"About 30 Senate Democrats marched down the steps of the Capitol on
Tuesday to declare their support for abortion rights and shout their
solidarity with protesters who gathered just across the Capitol plazain frontof the Supreme Court."
However:
"Democrats are getting used to this kind of moment, part of a well-trodcycle.
Their base has a demand. Democrats agree with the demand. Democrats
promise action. Democrats don't have the votes in Congress to make good
on that promise."
And:
"Time and time again, we have seen Democrats use abortion rights as a
campaign issue and fail to deliver on their promises to protect and
expand our right to reproductive freedom," said Analilia Mejia,
co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy."
I would say this does not mean there is a rightward shift in the Democratic Party. But it certainly look like a shift toward being weak and ineffective.
So it seems Dems need to show up more BIG TIME and vote, and start writing more letter and calling their representatives. That or succumb the the radical authoritarian right. Choose.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,683
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I guess we’ll have to disagree. To me it doesn’t make sense that abortion laws are about restricting women when nearly half of the supporters are women. It makes more sense to believe what they claim, and that is they believe a fetus is a life deserving of rights. That makes sense. Of course those views are influenced by church and politics. I’m not trying to pick strange arguments. It just frustrates me when everything creates more division and leads to more hate among our own country. The left should recognize it’s not about controlling women, for the reasons I just stated. The right needs to recognize late term abortions are actually pretty rare and it’s not used as just another form of birth control. People are waking into the clinic 1 week before the due date because they changed their mind. Maybe we’d get some common ground if everyone could see that.
I see it a lot like you do. Why do you have to demonize the opposing position? Both are very reasonable….
I guess we’ll have to disagree. To me it doesn’t make sense that abortion laws are about restricting women when nearly half of the supporters are women. It makes more sense to believe what they claim, and that is they believe a fetus is a life deserving of rights. That makes sense. Of course those views are influenced by church and politics. I’m not trying to pick strange arguments. It just frustrates me when everything creates more division and leads to more hate among our own country. The left should recognize it’s not about controlling women, for the reasons I just stated. The right needs to recognize late term abortions are actually pretty rare and it’s not used as just another form of birth control. People are waking into the clinic 1 week before the due date because they changed their mind. Maybe we’d get some common ground if everyone could see that.
I see it a lot like you do. Why do you have to demonize the opposing position? Both are very reasonable….
It’s very reasonable to oppose abortion for yourself or partner. It’s much less reasonable to believe the govt should force a woman to carry a child to term against her wishes.
There is not a true compromise position for the pro life movement. If you believe life and rights begin at conception, then how can you accept an abortion regardless of the weeks? You cannot. The left has made the compromises, agreeing that late term aborti9ns should only occur when the mother is at risk. That’s a very common D position.
I guess we’ll have to disagree. To me it doesn’t make sense that abortion laws are about restricting women when nearly half of the supporters are women. It makes more sense to believe what they claim, and that is they believe a fetus is a life deserving of rights. That makes sense. Of course those views are influenced by church and politics. I’m not trying to pick strange arguments. It just frustrates me when everything creates more division and leads to more hate among our own country. The left should recognize it’s not about controlling women, for the reasons I just stated. The right needs to recognize late term abortions are actually pretty rare and it’s not used as just another form of birth control. People are waking into the clinic 1 week before the due date because they changed their mind. Maybe we’d get some common ground if everyone could see that.
I see it a lot like you do. Why do you have to demonize the opposing position? Both are very reasonable….
It’s very reasonable to oppose abortion for yourself or partner. It’s much less reasonable to believe the govt should force a woman to carry a child to term against her wishes.
There is not a true compromise position for the pro life movement. If you believe life and rights begin at conception, then how can you accept an abortion regardless of the weeks? You cannot. The left has made the compromises, agreeing that late term aborti9ns should only occur when the mother is at risk. That’s a very common D position.
Right. And for those that believe life begins at conception abortion is murder. It doesn’t mean they are trying to control women.
I should say…I do think majority opinion matters in a lot of cases. Especially when granting more rights bs taking them away.
I believe this had been settled in the courts and by the people. So I think pro life efforts should shift to sex education and providing contraception. And also ensuring pregnant women can have a true open conversation about alternatives if they wish.
There are certainly crazy zealots on both sides and more so on the anti-abortion side. But there are a lot of people that just believe it’s a life and therefore a terrible tragedy.
I should say…I do think majority opinion matters in a lot of cases. Especially when granting more rights bs taking them away.
I believe this had been settled in the courts and by the people. So I think pro life efforts should shift to sex education and providing contraception. And also ensuring pregnant women can have a true open conversation about alternatives if they wish.
There are certainly crazy zealots on both sides and more so on the anti-abortion side. But there are a lot of people that just believe it’s a life and therefore a terrible tragedy.
if they showed that they care about the kid after it is delivered, I might actually believe that.
I should say…I do think majority opinion matters in a lot of cases. Especially when granting more rights bs taking them away.
I believe this had been settled in the courts and by the people. So I think pro life efforts should shift to sex education and providing contraception. And also ensuring pregnant women can have a true open conversation about alternatives if they wish.
There are certainly crazy zealots on both sides and more so on the anti-abortion side. But there are a lot of people that just believe it’s a life and therefore a terrible tragedy.
Why do you think the majority should have the right to dictate here? For example, the Bill of Rights was established precisely to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. When Loving v Virginia was decided, finally allowing mixed marriages in this country, a strong majority of the population was against interracial marriage. Were they right? Should the majority have the ability to prevent the exercise of free will that does no harm to another living human? You might say, well that's crazy that we wouldn't allow interracial marriage today. But Sen. Mike Braun (R-ID) said that you can't have it both ways and even Loving should be left to the states to decide.
You can believe it's a terrible tragedy. I do. I wish we didn't have to have abortion, but I support a woman's choice here. As Clinton put it, it should be safe and rare.
I guess we’ll have to disagree. To me it doesn’t make sense that abortion laws are about restricting women when nearly half of the supporters are women. It makes more sense to believe what they claim, and that is they believe a fetus is a life deserving of rights. That makes sense. Of course those views are influenced by church and politics. I’m not trying to pick strange arguments. It just frustrates me when everything creates more division and leads to more hate among our own country. The left should recognize it’s not about controlling women, for the reasons I just stated. The right needs to recognize late term abortions are actually pretty rare and it’s not used as just another form of birth control. People are waking into the clinic 1 week before the due date because they changed their mind. Maybe we’d get some common ground if everyone could see that.
I see it a lot like you do. Why do you have to demonize the opposing position? Both are very reasonable….
It’s very reasonable to oppose abortion for yourself or partner. It’s much less reasonable to believe the govt should force a woman to carry a child to term against her wishes.
There is not a true compromise position for the pro life movement. If you believe life and rights begin at conception, then how can you accept an abortion regardless of the weeks? You cannot. The left has made the compromises, agreeing that late term aborti9ns should only occur when the mother is at risk. That’s a very common D position.
Right. And for those that believe life begins at conception abortion is murder. It doesn’t mean they are trying to control women.
And again, back to the point. What it does mean is that the vast majority of the state delegates passing these laws are men. That's why people say it's men controlling women.
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,683
I guess we’ll have to disagree. To me it doesn’t make sense that abortion laws are about restricting women when nearly half of the supporters are women. It makes more sense to believe what they claim, and that is they believe a fetus is a life deserving of rights. That makes sense. Of course those views are influenced by church and politics. I’m not trying to pick strange arguments. It just frustrates me when everything creates more division and leads to more hate among our own country. The left should recognize it’s not about controlling women, for the reasons I just stated. The right needs to recognize late term abortions are actually pretty rare and it’s not used as just another form of birth control. People are waking into the clinic 1 week before the due date because they changed their mind. Maybe we’d get some common ground if everyone could see that.
I see it a lot like you do. Why do you have to demonize the opposing position? Both are very reasonable….
It’s very reasonable to oppose abortion for yourself or partner. It’s much less reasonable to believe the govt should force a woman to carry a child to term against her wishes.
There is not a true compromise position for the pro life movement. If you believe life and rights begin at conception, then how can you accept an abortion regardless of the weeks? You cannot. The left has made the compromises, agreeing that late term aborti9ns should only occur when the mother is at risk. That’s a very common D position.
Right. And for those that believe life begins at conception abortion is murder. It doesn’t mean they are trying to control women.
And again, back to the point. What it does mean is that the vast majority of the state delegates passing these laws are men. That's why people say it's men controlling women.
Plus the Supreme Court justices, right? 6 men, 3 women.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I should say…I do think majority opinion matters in a lot of cases. Especially when granting more rights bs taking them away.
I believe this had been settled in the courts and by the people. So I think pro life efforts should shift to sex education and providing contraception. And also ensuring pregnant women can have a true open conversation about alternatives if they wish.
There are certainly crazy zealots on both sides and more so on the anti-abortion side. But there are a lot of people that just believe it’s a life and therefore a terrible tragedy.
Why do you think the majority should have the right to dictate here? For example, the Bill of Rights was established precisely to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. When Loving v Virginia was decided, finally allowing mixed marriages in this country, a strong majority of the population was against interracial marriage. Were they right? Should the majority have the ability to prevent the exercise of free will that does no harm to another living human? You might say, well that's crazy that we wouldn't allow interracial marriage today. But Sen. Mike Braun (R-ID) said that you can't have it both ways and even Loving should be left to the states to decide.
You can believe it's a terrible tragedy. I do. I wish we didn't have to have abortion, but I support a woman's choice here. As Clinton put it, it should be safe and rare.
I mentioned the opinion of the majority in a society matters and especially when granting more rights vs limiting them. I think that is how you move forward. That’s all.
hippiemom = goodness
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,683
Another meme that nails it!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I should say…I do think majority opinion matters in a lot of cases. Especially when granting more rights bs taking them away.
I believe this had been settled in the courts and by the people. So I think pro life efforts should shift to sex education and providing contraception. And also ensuring pregnant women can have a true open conversation about alternatives if they wish.
There are certainly crazy zealots on both sides and more so on the anti-abortion side. But there are a lot of people that just believe it’s a life and therefore a terrible tragedy.
if they showed that they care about the kid after it is delivered, I might actually believe that.
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
I should say…I do think majority opinion matters in a lot of cases. Especially when granting more rights bs taking them away.
I believe this had been settled in the courts and by the people. So I think pro life efforts should shift to sex education and providing contraception. And also ensuring pregnant women can have a true open conversation about alternatives if they wish.
There are certainly crazy zealots on both sides and more so on the anti-abortion side. But there are a lot of people that just believe it’s a life and therefore a terrible tragedy.
Why do you think the majority should have the right to dictate here? For example, the Bill of Rights was established precisely to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. When Loving v Virginia was decided, finally allowing mixed marriages in this country, a strong majority of the population was against interracial marriage. Were they right? Should the majority have the ability to prevent the exercise of free will that does no harm to another living human? You might say, well that's crazy that we wouldn't allow interracial marriage today. But Sen. Mike Braun (R-ID) said that you can't have it both ways and even Loving should be left to the states to decide.
You can believe it's a terrible tragedy. I do. I wish we didn't have to have abortion, but I support a woman's choice here. As Clinton put it, it should be safe and rare.
I mentioned the opinion of the majority in a society matters and especially when granting more rights vs limiting them. I think that is how you move forward. That’s all.
It matters, inasmuch as it makes it easier. But it shouldn't matter. Personal rights should not be subject to the tyranny of the majority.
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
Don't know where you live but the clinic near me always has the same old (70+) white guy protesting and sometimes a few other old white guys join him. Rarely are there women but I'm sure it happens.
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
Once more, look at the lawmakers. Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
Once more, look at the lawmakers. Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.
It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic. As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing. I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it. I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls. It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.
I should say…I do think majority opinion matters in a lot of cases. Especially when granting more rights bs taking them away.
I believe this had been settled in the courts and by the people. So I think pro life efforts should shift to sex education and providing contraception. And also ensuring pregnant women can have a true open conversation about alternatives if they wish.
There are certainly crazy zealots on both sides and more so on the anti-abortion side. But there are a lot of people that just believe it’s a life and therefore a terrible tragedy.
Why do you think the majority should have the right to dictate here? For example, the Bill of Rights was established precisely to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. When Loving v Virginia was decided, finally allowing mixed marriages in this country, a strong majority of the population was against interracial marriage. Were they right? Should the majority have the ability to prevent the exercise of free will that does no harm to another living human? You might say, well that's crazy that we wouldn't allow interracial marriage today. But Sen. Mike Braun (R-ID) said that you can't have it both ways and even Loving should be left to the states to decide.
You can believe it's a terrible tragedy. I do. I wish we didn't have to have abortion, but I support a woman's choice here. As Clinton put it, it should be safe and rare.
I mentioned the opinion of the majority in a society matters and especially when granting more rights vs limiting them. I think that is how you move forward. That’s all.
It matters, inasmuch as it makes it easier. But it shouldn't matter. Personal rights should not be subject to the tyranny of the majority.
Yeah I get that. I'm no expert here and I was speaking more from the standpoint of myself I suppose. Being that even if it's something I don't like or agree with, if it is adding rights and not taking away, then I am swayed by public opinion to understand it's the will of the people.
But you are correct, the way the will of the people should work is simply through electing officials and then laws being made. So for sure, you are correct.
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
Once more, look at the lawmakers. Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.
It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic. As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing. I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it. I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls. It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.
the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court. For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill. 76 were 'yea'. Of those 'yea', 7 were women. https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671
Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend.
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
Once more, look at the lawmakers. Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.
It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic. As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing. I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it. I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls. It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.
the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court. For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill. 76 were 'yea'. Of those 'yea', 7 were women. https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671
Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend.
On the issue of men making laws for women...it's seems pretty clear to me that the majority of government representatives voting on these issues are male. But it is also true that there is a group of women that vote for these reps knowing exactly what their position is....and they have the same position.
I mean - 42% of women voted for Trump over Biden no?
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
Once more, look at the lawmakers. Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.
It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic. As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing. I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it. I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls. It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.
the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court. For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill. 76 were 'yea'. Of those 'yea', 7 were women. https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671
Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend.
Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right? There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”? Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill. If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills. Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue. Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
Once more, look at the lawmakers. Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.
It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic. As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing. I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it. I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls. It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.
the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court. For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill. 76 were 'yea'. Of those 'yea', 7 were women. https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671
Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend.
Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right? There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”? Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill. If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills. Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue. Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.
It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant. The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men. If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed? Who knows.
Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election. I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away.
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
Once more, look at the lawmakers. Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.
It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic. As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing. I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it. I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls. It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.
the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court. For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill. 76 were 'yea'. Of those 'yea', 7 were women. https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671
Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend.
Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right? There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”? Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill. If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills. Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue. Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.
It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant. The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men. If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed? Who knows.
Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election. I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away.
Why is party line irrelevant? Don’t they vote based on their constituents consisting of men and women? And based on trends (data), if it were 50/50 men and women, the result would probably be the same. Remember, only 1 out of the 7 women voted against that bill you used for an example. To add, there were plenty of men that voted against the bill, albeit Dems.
The most significant factor is literally the party line, so how is that irrelevant? I would venture to guess that religious views play a way more significant role than gender on this issue.
I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women. I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front. Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”. I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think. On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side. What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.
Once more, look at the lawmakers. Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.
It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic. As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing. I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it. I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls. It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.
the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court. For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill. 76 were 'yea'. Of those 'yea', 7 were women. https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671
Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend.
Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right? There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”? Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill. If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills. Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue. Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.
It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant. The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men. If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed? Who knows.
Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election. I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away.
I will respectfully disagree with the bolded statement. For some people, abortion was a key issue in the last election. In my area, many women acknowledged Trump is a horrible human being but voted for him solely on his pro-life stance, and Biden's pro-choice stance.
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Cheers,
HFD
There are certainly crazy zealots on both sides and more so on the anti-abortion side. But there are a lot of people that just believe it’s a life and therefore a terrible tragedy.
Cheers,
HFD
You can believe it's a terrible tragedy. I do. I wish we didn't have to have abortion, but I support a woman's choice here. As Clinton put it, it should be safe and rare.
Plus the Supreme Court justices, right? 6 men, 3 women.
Yup.
Rarely are there women but I'm sure it happens.
But you are correct, the way the will of the people should work is simply through electing officials and then laws being made. So for sure, you are correct.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend.
I mean - 42% of women voted for Trump over Biden no?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills. Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.
Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election. I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away.