this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
-24 points (30.6% liked)
Conservative
247 readers
5 users here now
We are a community dedicated to discussion surrounding the political right.
People of all political views are welcome here, but we expect a high level of discussion from everyone.
Rules:
-Good Faith participation only. take hollow shit slinging elsewhere please
-Stay on topic. should be obvious
-Follow instance rules. They pay the bills, they get to set rules.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Lmao tell me you're just posting outrage without reading the article without telling me.
If you had been bothered to read before making a retarded quip, you'd notice that the rejection by judge was because the ballot measure was not specific enough, and was just meant to tack a bunch of stuff on such that it could get passed simply by being attached to a different issue.
If you don't see why that's not how things should run, I only assume you're the one person on earth who isn't a corrupt politician that just absolutely salivates over every god awful omnibus bill with hundreds of riders for random garbage
So your argument is the public is too stupid to decide ballot measures by themselves?
No. It's quite telling that you refuse to address the actual reason, and are just trying to pin it off on anything else. Perhaps there's a reason you're so incredibly pissy that these issues can't just all be slammed into one omnibus package, but rather have to be individually voted on?
It's pretty dishonest to call it an omnibus package. It all comes down to whether or not you think the government should have the power to regulate a person's fertility and childbearing. That is hardly the limited type of government conservatives say they support.
It covers a whole lot of things. If you could be bothered to read, which i know is a struggle for you, you'd see it covers a lot of stuff and isn't one concise policy.
All that stuff relates to fertility and child bearing like I said.
Denser than a fucking brick, you are
Tell me where I am wrong. I didn't see anything saying otherwise in the article
Seems I was right about you
Enlighten me then.
I have. Multiple fucking times
Which post did you tell me what other things are in this omnibus?
The fucking article told you that.
All I saw in the article is that it involved matters related to fertility and childbearing. You said I was wrong. Tell me how.
You seriously fail to understand how "everything related to those topics" is not a single issue bill?
It's all related to reproductive rights. Bills related to fundamental rights are often broad. For example the Civil Rights act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This is no different.
So you agree it's broad then? Cool. They should either pass individual ballot measures or fuck off. Just crying "rights" isn't an excuse to sidestep good legislatige process
Ballot measures are part of the legislative process. It's broad because it needs to be. Reproductive rights touch on a lot of areas. It's not a severable principle. It needs to be broad. The idea that it is overbroad is wrong.
It's entirely severable. The article clearly listed multiple distinct topics. Measures could easily be made for each separate one.
It could be, but it wouldn't make sense as it wouldn't serve the purpose of the ballot initiative. It's all based on the same legal principle that the government does not have the right to infringe on an individual's rights to reproductive control.
I could make an entire encyclopedia of law just under one incredibly generic principle like you're doing. It doesn't make it into a specific policy just because it shares a theme.
Look at other ballot measures, like weed legalization. Those simple principles sprung an encyclopedia of laws too. ANY significant change to government policy will do that. Complexity is certainly not a reason to ignore the will of the voters.
Jesus you're fucking dense. Yes, there's an encyclopedia of laws to be passed. No, it doesn't justify forcing them all into one big yes/no
You can keep insisting that it's an "encyclopedia of laws" but that doesn't make it true. Ballot initiatives are to determine the public stance on the issues. The public wants reproductive rights. It doesn't matter if you describe it in those 2 words or a thousand words. It means the same thing.
So then vote on each specific law individually and stop throwing a fit if its all stuff you're confident in. Simple as.
Or Republicans could stop treating the public like idiots who can't decide on more than one thing at once. Funny how y'all have no problem with compendium bills when it comes to disenfranchisement of minority voters or cutting taxes on the wealthy.