Fan since a Fetus Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 It doesn’t matter if they vote for it directly. We’ve seen several instances across the states where the public has voted for something like marijuana and the republicans refused to do as the voters wanted. It’ll take a change in leadership. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 1 hour ago, Larry said: Directly or indirectly? Directly. Tho @Fan since a Fetus sums the problem up rather succinctly. See cannabis legalization in Virginia for example. Either way the Republicans will do as they please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted April 18 Author Share Posted April 18 4 hours ago, Fan since a Fetus said: It doesn’t matter if they vote for it directly. We’ve seen several instances across the states where the public has voted for something like marijuana and the republicans refused to do as the voters wanted. It’ll take a change in leadership. That was my point, about "indirectly" If Team Red won't allow the voters to legalize abortion, then they'll just have to vote Team Red out of power. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted April 20 Share Posted April 20 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 From Gavin Neswome, an ad to be played in Alabama: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 20 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said: Still need to put it on the ballot in AZ to add to their state constitution. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted May 4 Share Posted May 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmirOfShmo Posted May 7 Share Posted May 7 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long n Left Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 For the life of me, I can’t figure out where all the “Muh Rights” folks have gotten off to? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted May 14 Share Posted May 14 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted May 14 Share Posted May 14 On 5/8/2024 at 6:49 AM, Long n Left said: For the life of me, I can’t figure out where all the “Muh Rights” folks have gotten off to? 2 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted May 14 Share Posted May 14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfitzo53 Posted May 14 Share Posted May 14 "kept fetuses in her home" is not a phrase that should ever have to see print. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 15 Author Share Posted May 15 5 hours ago, dfitzo53 said: "kept fetuses in her home" is not a phrase that should ever have to see print. The problem isn't that it's in print. It's that it's in reality. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted May 17 Share Posted May 17 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted May 24 Share Posted May 24 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted May 25 Share Posted May 25 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 25 Author Share Posted May 25 Louisiana, of course, now being the FDA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted Monday at 06:03 PM Share Posted Monday at 06:03 PM Texas professors sue to fail students who seek abortions A pair of Texas professors figured out that their female students have sex and, boy, they do not like it. So now the philosophy professor and finance professor are suing for the right to punish their students who, outside of class, have abortions. "Pregnancy is not a disease, and elective abortions are not 'health care,'" University of Texas at Austin professor Daniel Bonevac sneers in a federal court filing with professor John Hatfield. Instead, Bonevac writes, because pregnancy is the result of "voluntary and consensual sexual intercourse," students should not be allowed time off to get abortions. If the students disobey and miss class for abortion care, the filing continues, the professors should be allowed to flunk students. Additionally, Bonevac asserts that he has a right to refuse to employ a teaching assistant who has had an abortion, calling such women "criminals." Click on the link for the full article But how would they know what procedure the students are having done? Are the professors planning to violate HIPPAA to find out? I guess they are saying since they think abortions are not healthcare they have a right to know about it. But it's not up to the professors to determine what is healthcare, so I suppose the courts will rule on this. In Texas, I wouldn't have high hopes they'll rule against the professors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted Tuesday at 01:37 AM Author Share Posted Tuesday at 01:37 AM 7 hours ago, China said: A pair of Texas professors figured out that their female students have sex and, boy, they do not like it. They want only their male students to have sex? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted Tuesday at 02:28 AM Share Posted Tuesday at 02:28 AM 8 hours ago, China said: But how would they know what procedure the students are having done? Are the professors planning to violate HIPPAA to find out? I guess they are saying since they think abortions are not healthcare they have a right to know about it. But it's not up to the professors to determine what is healthcare, so I suppose the courts will rule on this. In Texas, I wouldn't have high hopes they'll rule against the professors. The mistake you’re making is believing that there is some logical argument here that eventually led to believing filing a law suite was a good idea what really happened is they wanted to file a law suite to further restrict abortion or punish people harsher as a deterrence, and somehow wound up writing this stuff down and it was the best they could come up with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now