58% seems alarmingly low, to me. I'm choosing to believe more tailored polls with more granular questions would yield less dispiriting results, 'cause damn. Years of propaganda have had their effect. Where's falwell's grave? Need to pay my...respects.
Yay Ohio! But don’t forget - first you all have to vote NO on ISSUE 1 on AUGUST 8th, in which the republicans are trying to preemptively mess with the ability for ballot initiatives like abortion rights to pass
"Quite frankly, it’s probably a bad move all over to claim that the FDA doesn’t know what it’s doing when it’s an agency we are supposed to rely on for our own safety, regardless of how we feel about abortion. If they can do this, it could be any other medication next, and I don’t think anyone wants that."
Not a bug. These are the sons and daughters (mostly sons) of the snake oil salesmen and the robber barons of old.
Free speech rights do not cover lies that harm people. You can't shout "Fire" in a crowded theater (unless there is a fire, presumably). You can't trick a woman into continuing a pregnancy that is far more likely to harm her than an abortion is.
In your face, JD Vance! (I actually have no idea what his stance on abortion is, but I’m betting that his status as a Republican wouldn’t be tolerated without the knee-jerk “abortion is bad” reaction). And, of course, every lawmaker born without a uterus should not be making decisions about reproductive rights for those of us who do. Get out there and vote for this, women and women supporters of Ohio!
It's extremely important that we hammer the abortion issue on the republithugs. All of us, but especially women must remind the women that would vote R that they will be allowing men to make their health care decisions for them. This cannot be allowed!
Men need to be aware that with accurate DNA testing available, they could be responsible for financially supporting their child for the next 18 years or so.
These “clinics” should be legislated out of existence, or at least marked with giant warning signs about their beliefs: “Abortion is murder and walking wombs are not important”.
I thought the Republican hacks on the Supreme Court ruled that efforts by California to limit lies by these crisis pregnancy clinics was a violation of their free speech. They were entitled to claim abortions caused breast cancer and make you suicidal, or even refuse to post notices they are not a medical facility. Requiring those fake clinics to provide information on contraceptives or abortion options is a no no, but states can require a pregnant woman to get an ultrasound and view it before getting an abortion.
That Ohio amendment is superbly drafted and should be the template for all such.
- It codifies the medical realities under Roe without mentioning Roe, denying opponents that shiny object.
- It does so in clear and ordinary language that any voter can understand.
- It guts the lies about "abortion on demand all the way through birth" in a clear separate clause.
- It not only achieves inclusiveness without the potentially divisive use of "pregnant person" (another diversionary target of the Right) but does so with a brilliant word choice: "patients" . Because abortion care is medical care and deserves to be protected as such.
- It reaches out to men as well because they are also "individuals" who could be hit with bans on contraception, as the forced birthers are also planning.
All in all, it does a lot if heavy lifts without breaking a sweat.
The only other item should be language explicitly shielding licensed abortion providers from prosecution or extradition to reproductive slavery states, when providing abortion care to persons from reproductive slavery states. Recent shield laws in five New England states have made it possible for licensed, qualified providers to offer telemedicine support, and to prescribe, and dispense misoprostol and mifepristone to persons in reproductive slavery states.
Now women can contact https://aidaccess.org/en/ and be referred to a US based provider for affordable care.
Adding a shield law for care in other states would have been an unnecessary complication to an amendment about in-state rights.
In any case, shield laws that protect the out-of-state practitioner give no protection to patients or practitioners in the forced birth state, who can be prosecuted for using what they receive from outside in violation of in-state laws. They are therefore of limited value.
The providers in shield law states have already prescribed and dispensed medication to nearly 4000 women in reproductive slavery states, just in the past month since the laws passed. I don't think that is limited value, but you're entitled to your opinion.
Greater ease of access by telemedicine but with the conduct still being legal in the recipient state is different from a patient or practitioner breaking the in-state law with what they received .
For example, if a state has a 6 week ban and abortion medication is sent in from NY and used at 8 weeks the doctor in NY is protected but the woman who used it or an in-state doctor who forwarded it to her are still subject to the penalties of the in-state laws.
The out-of-state provider would be ethically bound to inform the recipient of that.
Well thank you for so patiently mansplaining what everyone who follows this issue closely already fully comprehends. I can see it has been burdensome to somehow simplify, and clarify your message for my benefit.
Providers in states with shield laws, who offer services to women in reproductive slavery states, offer comprehensive care using telemedicine, before, during, and after prescribing and dispensing medication for SMA. Women who seek this care are advised of all risks, by competent, qualified, licensed providers according to accepted standards of care and best practice.
As a doctor and as a lawyer I think that they are important to protect practitioners who want to help from cynical attacks that misuse constitutional provisions.
However, the reality is that they are limited as a response because the risk to the recipients remains. The doctor in NY will not have to worry about being extradited to Texas but the woman or doctor in Texas is still under the full force of Texas law.
I'm not sure why you are so annoyed over that being noted, but we evidently will just have to disagree on our assessments.
IIRC Ohio Rs and other red states are constructing laws that limit their residents to conduct recalls and ballot issues. They are trying to circumvent state and federal laws and limit the population voices. Have I told you how much I hate Rs?
A few governors back, the Ohio gov got a bill passed that out Scott Walkered Scott Walker's anti-state union bill in Wisconsin. Organized labor organized a signature-gathering operation to put an issue on the ballot negating that law. They got more signatures than the total number of people who voted for the governor in the previous election.
The Republican legislature immediately passed legislation limiting signature-gathering to January, February, and March and required it to be done outside.
Unfortunately North Carolina has no provisions for citizen sponsored referendum drives. Only the legislature can authorize referendums, often in poorly written and confusing language so you don't know if you are voting for or against a possible law or constitutional amendment.
I know, I lived there for many years. I hate the trajectory NC is on and Rs are ruining the state from the inside out. They were pouring money into NC for the past several years. Art Pope is a real motherfucker.
I love living in Illinois. I really do. I feel safe here. My oldest is non-binary and starting high school next month and we’ve started having conversations about how they’ll decide where to go to college and perhaps begin adulthood. We told them to make sure they live in a place they feel safe to be themselves.
"given that a poll published this week found that 58 percent of people in the state want abortion to be legal — and bad news for Republicans who have passed 57,000 laws banning the procedure that are currently being held back by court orders."
As I often say, polling numbers on policy mean absolutely nothing if people aren't willing to change their vote, or at least strategically not vote, in order to make that thing happen. Ohio is now a solidly Republican state, and the Republican party is anti-abortion. Will people vote against their own party to make abortion legal? I guess we'll see.
“Will people vote against their own party to make abortion legal?”
Welp, given the opportunity, they certainly have been doing that. So I say “Yes!” That’s why OH wants to require 60% to pass a pro-choice referendum. I think the voters of OH just beat them to the punch.
58% seems alarmingly low, to me. I'm choosing to believe more tailored polls with more granular questions would yield less dispiriting results, 'cause damn. Years of propaganda have had their effect. Where's falwell's grave? Need to pay my...respects.
Yay Ohio! But don’t forget - first you all have to vote NO on ISSUE 1 on AUGUST 8th, in which the republicans are trying to preemptively mess with the ability for ballot initiatives like abortion rights to pass
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSI1Sn3Yso8
Making Our Dreams Come True
"Quite frankly, it’s probably a bad move all over to claim that the FDA doesn’t know what it’s doing when it’s an agency we are supposed to rely on for our own safety, regardless of how we feel about abortion. If they can do this, it could be any other medication next, and I don’t think anyone wants that."
Not a bug. These are the sons and daughters (mostly sons) of the snake oil salesmen and the robber barons of old.
Not just that but their biggest boosters would rather take horse meds than vaccines, remember.
Of course. Those are the snake oil mar-suc-customers
Free speech rights do not cover lies that harm people. You can't shout "Fire" in a crowded theater (unless there is a fire, presumably). You can't trick a woman into continuing a pregnancy that is far more likely to harm her than an abortion is.
Tell it to those judges trying to protect those potemkin crisis centers!
They either know already or refuse to know.
In your face, JD Vance! (I actually have no idea what his stance on abortion is, but I’m betting that his status as a Republican wouldn’t be tolerated without the knee-jerk “abortion is bad” reaction). And, of course, every lawmaker born without a uterus should not be making decisions about reproductive rights for those of us who do. Get out there and vote for this, women and women supporters of Ohio!
It's extremely important that we hammer the abortion issue on the republithugs. All of us, but especially women must remind the women that would vote R that they will be allowing men to make their health care decisions for them. This cannot be allowed!
Men need to be aware that with accurate DNA testing available, they could be responsible for financially supporting their child for the next 18 years or so.
"Crisis Pregnancy Centers Can’t Play Their Dirty Tricks In Illinois No More"
If only we could convince EVERY state to pass laws like this.
These “clinics” should be legislated out of existence, or at least marked with giant warning signs about their beliefs: “Abortion is murder and walking wombs are not important”.
I thought the Republican hacks on the Supreme Court ruled that efforts by California to limit lies by these crisis pregnancy clinics was a violation of their free speech. They were entitled to claim abortions caused breast cancer and make you suicidal, or even refuse to post notices they are not a medical facility. Requiring those fake clinics to provide information on contraceptives or abortion options is a no no, but states can require a pregnant woman to get an ultrasound and view it before getting an abortion.
That Ohio amendment is superbly drafted and should be the template for all such.
- It codifies the medical realities under Roe without mentioning Roe, denying opponents that shiny object.
- It does so in clear and ordinary language that any voter can understand.
- It guts the lies about "abortion on demand all the way through birth" in a clear separate clause.
- It not only achieves inclusiveness without the potentially divisive use of "pregnant person" (another diversionary target of the Right) but does so with a brilliant word choice: "patients" . Because abortion care is medical care and deserves to be protected as such.
- It reaches out to men as well because they are also "individuals" who could be hit with bans on contraception, as the forced birthers are also planning.
All in all, it does a lot if heavy lifts without breaking a sweat.
Bravo!
The only other item should be language explicitly shielding licensed abortion providers from prosecution or extradition to reproductive slavery states, when providing abortion care to persons from reproductive slavery states. Recent shield laws in five New England states have made it possible for licensed, qualified providers to offer telemedicine support, and to prescribe, and dispense misoprostol and mifepristone to persons in reproductive slavery states.
Now women can contact https://aidaccess.org/en/ and be referred to a US based provider for affordable care.
Adding a shield law for care in other states would have been an unnecessary complication to an amendment about in-state rights.
In any case, shield laws that protect the out-of-state practitioner give no protection to patients or practitioners in the forced birth state, who can be prosecuted for using what they receive from outside in violation of in-state laws. They are therefore of limited value.
The providers in shield law states have already prescribed and dispensed medication to nearly 4000 women in reproductive slavery states, just in the past month since the laws passed. I don't think that is limited value, but you're entitled to your opinion.
It is not opinion - it is law.
Greater ease of access by telemedicine but with the conduct still being legal in the recipient state is different from a patient or practitioner breaking the in-state law with what they received .
For example, if a state has a 6 week ban and abortion medication is sent in from NY and used at 8 weeks the doctor in NY is protected but the woman who used it or an in-state doctor who forwarded it to her are still subject to the penalties of the in-state laws.
The out-of-state provider would be ethically bound to inform the recipient of that.
I cannot make this clearer for you.
Well thank you for so patiently mansplaining what everyone who follows this issue closely already fully comprehends. I can see it has been burdensome to somehow simplify, and clarify your message for my benefit.
Providers in states with shield laws, who offer services to women in reproductive slavery states, offer comprehensive care using telemedicine, before, during, and after prescribing and dispensing medication for SMA. Women who seek this care are advised of all risks, by competent, qualified, licensed providers according to accepted standards of care and best practice.
Actually, it was womansplaining. 😉
You seem to think that I oppose shield laws.
I do not.
As a doctor and as a lawyer I think that they are important to protect practitioners who want to help from cynical attacks that misuse constitutional provisions.
However, the reality is that they are limited as a response because the risk to the recipients remains. The doctor in NY will not have to worry about being extradited to Texas but the woman or doctor in Texas is still under the full force of Texas law.
I'm not sure why you are so annoyed over that being noted, but we evidently will just have to disagree on our assessments.
> If they can do this, it could be any other medication next, and I don’t think anyone wants that.
Unless that "other medication" is hormonal contraception, in which case 𝙙𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙗𝙞𝙣𝙜𝙡𝙮 𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙮 𝙥𝙚𝙤𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙬𝙖𝙣𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩.
Why stop there though when you can also eliminate unpleasant medical devices like IUDS? Gilead’s not gonna build itself!
IIRC Ohio Rs and other red states are constructing laws that limit their residents to conduct recalls and ballot issues. They are trying to circumvent state and federal laws and limit the population voices. Have I told you how much I hate Rs?
A few governors back, the Ohio gov got a bill passed that out Scott Walkered Scott Walker's anti-state union bill in Wisconsin. Organized labor organized a signature-gathering operation to put an issue on the ballot negating that law. They got more signatures than the total number of people who voted for the governor in the previous election.
The Republican legislature immediately passed legislation limiting signature-gathering to January, February, and March and required it to be done outside.
Unfortunately North Carolina has no provisions for citizen sponsored referendum drives. Only the legislature can authorize referendums, often in poorly written and confusing language so you don't know if you are voting for or against a possible law or constitutional amendment.
It is the same in Texas, unfortunately. I checked as soon as the Dobbs opinion leaked.
We need action at the federal level, which means we need to elect a fuck-ton more Democrats.
I know, I lived there for many years. I hate the trajectory NC is on and Rs are ruining the state from the inside out. They were pouring money into NC for the past several years. Art Pope is a real motherfucker.
I love living in Illinois. I really do. I feel safe here. My oldest is non-binary and starting high school next month and we’ve started having conversations about how they’ll decide where to go to college and perhaps begin adulthood. We told them to make sure they live in a place they feel safe to be themselves.
I brought my similar child to NYC for University from a red state for the exact same reason.
OT-just saw a UPS guy (he was in uniform) who was visiting someone in the ICU. I congratulated him on the successful labor negotiations.
In the maternity ward, huh?
Well, they do deliver packages.
"given that a poll published this week found that 58 percent of people in the state want abortion to be legal — and bad news for Republicans who have passed 57,000 laws banning the procedure that are currently being held back by court orders."
As I often say, polling numbers on policy mean absolutely nothing if people aren't willing to change their vote, or at least strategically not vote, in order to make that thing happen. Ohio is now a solidly Republican state, and the Republican party is anti-abortion. Will people vote against their own party to make abortion legal? I guess we'll see.
“Will people vote against their own party to make abortion legal?”
Welp, given the opportunity, they certainly have been doing that. So I say “Yes!” That’s why OH wants to require 60% to pass a pro-choice referendum. I think the voters of OH just beat them to the punch.
They absolutely will on the ballot initiative. We've seen that in several states already.
Whether they will or won't on particular candidates remains to be seen.
Outlets like the National Review are crying that the ballot initiative is “too radical,”
whereas the abortion ban is complete and utter milk toast
Yeah, it don't track...
Intellectual consistency does not exist in the far-Reich alternative reality.
Boy Howdy... ;>D