https://apnews.com/article/abortion-missouri-ballot-election-c284f4fe17a23b63a4528bc2b2051943Republicans latest fascist attempt to overturn the will of people and allow people's votes to be counted was thwarted as the courts ruled that the Republican Missouri's AG actions to illegally remove the a ballot measure to defend women's reproductive health freedom must be on the ballot.JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — A measure undoing Missouri’s near-total abortion ban will appear on the ballot in November, the state’s high court ruled Tuesday, marking the latest victory in a nationwide fight to have voters weigh in on abortion laws since federal rights to the procedure ended in 2022.If passed, the proposal would enshrine abortion rights in the constitution and is expected to broadly supplant the state’s near-total abortion ban. Judges ruled hours before the Tuesday deadline for changes to be made to the November ballot.Supreme Court judges ordered Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft to put the measure back on the ballot. He had removed it Monday following a county circuit judge’s ruling Friday.The order also directs Ashcroft, an abortion opponent, to “take all steps necessary to ensure that it is on said ballot.”Secretary of State’s Office spokesman JoDonn Chaney in an email said the Secretary of State’s Office is putting the amendment on the ballot, although Ashcroft in a statement said he’s “disappointed” with the ruling.The court’s full opinion on the case was not immediately released Tuesday.Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the campaign backing the measure, lauded the decision.“Missourians overwhelmingly support reproductive rights, including access to abortion, birth control, and miscarriage care,” campaign manager Rachel Sweet said in a statement. “Now, they will have the chance to enshrine these protections in the Missouri Constitution on November 5.”
Mary Catherine Martin, a lawyer for a group of GOP lawmakers and abortion opponents suing to remove the amendment, had told Supreme Court judges during rushed Tuesday arguments that the initiative petition “misled voters” by not listing all the laws restricting abortion that it would effectively repeal.“This Missouri Supreme Court turned a blind eye and ruled Missourians don’t have to be fully informed about the laws their votes may overturn before signing initiative petitions,” the plaintiffs said in a statement after the decision.Missouri banned almost all abortions immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.Eight other states will consider constitutional amendments enshrining abortion rights, including Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada and South Dakota. Most would guarantee a right to abortion until fetal viability and allow it later for the health of the pregnant woman, which is what the Missouri proposal would do.New York also has a ballot measure that proponents say would protect abortion rights, though there’s a dispute about its impact.Voting on the polarizing issue could draw more people to the polls, potentially impacting results for the presidency in swing states, control of Congress and the outcomes for closely contested state offices. Missouri Democrats, for instance, hope to get a boost from abortion-rights supporters during the November election.Legal fights have sprung up across the country over whether to allow voters to decide these questions — and over the exact wording used on the ballots and explanatory material. In August, Arkansas’ highest court upheld a decision to keep an abortion rights initiative off the state’s November ballot, agreeing with election officials that the group behind the measure did not properly submit documentation regarding the signature gatherers it hired.
Voters in all seven states that have had abortion questions on their ballots since Roe was overturned have sided with abortion-rights supporters.
https://www.kcur.org/politics-elections-and-government/2024-09-09/jay-ashcroft-tries-to-take-abortion-rights-amendment-off-missouri-ballot-weeks-after-approving-itWhat a piece of shit Ashcroft is.
>>1341728Unemployment is only 4.2% and there hasn't been a Republican policy to promote wage growth in modern political history. Shut the fuck up.
The shill is indignant
>killing your child in the third trimester so you can go back to making powerpoints for $60K a year
>>1341710AGAIN!?!?!?
>>1341758>What are you, some kinda breeder?Yeah. And I make more than $60k. That's the implication behind the insult.
>>1341728>>1341744This /pol/ppet is mindbroken that Biden is getting us out of the Trump recession and he can't control women.
>>1341744>unemployment>going up>is goodAlso>implying I was saying unemployment is upAlso, wage growth is good, actually.You know because people with stable financial situations are less likely to feel the need to get an abortion for their own economic well-being.Honestly your reply might have been the dumbest on topic response imaginable.
>>1341802>Proving his point
>>1341791His temper tantrum is mildly entertaining, at least
>>1341821>>1341815>>1341802New Russian talking point must have dropped.
>>1341740CA did great with their minimum wage increase. They only lost 10k jobs.Now let’s do that across the entire country, comrade.
>>1341865Already added it to my filters. Dude's pathetic.
>>1341791And on 12 midday 20th January 2025, in Soviet America a woman will control him. And his opinions.Pro-lifers' opinions will be more than invalid when President Harris ensures they'll be denied their right to be pro-life. They'll just have to deal with a post-Trump US that will become pro-Choice again. Kamala-led America. Love it or leave it.
>Womp womp>>1341821 loves Shylily
>>1341872All you need to know about pro-life's principles is this video when you put them to task on if they favor programs that help kids.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e51LvF2caXEOf course a lot of them want to force women to keep pregnancy to term even if it kills them and at the same time believe they should do nothing to make the child a productive member of society either. Except for the missionary who walks the walk for Jesus and the youth who sees the government as a source of good.Everyone else? Selfish boomers.
>>1341873He comes off as a Veibei fan.
That which has intrusive thoughts will never be a man>troon>troon>troonWeird
>>1341877>Of course a lot of them want to force women to keep pregnancyThey chose to get pregnant.
>>1341895Can you have another melt down so we can point and laugh? Your script is super boring
>>1341895>12 year old Rape victim chose to be raped and have a kid
>>1341932Muh rape is an idiotic argument. Its less than 2% of abortions nationally. And if you do get raped usually the first thing they do at the hospital is give you a massive dose of estrogen so you don't get pregnant.
>>1341935And those need to be legal, you would have them be banned because of your lust to control all women.
>>1341936>And those need to be legalThey are legal. > you would have them be banned Nope. We dont want to "control women". What we want is for you guys to stop killing babies. Do literally whatever the fuck you want, sterilize yourself if you have to. Just stop killing babies. That's our position. Not complicated.
>>1341939Yup.https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/a-review-of-exceptions-in-state-abortions-bans-implications-for-the-provision-of-abortion-services/You want a total ban and to control women. You hide behind the 'killing babies' line when everyone knows you don't care about babies. Just controlling winning.
>>1341972>Just controlling winning.This bot is broken.
>>1341972Racist demoKKKrsts really do live in a different reality. What color is the sky in your world, faggot.
Eternally kissless virgin /r9k/-reject incels thinking they can have opinions about women's bodily autonomy isn't a right
>>1341978>they can have opinions about women's bodily autonomy isn't a rightESL
>a foreigner rambling about 'ESL' in an American board>a foreignerlol
>>1341976But the Klan, Nazis and anti-Semites are backing Trump.
>>1341973Republicans want to do that too. You can't lose if you subvert the will of the people.https://sg.news.yahoo.com/republicans-launching-last-minute-attempts-201322452.html
>bots defending women murdering their babies as a sexual fetish.And I thought we would have flying cars in 2024
Not gonna pass. Missouri doesn't believe in infanticide.
>>1341993>You can't lose if you subvert the will of the people.The will of the people of Missouri is very few abortions. Pre-removal of the illegal and unjust Roe V. Wade decision Missouri had like one abortion clinic.Eat shit, queer-ass cat mom.
Will pass, Missouri doesn't care about subhuman eternal kissless incel virgins' opinions and feelings.The intrusive thoughts of subhuman eternal kissless incel virgins>Eat shit>queer-assWeird
isn't he so weird
>>1341996Other way around, they want to end the Draconian Republican abortion ban.
>>1342013What a weird strawman from a weird person.
There's those intrusive thoughts again>creampieWeird
>>1342062That's still a very weird thing to say.
Condoms have carcinogenic PFAS tho
>>1342073Forgot my link.https://www.newsweek.com/trojan-condoms-cancer-chemicals-lawsuit-1952563
>>1342079>>1342079So abortions will stop men from getting cancer.That's a win.
>>1342062>>1342073Well, the likes of you have nothing to worry about, as kissless incel virgins that are so concerned about abortions will never get to have sex with women. And as you genetic dead ends will never pollute the gene pool, that can only be a good thing.
>>1342091Not sure why I was included in this response. Me pointing out that condoms have carcinogens was a counter to gun schizo's fixation with a supposed "creampie fetish" and saying people should always use condoms for casual sex.
>>1342102Stop being weird
That which is showing its intrusive thoughts>trannyWeird
Abortion is wrong and is not a human right
>>1342127That's what Republicans do.
>>1342134Nah, they're for child deaths.
>>1341710Here is the secular case against abortion:First you must agree that human life is valuable by default. If your opponent disagrees, shake their hand, you’ve won.If they agree human life is valuable, then you need only point out that an unborn human:>Cannot be anything but alive (biological)>Cannot be anything but human (Homo Sapien)>Cannot be anything but an individual (Unique genetic code at conception)So, termination of the unborn is killing an alive human individual.From there the discussion becomes when is it okay to kill an alive human individual. We have precedence for this:>Self Defense (Death or serious harm to the mother, less than 1%)>Mercy (Short and painful death of the child, less than 1%)I’d also suggest impressing upon your adversary that you ARE in fact pro-choice, which means you value consent. Valuing consent means:>Rape (2% of all cases).Those are the sensible exceptions. 3% of cases. 97% of abortions are done out of convenience, and there is no other precedence for killing an alive human individual for this reason. From there the onus is on your opponent to justify that killing in a way that is not unique to the situation of the unborn. Covering the 3% of cases where they have an argument up front, they will have nothing sensible. They will try to name many things (location, consciousness, pain, age, etc) but none hold up to scrutiny when applied to other matters.This is one issue that has actually been solved by logic. They have only emotion left from here.
>>1342138tl;dr, Also using your logic against you, Republicans want to ban that 3%, therefor we need to keep all abortion legal to protect that 3%.
What does that which says Republicans are against abortions think of a certain someone who is supportive of the Republicans' leader?
>>1342140So we'll ban convenient abortion for the 97 % and allow the 3% special cases. Thanks for agreeing with me!!
>>1342144Nah, Republicans have proven they won't stop there, so by your logic, they all need to be legal to protect the 3%.
>>1342146No. Your being emotional. Abortion is muder. The 3% is special cases decided by the doctor. You haven't even read the full text. Do youeven believe life is sacred?
A question for those who are pro-life ITT: will you ever marry a woman to be able to make her pregnant? Are you in a relationship with a woman right now to be in any position to marry her?
>>1342147Nah, you're punishing innocent victims in your irrational war on women. You've proven you can't be trusted since Republicans in multiple states have passed full bans with no exceptions. The only choice is to make them all legal.
>>1342150There are democrat progressives that would kill a baby even after it is born. You have NO moral high ground. Just admit its a power trip to kill a defenseless baby.
>Your being emotional>Your>Abortion is muder>muderESLThose who are illiterate don't have the right to have opinions. Besides:>You're being emotional>Abortion is murderThanks for destroying your own opinion if you're being so emotional about that which you feel so emotional about. Someone who isn't emotional would simply say 'Only the individual woman has the right to decide: the concept of "Bodily Autonomy", as in their body is for them, their body is their own. Not even other women have the right to have an opinion on the issue, as they aren't that individual woman, and men have less right to so much as think of having an opinion on abortion. Only the individual woman has the right to decide'.If you so much as think of having an opinion to the contrary, the only one who is emotional here is you.
>>1342150>I am a victim, you must let me murder the innocent and defenseless to make it rightHmm.. where have I heard that argument before..
>>1342147>Do you even believe life is sacred?I thought you were making a secular argument
>>1342157He's the same schizo who supposedly wants to rape and enslave democrats, it's not like there's any continuity in his arguments
Progressives are so disingenuous....https://notthebee.com/article/come-see-how-the-teeny-tiny-share-of-late-term-abortions-actually-adds-up-to-horrifically-massive-numbers-of-dead-babies
>>1342166Did you just post the veggie tales onion unironically
>>1341712The Dobbs decision has already saved the lives of tens of thousands of people.
>>1342170>we need to ban all guns but one, fuck you if you get attacked and need more than a 10 round mag you can just dieI dunno, if you don't know how to reload, you probably shouldn't be carrying a firearm in the first place. You might hurt someone.
>>1342168>>1342172>>1342223Why are Republicans so pro death?
>Samefagging>Mass replying>Being a retardWeird
>>1342333>republicans are anti abortionWell, not really. Not Republican voters. Abortion bans lose on referendums in every state they go up in. Trump also refused to answer in his debate whether or not he'd veto an abortion ban. Republicans are flip-floppy on abortion at best.
>>1342345Just proves the disconnect between the Republican politicians and voters.Don't forget Republicans also constantly undermine the will of the voters because their anti woman platform is just not popular.
>>1342345Abortion bans lose on referendums in every state they go up in. Its electorally unpopular, even in red states. Also, "common sense abortion control" is a meaningless statement. People disagree on what "common sense" means. That's the whole point.
>>1342503He's just trying to reverse uno policies that actually save lives like gun control.
>>1342503All of those voters were born.
>>1342511This isn't a response to anything I said
>>1342582Election results prove people want reproductive health for women.
>>1342617>strawmanningIt's healthcare and the people want it.
>>1342651More like 5-6%In total 85% of abortions are from consenting people who are not related and there are no medical issues.In short, the overwhelming majority of abortions are due to women not taking responsibility for their creampie fetish.
Why does gun schizo consider the most natural form of sex to be a fetish? Wild animals don't wear condoms.
