Ohio voting on Abortions and marijuana

Yeah, repealing Roe was foolish.

Those silly ideas...like Natural Rights of Man. Right to Life, Liberty, and Property. And the right to keep and bear arms to defend all of those.

So old-fashioned.

We're making real progress...now that we've finally forced **THOSE PEOPLE** to recognize that their bodies, their physical persons, are property of the State to conduct mRNA experiments on. Now that we're coming to recognize that only GOVERNMENT has the right to arms and force.

And now that we're recognizing that while all people are equal, some are more so than others. A baby's right to life is superceded by mother's right to be a swinging-single slut. And HER right to life, or reproductive rights, are superceded by the WHO's right to impose, on whim, an untested and NOT-effective mRNA experimental injection, fraudulently labeled as a vaccine.

I guess we're moving forward...now that we all know that we're the chattel of the Globalists, of Davos Man...

A challenge to those who are adverse to Roe vs. Wade being repealed:
Please show the wording that enacted such a law. I cannot find it, and would ever so much appreciate someone pointing me to the specifics of the case.

Another request, if it isn't too much. Please show where the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to decide what individuals may, or may not, ingest into their own bodies.
And for those claiming that the oats of today are not even near cousins to what was grown and sold yester-year, so what. Smoke/ingest less. How is it any of my business what you smoke or eat?

First off, judges of ANY kind were NEVER intended to legislate. Judges are there to INTERPRET the law as it exists rather than inject their own political bias into it.

Secondly, we have enough mentally, physically and emotionally impaired people in our society without legalizing MORE ways for those impaired people to become even more impaired.

So you're not ok with, say, Covid mandates but you're fine with mandates about what people do to/with their own bodies when you agree with it?

I think the OP started this thread for the purpose of getting people agitated and arguing with each other. Whether you agree with Ohio's election or not, what's done is done, and we'll all just have to live with it.

You know what, if the System wants us to have legalized weed so bad, they should just make it legal across the board and get it the fuck over with. It's not like keeping it illegal is stopping anyone who wants to use it. I've fought against it for years, but now I'm just too old and tired to keep at it. Druggies are going to have to learn the hard way; let Darwin sort them out.

Reinstate Roe v. Wade, as well. Abortion is not the hill conservatives should be dying on. If the pro-life crowd wants to do something about babies being killed, then they should start having more of their own children to make up for the ones the lunatic leftists are killing.

Keith wrote:.....  Abortion is not the hill conservatives should be dying on .....  

I agree, because it's a hill they will never conquer.

Red Lily wrote:

Keith wrote:.....  Abortion is not the hill conservatives should be dying on .....  

I agree, because it's a hill they will never conquer.

First, I vehemently disagree.

Second...protection of human life, of Natural Rights of Man, is ABSOLUTELY a hill worth dying over.

Remove protection of Man's right to natural life, from conception to natural end...and remove protection of the most-defenseless of children...and you've just removed the reason for civilization.

A society that through propaganda and sexual grooming, can condition young people to disregard babies as "choices" to be destroyed at will...can, and will, soon do the same to others. To the elderly. To the sick. To the unemployed. To the needy. To those who are currently not trendy with the Elites.

Which one of those groups will you be in? And, now that you refuse to speak against this barbarism, who do you expect will speak for YOU, when the need comes?

Casey Jones wrote:

Red Lily wrote:

Keith wrote:.....  Abortion is not the hill conservatives should be dying on .....  

I agree, because it's a hill they will never conquer.

First, I vehemently disagree.

Second...protection of human life, of Natural Rights of Man, is ABSOLUTELY a hill worth dying over.

Remove protection of Man's right to natural life, from conception to natural end...and remove protection of the most-defenseless of children...and you've just removed the reason for civilization.

A society that through propaganda and sexual grooming, can condition young people to disregard babies as "choices" to be destroyed at will...can, and will, soon do the same to others.  To the elderly.  To the sick.  To the unemployed.  To the needy.  To those who are currently not trendy with the Elites.

Which one of those groups will you be in?  And, now that you refuse to speak against this barbarism, who do you expect will speak for YOU, when the need comes?

I don't live in a country where elections are won or lost on the topic of abortion. Personally, I find the whole thing abhorrent.

Red Lily wrote:

I don't live in a country where elections are won or lost on the topic of abortion.  Personally, I find the whole thing abhorrent.

Abortion has not been on any ballot, Federal or otherwise, until now. This was an amendment to the State Constitution.

Roe v. Wade was just forced on the public - legislation through judicial fiat. It was bad law, illogical and incongruous, and done TO forcibly mandate abortion throughout the US.

Abortion is a CRIMINAL matter. Criminal law is the prerogative of the various States. The US Constitution makes this clear.

If the State of New York wanted to make abortions free, and Utah wanted to punish it with a firing squad (it was considered homicide in Utah until Roe) then NEITHER position has anything to do with the Congress or Federal Government.

This is the way it had been all along, until the consolidation of power by the Left. Some states allowed, say, fireworks; or open carry of sidearms; or marriage of 12-year-olds. Or of first cousins.

Other states did not. Each state had the prerogative to determine how they would live.

This forcible, extralegal mandate of Roe was WHY it had become a hot-button issue. Support it, and a candidate supports an Elite Ruling Class making edicts and impositions on faraway people in states that disapprove. Reject it and criticize it, and the candidate is advocating Federalism - what the Left would mockingly call "States' Rights."

Red Lily wrote:So you're not ok with, say, Covid mandates but you're fine with mandates about what people do to/with their own bodies when you agree with it?

It isn't a "mandate" to make murder illegal!