Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So pro lifers Arizona governors Jan Brewer and Doug Ducey won by 54% and 56% because of "gerrymandering"???? How do you win a state wide election with gerrymandering????? Your bias sounds silly.
Last time I looked laws are not passed by the Governor alone maybe you didn't know that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by john3232
The issue will put before the voters in 2024 and they will decide.
Now, I don't know about you but almost every political post card I receive in the mail (Mesa, AZ) stresses the issue of abortion. These political postcards are huge. A lot of money was spent creating them. The Dems are spending millions and millions in AZ.
But alas it's the price of gas and the cost of groceries that may ultimately doom the Dems in AZ
Some limitation? Yeah, it's call regulation and under the 10th amendment under our constitution it says it's the states and the people that will decide what kind of regulation they want. It's call federalism.
Again, here you go again with the myth that the "majority" of Americans are pro choice with "some" limitation in which you can't define. If your side is the majority, We would had already made it constitution by democratic legislation and not needed for a few judges to make law in 1973.
The above link is one of many polls which indicate the majority of Americans want abortion to be legal in all or most cases. Multiple surveys also reveal pretty much the same results. Not sure what further proof you need. Abortion never has been, nor should be a Constitutional right. At the same time, procreation isn't a Constitutional right either. Both are privileges which shouldn't be heavily restricted unless government money is used to subsidize either one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanJuanStar
If your side is the "majority" like you say, then pass it by federal legislation to see if you have the votes since you ignore the millions of Americans that are pro life. Make it an Amendment. By your opinion, the majority in the U.S. would be Democrat states, the majority of governorship and state legislative branches would be Democrat but the fact is it's not. So that kills your myth.
Why does being pro choice have to be a Democrat side? You may not be aware that one of the most prominent conservatives in the Senate at one time (Barry Goldwater) was pro choice. In fact, he and his wife were founding members of Planned Parenthood in AZ. Of course, this was back when the GOP was more free enterprise & semi Libertarian instead of the authoritarian party it has become. Many people on all sides of the spectrum are pro choice. Yes, there are a good share of pro lifers ... and to them I say: if you oppose abortion, don't have an abortion!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanJuanStar
So having abortions on demand with government subsidizing it will be the same as abortions with regulations? I don't see it but o.k. If regulations on abortions can save 5,000 lives a year that would be a success. Just 15% less a year would be a success.
So you want to save thousands of babies which are unwanted and will very likely dependent on government handouts for survival?! In a perfect world, there would be no need for abortions, but I despise having to pay taxes to support others' reproductive choices. Perhaps the pro lifers who are adamant about saving the unborn should be the ones paying the taxes to support all those babies who would have been aborted. Because you know very well that people who have kids are most likely living on some kind of government assistance. It comes down to either putting heavy restrictions on reproductive choices & having the public pay more for child social services, or keeping abortion safe, legal, and paid for with private money. Pick your poison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanJuanStar
On all issues when it comes to life and security? We don't agree. The government should protect life and liberty and the rest you can do whatever you like.
Life & liberty should be protected, but if the pregnancy is an accident & unwanted, I can't see forcing a woman to go through labor & give birth if she never wanted a child in the first place. Contraception should always be used to prevent pregnancies, but we all know it’s not 100% effective. Whatever the reason, it's really not our business, nor the government's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanJuanStar
Don't We have laws to protect you from me beating your brains in or raping you but you don't want to extend that courtesy to unborn children because you don't want the government putting regulations on you? Too much to ask of you to have an abortion before the 4 month??? That's too much to ask of you?
All right, but how about extending the courtesy to women who were sexually assaulted & became pregnant as a result? In certain states, laws were recently passed that forbid abortion with no exceptions for incest, rape, or anything else other than saving the mother's life. This is the main reason why I'm no longer a Republican. I generally agree with them on fiscal matters, but not on these social issues which should be personal choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kell490
Arizona will make abortion legal and added to our state constitution so the right winger kooks we have in our legislature won't be able to stop it.
The initiative was able to get 175k signatures in only 2 1/2 months. They need 336k signatures were not able to make the cut off by July. If the legislature truly wanted Arizona voters to decide they would have put it on the ballot. The only thing they put on the ballot every election cycle is a initiative to modify our constitution so they can reverse ballot measures. They hate ballot measures because they don't represent a majority of Arizona voters. They keep getting reelected mostly by gerrymandering.
In the meantime, the archaic 19th Century Law which prohibits practically all abortions, and makes criminals out of doctors who perform them is the "law of the land" according to Brnovich. What the pro life side fails to understand is this will not stop abortions. Women will still get them somehow & some way: either by unsafe practices, or traveling to other states where it's legal.
Last time I looked laws are not passed by the Governor alone maybe you didn't know that.
Well you open the can of worms and accused the Arizona state and the state majority party being in power because of gerrymandering and they are not the majority. Bias conspiracies.
Republicans got the majority in the last 3 governor races when the candidates are pro life. The Arizona State Senate is Republican and state legislative branch is GOP. Your accusation is they are in power because of "gerrymandering". That's a myth.
The above link is one of many polls which indicate the majority of Americans want abortion to be legal in all or most cases. Multiple surveys also reveal pretty much the same results. Not sure what further proof you need. Abortion never has been, nor should be a Constitutional right. At the same time, procreation isn't a Constitutional right either. Both are privileges which shouldn't be heavily restricted unless government money is used to subsidize either one.
So We are making laws by polls? Those polls aren't accurate but if you think pro life has a solid majority then why make law in 1973 and not pass a constitutional amendment by now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Native
Why does being pro choice have to be a Democrat side? You may not be aware that one of the most prominent conservatives in the Senate at one time (Barry Goldwater) was pro choice. In fact, he and his wife were founding members of Planned Parenthood in AZ. Of course, this was back when the GOP was more free enterprise & semi Libertarian instead of the authoritarian party it has become. Many people on all sides of the spectrum are pro choice. Yes, there are a good share of pro lifers ... and to them I say: if you oppose abortion, don't have an abortion!
Goldwater was a libertarian later in his years and away from the Reagan doctrine. After the 1964 one sided loss, the party moved on. Authoritarian party? Sorry, wrong party. The party of big government is the Democrat party.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Native
So you want to save thousands of babies which are unwanted and will very likely dependent on government handouts for survival?! In a perfect world, there would be no need for abortions, but I despise having to pay taxes to support others' reproductive choices. Perhaps the pro lifers who are adamant about saving the unborn should be the ones paying the taxes to support all those babies who would have been aborted. Because you know very well that people who have kids are most likely living on some kind of government assistance. It comes down to either putting heavy restrictions on reproductive choices & having the public pay more for child social services, or keeping abortion safe, legal, and paid for with private money. Pick your poison.
You should truly come out and get rid of everybody that is a drain to the government by your definition. Should We kill all the children taking the earned income credit? That is an handout by the taxpayers. The list is long.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Native
Life & liberty should be protected, but if the pregnancy is an accident & unwanted, I can't see forcing a woman to go through labor & give birth if she never wanted a child in the first place. Contraception should always be used to prevent pregnancies, but we all know it’s not 100% effective. Whatever the reason, it's really not our business, nor the government's.
Nobody gets pregnant by "accident". That's like refusing to do your responsibilities in a marriage because it was a "mistake". Again, abortion should be legal but regulated. Germany has a 12 week limit. How long does a person needs to decide to terminate it because it's unwanted or by a mistake? Is 4 or 5 months good enough or you need more time?
Science is not an opinion. The predominance of human biological research confirms that human life begins at conception—fertilization. At fertilization, the human being emerges as a whole, genetically distinct, individuated zygotic living human organism, a member of the species Homo sapiens, needing only the proper environment in order to grow and develop. The difference between the individual in its adult stage and in its zygotic stage is one of form, not nature. This statement focuses on the scientific evidence of when an individual human life begins.
Now, if We can finally agree when lives begin then We can have an honest debate at what stage of life it could be terminated for whatever reason or with limitations and how are the people are going to enforce the standards under democratic legislation. If you still think it's not a life then We can't move the conversation to 2nd base because you want to ignore science.
On the vaccination, the government shouldn't force a drug against the will of citizens especially by lies. I'm not ending a life but I can decide not to take a drug. Just like rejecting therapy or chemo or surgery.
I think you got me confused with another person. I believe abortions should be legal and rare. Germany has a 12 week limitation and so does the rest of Europe. Abortions should be legal with limitations. 3, 4 or 5 months is reasonable for you to terminate your pregnancy. I don't like extremes from either side.
My apologies if I got you confused with another poster. Science says humans are accelerating climate change. Many don't believe in this science though. Abortions after the first trimester are extremely rare. But there are circumstances when an abortion is performed because of the risk to the mother or fetal medical issues. That's the choice the family should make though, not government.
My apologies if I got you confused with another poster. Science says humans are accelerating climate change. Many don't believe in this science though. Abortions after the first trimester are extremely rare. But there are circumstances when an abortion is performed because of the risk to the mother or fetal medical issues. That's the choice the family should make though, not government.
Climate change is different because many experts are not sure what should be the government's response or how much power they should have. The solution is a lot worse than the problem.
Latest CNN poll shows Hobbs with +3 RCP Average Lake 1.1+ 538 shows average Hobbs 0.5+. It will be a close race forsure early ballots are being mailed out soon.
Latest CNN poll shows Hobbs with +3 RCP Average Lake 1.1+ 538 shows average Hobbs 0.5+. It will be a close race forsure early ballots are being mailed out soon.
Tell me a governor candidate in modern times that refused to debate and won. Name 1? Hobbs barely won in a blue wave year in 2018 by 0.8% against a nobody. She is a bad candidate.
Tell me a governor candidate in modern times that refused to debate and won. Name 1? Hobbs barely won in a blue wave year in 2018 by 0.8% against a nobody. She is a bad candidate.
It did. We may end up having a Racist Chickensht for Arizona Govenor. Maybe her and Fetterman can team up as they have similar Racist histories
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How do you win a state wide election with gerrymandering????? Your bias sounds silly.
Lake 48.5% Hobbs 44.8% 
