this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
-25 points (29.5% liked)

Conservative

248 readers
1 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
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] ChonkyOwlbear 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's entirely severable. The article clearly listed multiple distinct topics. Measures could easily be made for each separate one.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] ChonkyOwlbear 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So then vote on each specific law individually and stop throwing a fit if its all stuff you're confident in. Simple as.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear 1 points 11 months ago

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.