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.
Unless, of course, it's your soon to be baby she's wanting to terminate.
I agree women should be able to get one (though most advocates use the whole "bc of rape and defects" line, which are most likely less than 10% of abortions).
So you have unprotected sex with women before you even know if she would KEEP a child?!? I think you should focus on THAT part.
It doesn't matter what McCrory does. Once the House approves it (highly unlikely there will be any other outcome) it's a done deal. The Governor does not need to sign it into law. It will be law even if he does nothing. In the unlikely event he were to veto it, the Republicans in the House and Senate just need a 3/5 majority to override any potential veto.
It absolutely matters what McCrory does, regardless of the nuts and bolts of procedure.
He needs to put a pen to it and pro-actively tell the citizenry where he stands.
It is his responsibility to step up and do so.
If it passes and he doesn't support it, he loses votes.
If it passes and he doesn't veto it, he loses votes.
And refusing to weigh in is not acceptable. He was elected and he is being paid to make the hard choices.
That's the theory at least.
For now, and likely until 2016, it looks like he's in the catbird seat.
Which raises the rest of the story.
He (and Pope) know they aren't gonna ever get crossover votes again...
so they may as well double down on keeping the right happy.
This sort of Sharia law does exactly that.
But it really DOESN'T matter to the particulars of this law what he does. There's very little chance that anything he would do would prevent the bill from becoming law.
What he does or doesn't do may matter as far as his political future, but it doesn't matter as far as this bill. I imagine he will do nothing and just let it ride and then he'll say he didn't sign it, but it will pass so the folks who are in favor of it will be happy.
But it really DOESN'T matter to the particulars of this law what he does. There's very little chance that anything he would do would prevent the bill from becoming law.
What he does or doesn't do may matter as far as his political future, but it doesn't matter as far as this bill. I imagine he will do nothing and just let it ride and then he'll say he didn't sign it, but it will pass so the folks who are in favor of it will be happy.
I understand that the law may take effect with or without him signing it.
That will be abject failure to do his job, and much of his voter base will want him to take a position that they applaud and support, as much as just letting the law pass into effect.
I understand that the law may take effect with or without him signing it.
That will be abject failure to do his job, and much of his voter base will want him to take a position that they applaud and support, as much as just letting the law pass into effect.
I think he should veto, citing the way the bill wound up being snuck onto the agenda, while acknowledging that he realizes it has enough supporters to override his veto. Then, when they override? He acknowledges that there was time after his veto for opposing voices to be heard, which means he feels confident that the GA has given the bill due diligence.
It's the way to wash the most stink off himself.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Thanks for a reply with some thought behind it.
I agree and wonder if he has the instinct or smarts.
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.