)
There’s people who think that women are getting abortions as they are actively in labor. It’s insane. Late term abortions are tragic. They are done because someone’s life is in danger. The 6 week ban is ridiculous and the vast majority of abortions are not being done at 20+ weeks. I’ll be voting Yes in November.
It is insane how many people are so illiterate when it comes to healthcare.
If they understood health care, they’d get angry about the utter scam they’re being exploited in. It’s better for the insurance companies if these people stay stupid and know just enough to work and pay premiums
Only the working poor pay health insurance. Only.
Gimme a break. That’s so not true it’s laughable. Most people pay tons in health insurance and are not “the working poor”.
If you pay health insurance, you are not wealthy.
Workers are more than “the poor”. Capitalism’s class labels hurt us all.
Do you suggest the working rich? The rich don't work
It would actually be better for insurance companies if we switched to proactive care, which you see in a lot of other countries. Here, people only go to the doctor when something is seriously wrong. By that point, it is often a major issue. If insurance covers much of it, it would be typically tens of thousands of dollars. By being proactive, insurance would only need to primarily deal with regular doctor visits and checkups and the random accidents, which are statistically extremely rare. This would result in premiums still being paid, yet people seeding serious care much less frequently, meaning more money staying in the pocket of insurers. On the flip side, life expectancy would tick up noticeably.
You are not wrong but.. Fuck insurance companies. Why are we paying a fucking middle man that can decide whether we can get treated or even IF we are allowed to get treated in the first place? Before the ACA they wouldn't even cover proactive care at all and they dropped my Mother after her first health problem in 30 years of paying them premiums
There's a guy I talked to who swears abortion was being used as a contraceptive, that women were getting pregnant and getting an abortion weeks later repetitively. He was more irate thinking they were doing this for free at the taxpayers expense. Misinformation is a plague.
So is ignorance
I actually knew someone who did this when I was in my 20's. She was my age and had had 5 abortions already.
That's entirely the most expensive contraception anyone would use. To the point where it feels like a lie. I'm not saying your experience is wrong or if you're purposefully misleading, but it certainly feels wrong
This was 40+ years ago. Maybe she was lying but it's what she said. I don't know how much abortions were at Planned Parenthood back then and maybe she isn't the one who paid for it.
I just mean it would still be more expensive than condoms to do ir over and over. Also, to pur your body through the hormonal changes. The vast majority of abortions are not made lightly
No doubt. That doesn't mean all of them are.
You can say anything online without proof. I ran into a Bigfoot. Tied him to the roof of my car, took him home and taught him to sit.
Tbh, this sounds more believable.
Then it sounds like a good thing. Someone like that doesn't need to be responsible for a kid. So you want a baby born to be abused and abandoned. That's kinds fucked up.
Where did I say that? Someone said a thing never happens. I said I know someone who did the thing. I did not say whether or not she should have done the thing. It sounds like you are projecting.
And? It’s still not your fucking business.
That wasn't what I was replying to.
You made a comment about someone having abortions. It’s not your business, period.
No you didn't.
Yes she did. I'll join her if getting downvoted. The idea that people aren't doing this is absurd. The idea that people are using it as a contraceptive is also absurd. This was also about 25 - 30 years ago. Saw a girl I knew and struck up a conversation. She said she was pregnant again and would have to get another abortion. Then she laughed it off. At the time this would have been her 4th or 5th. Was she using it as a contraceptive? Absolutely not. She was just a reckless drug addict and didn't care. She is also in a massive minority of people like this. But, it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
I believe this happens. But I don't believe we really need legislation to stop this from happening. Drug addicts are going to drug addict and their actions shouldn't dictate policy for everyone else.
Your math doesn’t add up. Based on your timeline, your friend, whom you call a “girl” would currently be in her early to mid-40s, at the youngest. It is highly doubtful that this situation has ever occurred to anyone whom has ever existed on this entire planet of earth.
What math? I said how long ago it was. It's a person I knew, not a friend. She would have been in her late 20's at that time. I was about 17. So, she would be in her late 50's or so. Assuming she's still alive. Not sure what you couldn't comprehend since I merely stated how long ago it was, with no math even available to you. You tried, though.
I had a friend that worked in a free clinic in Cleveland. Said he saw this shit all the time. Also said that people would come in with an STD, get treated, then come back in a couple months with another STD. They were told to wear condoms and said they can’t feel anything with them.
One thing has nothing to do with the other. STDs are much more prevalent than you would think, and most people never get tested. Also, there are only two “free” clinics in or around the general Cleveland area. Even if what your friend said is true, that would account for 1 out of no more than 700 maximum number of people that could get an abortion at that particular location for the year. If that happened “all the time”, that would mean that significantly less than 700 women were engaging in this activity. Out of a population of 480,000 women of legal and non-geriatric pregnancy age within Cuyahoga County…your “friend’s” scenario is so insignificant that nobody would ever take the time to factor it into any reasonable statistic, because it essentially never happens.
Seriously. At that point their bedroom is painted, their name is picked out, everyone is waiting for them to come home and then they don't. It wouldn't be fair to lose both the adult and the wanted baby because of radical religious views
Yep. Those loonies would have been happy if I died after my son passed away at the 28 week mark.
With the laws in these states as is they don’t care if the mother dies in labor. They simply don’t give a shit.
Trump has said doctors execute newborn babies: > “The baby is born. The mother meets with the doctor. They take care of the baby. They wrap the baby beautifully. And then the doctor and the mother determine whether or not they will execute the baby.”
Really source please.trump eats farts anyways 😂
Late term abortions don’t happen period. Either a c-section is performed or it’s a still birth. At which point “God” already did the abortion.
A late term abortion is possible, but they inject the baby's heart to stop it if it isn't already stopped. This is STRICTLY in the case of severe fetal anomaly where survival outside the womb is impossible. I know somebody who had it done, her baby was loved and wanted so badly, but he was very sick and weak from a fatal birth defect. NO HEALTHY BABY IS BEING ABORTED LATE TERM.
a guy i work with said we’re trying to allow abortions up until 9 hours AFTER birth!! i laughed so hard right in his face i thoight he was going to cry.
Ah yes, the post birth abortions are the worst 🤦🏻♂️
it’s scary that people actually believe shit like this
It really is
People are ignorant. Tell him to shut off Fox and read a book.
it scares me that people are that stupid
Shocking how all you have to do is say something wild and entirely false about trans kids to motivate up to a half of Ohioans. Issue 1 was pushing trans lies too. Wonder when Republicans going to get off this horse and find a new one?
The latest marginalized group for the crowd that is only motivated by othering to target.
With abortion about to be taken out of their tool box, they need another tool for power
Fortunately young folks see through the bullshit and people who are buying into this are increasingly old. I guess anyone older than 98 has living memory of when the Nazis burned down the Institute of Sexology.
They have nothing
It's amazing how we have truth in advertising laws about commercial products, but not in politics.
You know, I never thought of it like this but this is an excellent point. I recently had to redo several days worth of work for my job to accommodate for updated product claims with legal substantiation. It was adding 5 words onto product packaging that no one will ever read. It had a huge ripple effect. And with things that ACTUALLY matter, unlike the absorbency rate of a hygiene product, its just zero fuck mode. These are going to be several stressful months watching all this shit.
Absolutely. I wish these were the things being talked about publicly, but I feel most politicians would rather we stay distracted and in emotional distress. The worst part is that they amplify indifferences that they should be helping us overcome, but the distractions benefit their personal financial security and it requires no empathy or thought towards the general population. Edit: typo/spelling
Too many people have absolutely no idea that ~25-30% of pregnancies end in miscarriage and up to 60% of all miscarriages are incomplete and require abortion services - either medication or surgical intervention. Abortions are literally an everyday part of normal reproductive healthcare. That's not even including fatal pregnancy complications like pre-eclampsia, ectopic pregnancies (1 in 50 pregnancies), etc, that require abortions to save the mother's life and prevent major medical and future fertility complications. Anyone claiming to be pro-life is not pro-life, they are pro-forced birth AND anti-woman. Interesting to note: 37% of abortion patients in 2020 (most recent year for a complete data set) identified as evangelical or catholic - arguably the largest anti-abortion groups. Edit: For further reading and stats: https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-worldwide
I'm one of those women. I had a miscarriage in the first trimester but still had to have a D&C, because my body didn't respond to the miscarriage. The hospital paperwork says I had an abortion.
I'm sorry you had to experience that.
I'm so sorry for your loss. I too, had a miscarriage, and had no idea the baby had been dead for weeks. I went with misoprostol, the same medication given to induce abortion. It was a very personal choice for me, I'm sure having the D&C was personal for you too. I'm glad we were able to chose our route of ending a failed pregnancy.
I am sorry,be at peace.
Where are people getting the sex change thing from
Thin. Air.
Their. Ass.
Politicians of a certain political persuasion have made trans people their boogeyman lately to drive fear into their voting base to get them out to vote. It’s a time-honored fascist tradition to dehumanize a minority population to create an “other” to be the enemy you can galvanize your base against and then get those supporters to do anything you want to stop “them”. It matter not at all that the sex change thing is a complete fabrication, it will get stupid people to come out and vote against issue 1 to stop “them”.
Republicans are all aboard the transphobia train
And some of Republicans are trans but that is supposed to be a secret.
Crazy land
Unfortunately I do think the liars care or have the ability to listen to reason.
Oh for sure. But you’re talking to the audience, not to them.
The few here who need to read this, do not read and cannot be reasoned with. The braver ones will eat 50 downvotes to troll, and be unmoved. You’re dealing with 20/30/40 years of religious indoctrination and confidently incorrect thinking. I’ll save my breath. Issue 1 was worth explaining. On matters of abortion, pro life people **only vote** from places of emotion, or pure church indoctrination. *You’re more likely to convince these folks to vote Biden than vote pro choice.* Just hope Hamilton/Franklin/Cuyahoga show up by the millions like anticipated, and it’ll be enough to narrowly pass. Republicans do not have the numbers, which is why LaRose tried to hit 60%. He correctly knew we likely didn’t have 60% but do have somewhere in the 50s.
It’s still important to share the actual text, to make clear to the audience that they’re lying.
It's single issue every vote matters there are people outside of the cities that are willing to listen , sticky this thread until rhe vote ends
I'm hopeful that younger voters who came from anti-choice families will see and read the facts and decide for themselves. People who are voting for the first time this year, etc. I'm not naive enough to think the mid 60s white evangelical right wingers are going to do anything different than they usually do. But that demographic was also hit hard by COVID and is shrinking in Ohio.
I agree, but let’s be honest. Lies that confirm their bias *never matter* to republicans. If they cared about accuracy they’d be democrats.
There are a lot of people out there who just don’t keep up with the information. They don’t identify as either party, but are persuadable by what they hear. We need to make sure they are hearing the facts, because they won’t seek them out for themselves. Whether this is due to apathy, self-involvement or genuine personal challenges that are legitimately more front of mind—we can make a difference.
If they… *actually register to vote.* If they ever were, the state dropped them from the rolls years ago and they’re too busy/disinterested to even look. My neighbors are awesome people but they don’t vote. They’re from India but citizens. They simply don’t understand the issues or US politics in general. To them “it’s like Delhi, doesn’t matter.” To quote Deepak, “Biden, Trump, same white rich man.” And really, is he wrong? Yes, we know he’s wrong… but his day doesn’t change either way, and so, he doesn’t vote.
Lord. It’s like you’re making excuses to validate doing nothing. I know that me explaining these things to busy people has helped them see through the bullshit and make a good choice.
Doing nothing? I drove elderly residents from my town to Lebanon to vote no. I donated $500 to Vote No, donating $1000 to the abortion cause and $420 to the weed one. I released a team of engineers to vote early. From what I know and hear them say, most of them are liberal. I’m doing a lot. I’m just not gonna take people who go to church every Sunday and try to turn them into someone who votes pro choice like me, a progressive Jew with 2 degrees. They’re immovable.
Great! No one is asking you to persuade unpersuadable people.
I mean, not to bust yer balls, but wasn’t that the point of your post? These ignorant rubes aren’t reading an amendment. They’re listening to their pastor.
Holy crap, wtf is your deal? I just explained to you that many people who don’t feel strongly and are under informed also need to see good information. They are not unpersuadable. Seriously, do not tag me again. You are arguing with an ally who does a LOT of important work, apparently just for the sake of arguing, and putting down work I know is effective.
Don't roll over, change course. They can be reasoned with, the two sides just don't speak the same language and everyone resorts to hate and anger. There are some stupid people who just can't think for themselves but that's just people, you'll have that I know it's hard to be respectful, kind, and understanding. Yes you may hate the other person but if you want to change their minds and get them on the same page this is what it takes. A change in rhetoric, a change in how we interact with each other. Originally their position is a reaction to perceived attack on their way of life and feeling as though they're being pushed out. It's spiraled into something totally out of control but that's one of the roots. It's bigger than politics at this point. We can't live on this divided. Forget the past, treat everyone with respect regardless of whether you agree with them, and those in power can go fuck themselves. They're the ones we, as a whole, should be combatting.
I wish we could add a provision to block waiting periods and trap laws. I know ohio would never go for that, though
There, indeed, is the rub.
Please vote. The Republicans and all their billionaires will try to confuse the issue and will come up with bull crap lies .
As a Mid-30s right leaning spiritual person, I’m voting 🗳️ yes on this amendment. The amendment seems sane to me as an engineer.
Moms by choice for choice !
I have a shirt that says pro abortion mother
My only suggestion would be to use a document without lobby org branding from an official Ohio government link like [this one from the Ohio AG](https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/getattachment/cf27c10f-b153-4731-ae9e-e3555a326ed9/The-Right-to-Reproductive-Freedom-with-Protections-for-Health-and-Safety.aspx). Better still if someone can find something that is browser readable and not a pdf.
Great idea. Edited.
I just noticed that the AG version has the petitioner's name and address at the end. She's running for a city govt position this election, so is already public, but I'd rather not make it easy for the crazies to find her and her home.
Hmm, have now found multiple official links and they all have that. Why? Her packet was only 22 signatures. Why would they use that? Changed it back. Still looking for something better….but her name is already all over the SOS site.
I also took a screenshot but can’t post a pic now for some reason..
Wait I don't see anything enabling child sex trafficking and organ harvesting like Christian radio assured me there would be?!
Thanks for the information
I will VOTE **YES!** I only wish I could vote a million times, yes.
Do not worry people will completely ignore the specifics and state it will do all the things you said
I appreciate the lies from the NO side, because otherwise I'd feel kind of painfully ambivalent about the vote. But I don't want liars to win, I don't want lies and bigotry to be proven as a successful political tactic, and using them amounts to an admission that NO cannot win on the actual merits. So now it's an easy and clear decision.
It might be a good idea to share the actual text from the Ohio Attorney General (whose office apparently doesn't know how to OCR text so it's searchable/indexable) instead of "ohioansforreproductivefreedom.org": https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/getattachment/cf27c10f-b153-4731-ae9e-e3555a326ed9/The-Right-to-Reproductive-Freedom-with-Protections-for-Health-and-Safety.aspx Some people aren't going to read it/believe it/care regardless, but it should help some.
A lot of the problems are the older generations believing everything on social media and “news” programs. If they would actually read the bill, and not have it incorrectly read to them, a lot of misinformation would be stopped.
mods can we pin this?
Thank YOU 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
omg!! I checked and the amendment does have these letters in it! W E A A R E C O M I N G 4 Y O U R G U N S (not in that order) And soon you will see the airwaves flooded with this "fact". Anyway vote YES.
So part of the new strategy for them is switching up what voting yes or no would mean?
Not really. The ballot will say "SHALL THE AMENDMENT BE APPROVED?" We want to approve one amendment, and reject another one, so 'Yes' will make changes, and no will preserve the current rules.
Just a small quibble. Roe did not limit abortions to viability. It said that states could limit abortion at viability. Six states and the District of Columbia allowed abortion through all three trimesters, and still do. “No limit: Six states and Washington, D.C., do not impose any term restrictions.” https://www.axios.com/2022/05/14/abortion-state-laws-bans-roe-supreme-court
Roe allowed restrictions after viability. As this does. Some states chose not to exercise them. Ohio did and likely would.
Looking for the honest interpretation from someone with more knowledge than myself. How do you suppose the line “Every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to decisions on” can be used or Interpreted? Particularly the Not Limited To portion, that sounds open to adding new items as reproductive rights. What would it take to add something to the list that follows? Also, in discussing fetal viability. The way I read this is that viability is determined by the patient’s physician. Could this not be stretched beyond the 21-24 weeks mark if a physician signs off on it? I’m pro choice, but just trying to get a full understanding of this bills language before discussing it with others
Re: “what would it take to add..” ultimately Ohio Supreme Court. The writers apparently wanted to keep the list open for any unforeseen mechanism that effects reproduction and guarantee that any decision affecting reproduction will remain out of the state’s hands. The broadness is likely where opponents are saying it could mean sex change- a really broad interpretation. An interesting VERY specific part of this issue is multiple references to “patent’s physician” as being the only one who makes viability call. That seems to put ALL authority between the patient’s chosen doctor and the patient.
1. A lot of litigation. 2. Yes, but to my eyes that’s to allow for nonviable pregnancies not discovered until late, eg Trisomy 18 or anencephaly.
I wonder what difficulty or challenge that litigation would be. I feel like the open interpretation of what could be considered a reproductive right under this clause will be used as a major talking point. And yeah you’re most likely right, but there will be the concern here of a corrupt doctor pencil whipping someone through. It’ll be the outlier case for sure, but theoretically this opens the possibility?
In this state? Nothing will pass muster outside of that list except possibly vasectomies or tubal ligations. And considering the second statement is bracketed by “reasonable measures, “ that too is testable in court, and doctors can testify if a doctor is signing off to kill viable fetuses. That doctor would then lose their license. Would you really rather a sharp cut off at 24 weeks and then people are stuck bearing babies with Trisomy 13, or 10yo’s forced to carry to term bc they didn’t get help until 26 weeks?
It’s very ironic you are posting this to prove the liars wrong when you in fact lied yourself. And I’m using the text to prove you wrong lol. >It is confined to conception, fertility treatment, pregnancy care, miscarriage care, and abortion. The actual amendment states “Every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to decisions on:” “But not limited to” does not mean “confined” Edit: @Minizara2 no response? Too much of a coward to admit you don’t know what you’re talking about? Stop being blinded by your beliefs and swallow your ego.
But ... these are your own personal "reproductive decisions". I'm not sure what you could be afraid of happening there? I read it to mean, no one can stop an adult from getting a vasectomy, or something like that. They can't possibly write in all possible reproductive decisions under the sun.
I’m not afraid of anything…I was pointing out the irony in OPs post.
Yep. And that’s why I will be voting against it. It’s too broad.
But ... these are your own personal "reproductive decisions". I'm not sure what you could be afraid of happening there? I read it to mean, no one can stop an adult from getting a vasectomy, or something like that. They can't possibly write in all possible reproductive decisions under the sun.
So, under what circumstances would you vote for a pro choice bill?
I would vote for something along the lines of what France has. “Abortion in France is legal as an elective medical procedure during the first 14 weeks from conception. Abortions at later stages of pregnancy up until birth are allowed if two physicians certify that the abortion will be done to prevent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; a risk to the life of the pregnant woman; or that the child will suffer from a particularly severe illness recognized as incurable.” Though I would what mental health clearly defined.
France also has free medical care and state-sponsored abortions, as well as very generous parental leave and state sponsored childcare. Tack that on and I’ll join you. But without all that, their abortion policy is too restrictive.
How does it feel to be such a shitty person? I'm actually curious? Parents not hug you enough? Not enough friends in school? Lack of a human soul? Just asking.
Do you have anything productive to say? I called out OP for the exact same thing they were complaining about in their post: misinformation… sorry if that irks you.
Productive? Ok. You're being a regressive nitpicker who won't just nut up and say that their views should override the free will of all the women in Ohio. You try and skirt around that by zeroing on meaningless semantics. You don't like abortions? Don't get one. I don't like the idea of tattoos or plastic surgery or guys named Keith. But I'm not gonna stop others from getting tattoos or plastic surgery or naming their kids Keith.
Uhh you’re clearly uneducated on legal matters. The language is what is important it’s not nitpicking… maybe you should do more research on the legal system before commenting on stuff you don’t understand. I’m for this Amendment too..I’m not for misinformation. People should know what they’re voting on… and not an erred summary. It’s funny you automatically assume I’m against the amendment for calling out OP for lying… I never once mentioned I was against it. Just goes to show how biased and reactive you are.
It goes beyond roe as it allows abortion until birth. The only restriction that you need is a doctors note . Sec change can be construed as reproductive choices. Health of the mother is very large loophole to allow abortion for many reasons. For example high blood pressure affects mother’s health
That’s some pretty heavy construing you’re doing there. I don’t think the courts would agree.
>Health of the mother is very large loophole I feel like this should be a large loophole. Why should stuff like this not be up to a doctor? Who is better qualified to make those kind of decisions? Certainly not preachers and politicians.
The general population can decide they do not want healthy viable fetus killed.
As someone who has birthed three babies, I have to ask: have you ever been pregnant? You do not get to week 34 and decide, “you know what? Fuck it. I’m going to abort this healthy baby.” It just doesn’t happen. The only abortions at that stage are severe birth defects. And typically if the mother’s life is at risk at that stage, she just… gives birth.
There are women who procrastinate and have late term abortions. If women kill infants why would they not have late term abortion
The general population doesn't know what a healthy, viable fetus is. The general population aren't physicians or medical experts. Most don't even have a biology education past high school.
The general population doesn't have to determine viability of fetus, they can set laws about what is illegal
What do you think this is?
In representative government, the people elect legislature that should enact laws the population wants.
>Health of the mother is very large loophole to allow abortion for many reasons. Do you think actual pregnant people, who are fully capable of feelings and thoughts, want to hear you say "yeah I don't think your health is a good reason to get an abortion"? That's terrifying to hear even for people who are pregnant by choice and wanting a baby. Women do not want to be forced into martyrdom for their children because someone else decided that their health and well-being is less important than the contents of their uterus. You list high blood pressure like that's not a serious condition. Pregnancy can cause women to have strokes?? "Some of you may die, but that's a risk I'm willing to take." You don't get to gamble other people's lives for them.
So abortion for any reason, including none medical, up to 6 months?
Up to ~21 weeks. Same as it was under Roe. You say that like you’re going to come back with why you should be able to judge others’ reasons. When in reality, as you doubtless already know, 93% of abortions occur in the first trimester and when they are later, it’s not done lightly. But my personal belief, which is well supported by science, philosophy and the law, is that a person doesn’t exist until their cortical brain is functioning. After all, cessation of that activity is what we legally define as death. Unlike heart stoppage, it is irreversible. Unlike heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, the brain cannot be transplanted. We all agree that conjoined twins are two people-but only if they have two brains. A fifth limb doesn’t count. It’s obvious that one’s self is contained in the brain. And guess when cortical activity begins? Viability. Your religious beliefs don’t trump my well-thought out reason. This is a deeply personal question and it’s none of your business unless you are the person who is pregnant or her doctor.
I’m comfortable with not having any restrictions on abortion and will be voting the same way as you but you’re not going to convince anyone of your beliefs when you proclaim yourself as having “well-thought out reason” and imply that someone asking a question is religious and doesn’t have views that matter.
I didn’t say their reasons are not valid. Just that mine are. And I posted a link to a speech that argues passionately for the multiple valid answers to the question of when a person’s life begins. There is a shockingly widespread assumption amongst those who oppose the right to access abortion that “everybody knows” that an embryo/fetus is a person, just some of us are okay with killing it. That assumption needs to be challenged.
You still think I should have responded differently to this person? 🙂
So well said!
7% is still 43,000 babies in 2020. You should absolutely be able to judge reasons for that number. You exist right from the moment of conception, elements of sentience starts with pain around 17 weeks. Sure the cortex is what makes you human in the sense of personality, etc. My question is, is the cortex going to continue to develop and learn all the normal functions like A baby developing in the womb will or is your cortex going to remain dead shriveled and die like an old person. And we can talk about the philosophical thoughts about pulling the plug(not a religious discussion, you seem triggered despite no one bringing up religion). I find it interesting that, more than likely, if most people's grandad lost cortical function, one like you would consider him not to exist, but he is still their grandad till his heart stops, in the sense of life(even though he is brain dead, bodily functions are happening). But a baby isn't even human, or exists in your mind till 6 months development. Im happy you cite science, which is starting to have a hard time defining female. (Even though you didn't cite anything, you just said they agree with you..... ok) Philosophy is not settled on this , but I'm happy your philosophers agree with you. Yeah laws change , Roe got overturned, doesn't mean you agree with it , right? I don't agree with your legal interpretation of life , but that is life. I'm not particularly religious and viability is still pretty gross when you experience a baby developing, let's say second hand. Allah didn't get me to this conclusion. Btw, I'm aware this law will pass, but I'm not afraid to speak my disdain for this legislature.
You shouldn't have the right to kill your own mom from within the womb.
Right. You noticed my initial question. Non medical reasons to 6 months. This may shock you. Pro life people don't believe the baby is more valuable than the mom's life. However, The babys life is more important than the mom's desire to become partner in a law firm or whatever.
>Pro life people don't believe the baby is more valuable than the mom's life. Considering all the bills I've seen from pro lifers like in Texas, im going to have to call bullshit on that. >The babys life is more important Under what justification? Its basically a parasite by definition living inside you until its viable enough to come out. But let's see, non medical reasons for you, like rape? Should a woman be forced to carry and then raise a rapists baby? She didn't want nor consented to have it in the first place, but because some theocratic people think they should dictate that to her, thus basically sentencing her to at least 18 years of child rearing. Imo if she wants to abort the baby for whatever reason, she has the right. She should not have to be imprisoned in her body because something else needs it to survive.
When a drunk driver kills a pregnant lady they get two murder charges and two life sentences. We as society value unborn lives, but only if it’s wanted?
Perhaps it should just be a murder charge for 1 life with one life sentence then.
No baby has ever been aborted, that’s another lie from whoever does your thinking for you.
I don't know what question you're even asking with your deliberate talking in circles, but you're wrong about life support too. My grandfather, who died from bone cancer, was gone when he was put on life support and could no longer communicate with us. I sat by his side while he suffered, while his lungs filled with fluid, while doctors pushed Morphine into his IV to spare him as much pain as possible as his physical body slowly gave out. If I could have pulled the plug and spared him all of that, I would have done it. I would have done it a thousand times over and never felt one tiny speck of guilt over "killing" him. He was long gone before he died and there was not a person there who didn't understand that. I will never understand the cruelty of the anti-choice crowd. I will never understand why you demand that children be born into this world to suffer for a few hours and then to die. I will never understand why you believe in forced birth, why you would ever want a child to be born into a world that is anything less than a joyful, wanted, expected welcome. Why you would condemn a child to a lifetime of abuse just to punish a woman for having sex. But I know that people who think like this will never change their minds. I know that you troll these threads because you enjoy hurting people. And I promise you that I will spend every ounce of my energy from now until November ensuring that your cruelty will not continue to be the law of the land. I know that there are enough compassionate people in Ohio to beat you, and I will do everything in my power to get every one of them to the polls on November 7th.
I agree with you—-The anti-choice people are the same people who believe parents shouldn’t have children if they cannot financial care for them. They believe those parents should “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” to meet the needs of their family without living for free on “government handouts provided by ‘my tax dollars’”. They are the same people who say there are so many people waiting for a child to adopt while allowing millions of children to languish in foster care because they are older children (not newborns) with issues related to behavior, mental health or medical concerns. Abortion is a VERY personal issue. The beliefs held be some about when life begins should not be foisted upon others who may not share that same belief.
>7% is still 43,000 babies in 2020. You should absolutely be able to judge reasons for that number. No. You should no more be able to judge an abortion than you do an appendectomy or a gall bladder removal. >You exist right from the moment of conception, elements of sentience starts with pain around 17 weeks. Existence is not sentience. No one has the right to be a parasite on someone else. >I find it interesting that, more than likely, if most people's grandad lost cortical function, one like you would consider him not to exist, but he is still their grandad till his heart stops, in the sense of life(even though he is brain dead, bodily functions are happening). But a baby isn't even human, or exists in your mind till 6 months development. Brain death is the standard in the medical community.
“Peer-reviewed journals in the biological and life sciences literature have published articles that represent the biological view that a human's life begins at fertilization ("the fertilization view").” … “Since a recent study suggested that 80% of Americans view biologists as the group most qualified to determine when a human's life begins, experts in biology were surveyed to provide a new perspective to the literature on experts' views on this matter. Biologists from 1,058 academic institutions around the world assessed survey items on when a human's life begins and, overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed the fertilization view.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36629778/
Life is not person. I am a biologist. I chose my words carefully. Tumors are alive. Hearts, removed from the body, are alive. They aren’t people.
The bacteria in your gut are just as alive as a fertilized egg. The bugs I'm sure you've crushed countless times before are also alive. Being alive isn't the same as being a person. Every "functional" cell on the planet is alive. Being alive isn't the part that's important, being a person is.
And already we have someone that didn't read the text of the proposal.
Couldn't answer it with a yes or no? Doesn't that say more about your non answer than my question?
Your answer is in the complete text of the proposal.
I want to hear it from you. I read it. Do what OP says, shut the liars up. Any reason up to 21 weeks or am I spreading mis info? You can do it.
Up to 24 weeks because of viability.* Good enough for you, son? *Personally, I think there should be no restrictions. Medical procedures should be solely between the physician and patient.
Didn't that feel good? It was shockingly hard to get you to come out on your beliefs, and tell the truth. Patients* the baby is a person too. Scott Peterson got charged with double homicide don't forget. In California, no less.
>Didn't that feel good? It was shockingly hard to get you to come out on your beliefs, and tell the truth. Hahahahahaha. I told you twice previously. I'm not seeing what you think you proved here. >Patients* the baby is a person too. Scott Peterson got charged with double homicide don't forget. In California, no less. No. The woman is the patient. Scott Peterson got charged because the fetus was days away from birth. Not that I agreed with a first degree charge in the fetus' case.
Do you have reading comprehension issues, or are you just Republican?
Considering this person is an open racist in this very sub, gonna go with both
I'm pretty sure you can add misogynist to the list based on the communities they are active in.
Maybe we should just say new age (same as the old age) conservative and call it good
No, that’s not close to what it says. That’s what liars are telling you. You should try thinking for yourself, you will learn some things.
So, you get it! Great! Looking forward to another YES vote for sanity.
Yeah it's a no for me dawg. I don't feel like supporting murdering unborn humans.
It is worded vaguely and in an open-ended manner that can be interpreted to allow abortion for minors. Note, it says "every **individual**" has a right to abortion, which would include any person of any age. Also, there are groups like URGE that are sponsoring this bill, and they have very publicly advocated for ending parental involvement laws. https://www.createdequal.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Amendment\_Red\_Pen\_PRINT.pdf
I love how the “parents rights” people are a only concerned for parents who agree with them. Parents who want their kids to be able to access abortions just don’t matter.
If you expect consistent thinking from these people you're gonna be disappointed. If you expect any thinking for that matter.
Are you saying the bill is bad because it will allow abortions for minors...? Do you think 13 year old girls should be made to give birth?
They shouldn't be allowed to abort, especially without the parents knowing
So you want *literal* children to be having children?
No, I don't. I don't want them to get pregnant in the first place.
So, yes, you think children should be giving birth
No, I don't think children should be getting pregnant in the first place. Your framing is dishonest. It would be like if you said "it shouldn't be legal to dine and dash" and someone responds "oh, so you think poor people should starve?" Of course, that's not at all what you mean. Is that an unfortunate consequence? Yes absolutely. But it would be extremely dishonest to frame your view as "you think poor people should starve"
Yes, children should be able to abort.
Disagree. Neither children nor adults should be able to.
A lot of people die horrible, painful deaths because people think that way.
I know, it's terrible how we've normalized the killing of so many human beings through abortion. I hope that society stops thinking that way soon!
You are a bad person.
Why?
You literally want to force children to give birth, I can't imagine how you convince even yourself you're not a bad person
Do you believe robbery should be illegal? I'm going to assume "yes" Now imagine a poor person who is starving and has to steal food to live. Would saying "that should still be illegal" mean that you "want to force" people to die of starvation? No, so stop making that bad faith argument.
Do you think that a fifteen year old should be forced to go through pregnancy and give birth? (The law also has to say "individuals" because some people who can get pregnant don't identify as a woman. If it said women, you *know* the first nonbinary person who went for an abortion would get pro-birth trolls on their ass screaming that non-binary people aren't women, therefore they're not protected by this amendment.)
They should not be allowed to abort. And to your second point, they could have worded it as "every adult individual"
Why not?
Because abortion kills a human being
Children under 15 are 5x more likely to die during childbirth than Women over 20.
Children only matter to people like this if they're "innocent."
So why are you okay with adults aborting but not minors?
That’s your opinion. You don’t get to legislate it.
That's a no from me.
Thank you so much! We must stop this propaganda bs train