Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Metropolitan DC Local Politics
Reply to "question 1 on MD ballot - negatives?"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]A yes on Q1 would add this text to the Maryland constitution. That every person, as a central component of an individual's rights to liberty and equality, has the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including but not limited to the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one's own pregnancy. The state may not, directly or indirectly, deny, burden, or abridge the right unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means[/quote] Which is just a bunch of fluff and doesn't answer my question. It starts off with 'every person' and 'reproductive rights'.... The entire thing is extraordinarily vague and you could drive a Mack truck through the holes in that language. Is a minor a person? Is a sex change operation a reproductive rights issue? If yes to both of those, then I can't see how voting yes to Q1 wouldn't remove parental rights to have final say over their minor child's health decisions when it comes to something like gender affirming care. They're selling it as rights for abortion acess, but it seems to be far more reaching than that and they're trying to hide it with vague language. [/quote] Are you the OP? It sounds like you should vote no to reconfirm your belief in controlling other people's bodies. No person under the age of 18 is having gender affirmation surgery over the objections of their custodial parent. This doesn't happen. I expect you know that.[/quote] This could upend that. [/quote] How? [/quote] Minor argues: 1) a person, 2)that gender affirming care is their reproductive freedom, and 3) that giving parents control over their decision violates, "The state may not, directly or indirectly, deny, burden, or abridge the right unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means". Look, I'll vote for abortion rights, but I am against very bad bills with all sorts of insane unintended consequences possible. Why was the language for Q1 tightened up so as not to be overly broad and vague? [/quote] Yeah, you'd rather leave the chance that all of the women in MD would be impacted if this doesn't pass. Give me a break. [/quote] Give me a break. MD is solidly blue. Abortion in MD will never go away. This question has ridiculously broad language that opens up all sorts of other cans of worms for unintended consequences. [/quote] You have to ask yourself if this is harmless virtue signaling or if this is an attempt to get the camel's nose in the tent. [/quote] No, I do not have to ask myself that. But if that's what you think, then you should vote no and be done with it. As the PP said, you're not fooling anybody here.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
