Lakewood Dem Club has a sign pickup 7/8 11a-1p at Madison Park. Suggested donation $5.

Over 700k signatures for the abortion rights amendment. Pretty scary that despite overwhelming support from Ohioans, this turnout would not be sufficient under the rules Republicans are trying to pass with Issue 1 (requiring a min of 5% from ALL 88 counties). The idea that land should have more voting power than people is completely antithetical to democracy. 

 

It is imperative that Issue 1 is defeated on Aug 8.

 

Completely agree with the point, but I also stared at this map for a good minute before I figured out it looked weird because it's including the water area of the Lake Erie counties

BREAKING - The Ohio Secretary of State's office has certified petition signatures for the proposed abortion amendment for the November 7 ballot. If approved by voters, it would enshrine abortion rights into the state's constitution. 

Another W in Ohio

 

Would the Ohio Supreme Court be stupid enough to reinstate the abortion ban right before Ohioans vote on abortion rights in November? I’m thinking the answer is likely yes. Which would in turn make it even more likely that the amendment would pass. 
 

 

https://x.com/ohiocapjournal/status/1691064627126472705?s=46&t=7i2eCUyWNZMfcPIb8zesTg

15 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Would the Ohio Supreme Court be stupid enough to reinstate the abortion ban right before Ohioans vote on abortion rights in November? I’m thinking the answer is likely yes. Which would in turn make it even more likely that the amendment would pass. 
 

 

https://x.com/ohiocapjournal/status/1691064627126472705?s=46&t=7i2eCUyWNZMfcPIb8zesTg

I think the amendment will surprise people and while close, I think it is going to fail. The language is a bit of an overreach in my opinion (it does not just guarantee the right to an abortion for the first trimester or 15-20 weeks which is where the majority sits) and it will be attacked vociferously for that reason.

1) looking at the final results of Issue 1, you had a 57-43 vote split. It would not be unreasonable to argue that at least 5-8% of the No on Issue 1 vote was from pro-life leaning voters who did not agree with the Issue 1 position and found it to be an overreach. If you take that margin away, you have an extremely close vote.

2) November election is an off year election and outside of city council races, there is not much on the ballot. It will be hard to get turnout more than what happened in August for the special election so you have a lot of people who are just not going to show up even though this is on the ballot.

3) It is always easier to vote no on an Amendment than yes. So the burden now is on the yes voters.

So if your electorate looks pretty similar to what you have in August and the big question is how many of the 57% are more Republican leaning who did not like issue 1 but more supportive of Pro-Life issues OR are pro-choice but find this particular amendment a bridge to far.  

28 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

1) looking at the final results of Issue 1, you had a 57-43 vote split. It would not be unreasonable to argue that at least 5-8% of the No on Issue 1 vote was from pro-life leaning voters who did not agree with the Issue 1 position and found it to be an overreach. If you take that margin away, you have an extremely close vote.

 

 

Those ARE unreasonable and totally made up %'s to justify your regressive and unpopular opinions.

11 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

Those ARE unreasonable and totally made up %'s to justify your regressive and unpopular opinions.

There will also be a larger turnout since it is a general election. 

53 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

3) It is always easier to vote no on an Amendment than yes. So the burden now is on the yes voters.

 

This isn't true. The bias for voters is towards the status quo, not voting an amendment up or down.

 

So the question would then be is this amendment closer to the status quo than the heartbeat bill? I think voters will think it is.

10 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

 

This isn't true. The bias for voters is towards the status quo, not voting an amendment up or down.

 

So the question would then be is this amendment closer to the status quo than the heartbeat bill? I think voters will think it is.

Doesn't the proposed amendment essentially return Ohio to the rules under Roe v. Wade?

48 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

Those ARE unreasonable and totally made up %'s to justify your regressive and unpopular opinions.

Are you saying that /all of the 57% that voted against issue 1 did so solely to support the abortion rights amendment? You leave no room for people that vote against Issue 1 and that could possibly be pro life? I think that is a bridge too far.

What numbers are made up? Issue 1 failed 57%-43% that is a fact. The 5-8% number i cited is speculation because we have no idea how the vote will go but it is certainly reasonable that a % of the 57% who voted no on issue 1 would vote no on the abortion amendment. We do not know how big that percentage is. I speculate it is in the 5-8% range. If it is 5% the amendment passes 52-48, if it is 8% it fails. 49-51.  I still think the amendment passes, but could still see it failing. 

 

It is interesting that you want to attack my statement as a bunch of bunk because it does not comport with your particular view on things instead of actually taking the statement for what it is worth and actually looking at what can happen. Given the Issue 1 has 57% support, and there is probably going to be some fall off. Even if the abortion polling shows it is favorable, there is often a 3-5 point +/- variance in polling. It is certainly not an unreasonable assertion. What actual analysis do you have on the issue besides the fact you do not like the pro-life side?

9 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Are you saying that /all of the 57% that voted against issue 1 did so solely to support the abortion rights amendment? You leave no room for people that vote against Issue 1 and that could possibly be pro life? I think that is a bridge too far.

What numbers are made up? Issue 1 failed 57%-43% that is a fact. The 5-8% number i cited is speculation because we have no idea how the vote will go but it is certainly reasonable that a % of the 57% who voted no on issue 1 would vote no on the abortion amendment. We do not know how big that percentage is. I speculate it is in the 5-8% range. If it is 5% the amendment passes 52-48, if it is 8% it fails. 49-51.  I still think the amendment passes, but could still see it failing. 

 

It is interesting that you want to attack my statement as a bunch of bunk because it does not comport with your particular view on things instead of actually taking the statement for what it is worth and actually looking at what can happen. Given the Issue 1 has 57% support, and there is probably going to be some fall off. Even if the abortion polling shows it is favorable, there is often a 3-5 point +/- variance in polling. It is certainly not an unreasonable assertion. What actual analysis do you have on the issue besides the fact you do not like the pro-life side?

 

Well, we do have polling we could look to instead of making numbers up...

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4115739-almost-60-percent-of-ohio-voters-back-abortion-rights-amendment-poll/

22 minutes ago, westerninterloper said:

Doesn't the proposed amendment essentially return Ohio to the rules under Roe v. Wade?

Yes and no. I think the amendment would easily pass and be a no-brainer if it just guaranteed a right to abortion until viability somewhere in the 15-21 week area.  The amendment does this but it also states that it also allows exceptions for the "health and well being of the mother" which offers a broad exception that goes beyond the physical safety of the mother and essentially would allow any licensed professional (not just an ob) to sign off on an exception until birth. 

 

Given what people may feel politically about the issue, I think given Ohio's conservative bent, the general consensus would be to have some guardrails on abortion but to at least have it legal through somewhere between the first 15-21 weeks. The majority of Ohioans do not support the heartbeat bill, but the majority also do not support abortion until birth. Even though the data may show that late term abortions may be a small amount of abortions, public opinion, especially in Ohio is not overly supportive of such a broad exception. 

 

There will be a lot of messaging on the issue from both sides in the coming months. The pro-choice side will try and sell people that it goes back to the way things were under Roe and leave out the other stuff. The pro-life side will likely push the fact it will allow late term abortions and also likely bring into the conversation transgender issues in a hope to peel off voters. 

 

Politically, if the abortion amendment loses, it could actually help democrats the most because 2023 is a nothing year as far as elections go however, 2024 is big with the presidential election and probably more importantly Senate. If the amendment passes, it will probably hurt Sherrod Brown's chances because he cant really run on this wedge issue in Ohio, but if it fails it will allow it to be a wedge issue for voters in 24 and help his reelection chances. 

I was actually hoping for a >60 % NO vote for a bigger pro-choice cushion.  What happpens in November will hinge on the extent of participation of Gen Z and women in general.

1 minute ago, Luke_S said:

 

Well, we do have polling we could look to instead of making numbers up...

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4115739-almost-60-percent-of-ohio-voters-back-abortion-rights-amendment-poll/

I think the polling is still early on that though and as the campaign starts in a month that may change some. I do believe at this time the majority will back the amendment but.......

1) There will be a lot of commercials out there that will probably peel off some of that support.

2) The 57% support against Issue 1 does support much of this assertion. 

3) The November election will still be a low turnout election (under 50%) because it is an off year election.

4) There are a number of people who voted no on issue 1 who will vote no on the abortion amendment. The question is how much fall off will there be. The poll does not accurately measure that. Plus the poll was done on 7/24 before issue 1. 

 

Do I think the abortion amendment will pass, Yes. However, I think it will be much closer than the issue 1 debate. 

1 minute ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

3) The November election will still be a low turnout election (under 50%) because it is an off year election.

4) There are a number of people who voted no on issue 1 who will vote no on the abortion amendment. The question is how much fall off will there be. The poll does not accurately measure that. Plus the poll was done on 7/24 before issue 1. 

 

3) - The messaging for the August election was not about Issue 1 specifically, but cultural issues like abortion. The surprisingly high turnout for that election shows that these issues are incredibly motivating for people. I'm not sure we should be expecting normal off-year election turnout.

4) I'm honestly not even sure what you are talking about. This poll is only about support for the abortion amendment. I'm not sure if you're intentionally muddying the waters by brining issue 1 into the mix. I understand your point that of the 57% of August voters its likely not all will support the abortion amendment, but we shouldn't pretend we don't have any data points for support in Ohio for the amendment. And from what I've seen, the polling on this issue has been pretty stable. 

I think this national poll can shed some light on where things may eventually end up. Prediction is that in Ohio and elsewhere, most states will be looking at restrictions between 3-6 months with strong polling toward retaining health/rape/incest exceptions.    

 

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/26/1171863775/poll-americans-want-abortion-restrictions-but-not-as-far-as-red-states-are-going

32 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

3) - The messaging for the August election was not about Issue 1 specifically, but cultural issues like abortion. The surprisingly high turnout for that election shows that these issues are incredibly motivating for people. I'm not sure we should be expecting normal off-year election turnout.

I think turnout will probably be a bit higher than an normal off year election but it will not come close to turnout for presidential or even Congressional elections. 

6 minutes ago, surfohio said:

I think this national poll can shed some light on where things may eventually end up. Prediction is that in Ohio and elsewhere, most states will be looking at restrictions between 3-6 months with strong polling toward retaining health/rape/incest exceptions.    

 

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/26/1171863775/poll-americans-want-abortion-restrictions-but-not-as-far-as-red-states-are-going

I think this pretty much encompasses where the nation is. They want access to abortion up to a certain point but they also want to protect the life of the unborn once it reaches a certain level of viability. Most people would consider an abortion at 30 weeks rather inhumane. Most people would not consider the same at 6 weeks. You have loud voices on each side arguing for no exceptions in any case and I do not think the public falls into either category. 

 

RFK Jr for as crazy as he may be, probably sums up the debate pretty well with his position. While that may not fit into either party's agenda, he is probably in line with most of the country with his stance. 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

What actual analysis do you have

 

History?

 

Besides, I'm not the one speculating and making up stuff to fit a certain agenda. It's pretty obvious your stance on pro-life is the minority position, by a lot. 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I think the amendment will surprise people and while close, I think it is going to fail. The language is a bit of an overreach in my opinion (it does not just guarantee the right to an abortion for the first trimester or 15-20 weeks which is where the majority sits) and it will be attacked vociferously for that reason.

1) looking at the final results of Issue 1, you had a 57-43 vote split. It would not be unreasonable to argue that at least 5-8% of the No on Issue 1 vote was from pro-life leaning voters who did not agree with the Issue 1 position and found it to be an overreach. If you take that margin away, you have an extremely close vote.

2) November election is an off year election and outside of city council races, there is not much on the ballot. It will be hard to get turnout more than what happened in August for the special election so you have a lot of people who are just not going to show up even though this is on the ballot.

3) It is always easier to vote no on an Amendment than yes. So the burden now is on the yes voters.

So if your electorate looks pretty similar to what you have in August and the big question is how many of the 57% are more Republican leaning who did not like issue 1 but more supportive of Pro-Life issues OR are pro-choice but find this particular amendment a bridge to far.  

 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

…Do I think the abortion amendment will pass, Yes. However, I think it will be much closer than the issue 1 debate. 

 

I’m impressed by the number of words you are willing to write. Saving these comments for further discussion after the amendment passes. It’s also great how you predicted that it would fail and then just a few posts later predicted it would pass, but be closer than Issue 1. It’s good to hedge your bets like that!

 

2 hours ago, westerninterloper said:

Doesn't the proposed amendment essentially return Ohio to the rules under Roe v. Wade?

Yes, although it does more explicitly lay out protection for the pregnant person’s health, and also explicitly protects contraceptives. Those are both popular positions. 

2 hours ago, Clefan98 said:

 

History?

 

Besides, I'm not the one speculating and making up stuff to fit a certain agenda. It's pretty obvious your stance on pro-life is the minority position, by a lot. 

You really do not have data to support that statement. First you do not understand my personal position on the matter, second, based on your comments, you clearly do not seem to understand the numbers.

 

For clarity sake, I do believe the amendment will likely win in November but it will be along the lines of 51-49 or 52-48. 

I do believe that a majority of Ohioans support some form of abortion access. I do not believe the majority of Ohioans want full uninhibited access throughout the 40 weeks of pregnancy. I think if you ask the majority of Ohioans, they would support reasonable restrictions on abortion.  

 

You may disagree with the position that there are people who want to place limits on abortion access, but if you take the pulse of the state, one that leans conservative nonetheless, this is a likely outcome. 

2 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

 

I’m impressed by the number of words you are willing to write. Saving these comments for further discussion after the amendment passes. It’s also great how you predicted that it would fail and then just a few posts later predicted it would pass, but be closer than Issue 1. It’s good to hedge your bets like that!

 

Yes, although it does more explicitly lay out protection for the pregnant person’s health, and also explicitly protects contraceptives. Those are both popular positions. 

For clarity sake, and I miscommuicated earlier. I think it will be a close vote but will likely pass in the 51/52% range. What I meant to say about failing was that I think it could possibly fail. I think that if you compare it to issue 1, there was no way issue 1 would fail. I am not as convinced about the abortion amendment but if I had to put a best guess on it, I see it narrowly passing at this point. If you want to quote me after the election, you can let this stand as my official prediction. 

Is there really a chunk (6-10%) of the electorate that will change their minds on this vote because the amendment allows for 24 weeks (fetal viability) instead of the "more palatable" 15-20? The answer is no. That's not what's going to have people clamoring for a No vote here.

 

I imagine the confusion from Issue 1 works both ways. We'll see similar turnout and a similar result: 57-43

44 minutes ago, 10albersa said:

Is there really a chunk (6-10%) of the electorate that will change their minds on this vote because the amendment allows for 24 weeks (fetal viability) instead of the "more palatable" 15-20? The answer is no. That's not what's going to have people clamoring for a No vote here.

 

If/when the amendment passes we can expect another more restrictive proposition from the other side. This is absolutely going to be an ongoing thing as long as there's no more Issue 1's on the horizon. 

2 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

For clarity sake, and I miscommuicated earlier. I think it will be a close vote but will likely pass in the 51/52% range. What I meant to say about failing was that I think it could possibly fail. I think that if you compare it to issue 1, there was no way issue 1 would fail. I am not as convinced about the abortion amendment but if I had to put a best guess on it, I see it narrowly passing at this point. If you want to quote me after the election, you can let this stand as my official prediction. 

I do appreciate the clarification and “official” prediction. 
 

Let’s start a pool. My estimate is that the amendment passes 57-43. Issue 1 is as good a proxy as anything; polling indicates Ohioans support abortion rights; and weed being the only other significant issue on the ballot will bring out more likely supporters. I’m thinking the Venn diagram overlap of people who support loosening weed restrictions while increasing abortion restrictions is very small. 

If I had to put a number on it, I would say 54/46. I could be way off, though. We'll only know in November. I think there are more No on 1 votes that switch than there are Yes on 1 votes that switch, but I also think turnout will negate most of the switch. I think more voters who show up in November will vote in favor of the Abortion Rights amendment.

 

It probably helps the Yes campaign in November that there aren't any statewide races. They've outperformed for Republicans in the past because Democrats can't run a good candidate. 

20 hours ago, 10albersa said:

Is there really a chunk (6-10%) of the electorate that will change their minds on this vote because the amendment allows for 24 weeks (fetal viability) instead of the "more palatable" 15-20? The answer is no. That's not what's going to have people clamoring for a No vote here.

 

I imagine the confusion from Issue 1 works both ways. We'll see similar turnout and a similar result: 57-43

I think it's more likely people who support some abortion access, but less than this amendment allows, will choose to abstain from the vote, rather than voting it down. I doubt it will be 10, or even 6%, of the electorate though. 

I also predict a similar spread on the abortion vote in November about 57-43. The anti-abortion segment of the GOP does not represent everyone in the party - take a look at Wood County for example - heavily Republican but voted down Issue 1. The heavy anti-abortion vote is in deeply rural NW Ohio (where the churches are, around Lima), but is in the minority across most of the rest of the state. There may be some conservative Black voters who will vote against abortion access, but probably not enough to change the outcome much.

 

If anything, I'd guess 43% is an upper limit to the No on abortion vote. Many people who don't particularly care for abortion-on-demand have stories in their families about difficult choices around the procedure, and they won't be willing to have blanket bans to limit the those abortions they oppose. 

I think the spread will be even larger if the recreational marijuana legalization initiative is on the ballot. The anti-abortion folks will be motivated to vote no matter what. If legalization is on the ballot, I think that will bring new people to the polls, and my sense is that those voters will also vote yes on abortion.

On 8/14/2023 at 1:32 PM, 10albersa said:

Is there really a chunk (6-10%) of the electorate that will change their minds on this vote because the amendment allows for 24 weeks (fetal viability) instead of the "more palatable" 15-20? The answer is no. That's not what's going to have people clamoring for a No vote here.

 

I imagine the confusion from Issue 1 works both ways. We'll see similar turnout and a similar result: 57-43

 

Definitely think turnout will be higher just because it'll be November when turnout is always higher. And I think Issue 1 was far more confusing to people than this will be, and that will also help turnout. The GOP was able to create all sorts of false messaging about Issue 1 to muddy its actual intent. While they will absolutely lie about what the abortion amendment will and won't do, they have to tread the line far more carefully because this is absolutely a losing issue for them. They will have to build this up as being too extreme rather than just directly coming out against all abortion, which is going to limit what they can do. Still, I do agree that the margins will be similar to polling and Issue 1 results, maybe a few points higher if young people really turn out.

Edited August 16, 20231 yr by jonoh81

Ohio Republicans on the Ballot Board just rejected a proposal for Ohio voters to see the full amendment text for reproductive rights on the November ballot. They are instead opting for language written by the Ohio Secretary of State's Office, that has numerous accuracy problems.

We all knew it, but LaRose is a partisan hack who has no business being Secretary of State. A complete dereliction of duty.

 

Ohio Capital Journal Article

LaRose Rewrites Ballot Language for Abortion Rights Vote this November

 

In a 3-2 split decision Thursday, the Ohio Ballot Board rejected using the full text of a proposed reproductive rights amendment on the ballot in November, adopting instead summary language written by the Ohio Secretary of State’s Office that was criticized for being incomplete and inaccurate.

 

The board’s approval of the language – which is now titled Issue 1 for the November general election – was the next step in the process of voters deciding whether or not the Ohio Constitution will include the right to abortion, as well as contraception, fertility treatment, miscarriage care, and continuing one’s own pregnancy. Those last four items were all left out of the language approved by the ballot board majority.

 

The summary language does not change what the actual amendment would state in the constitution, but would be the last representation of the amendment voters read before the casting their approval or rejection.

 

The full text of the amendment will be available at boards of elections during the election, but not in the ballot booths with voters. LaRose said posters with the text will be accessible at voting locations.

 

In the summary language approved by the board, the medical term “fetus” is changed to “unborn child,” and the amendment’s “decision” language is changed to “medical treatment.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/larose-rewrites-ballot-language-for-abortion-rights-vote-this-november-ocj1/

1 hour ago, ColDayMan said:

LaRose Rewrites Ballot Language for Abortion Rights Vote this November

 

In a 3-2 split decision Thursday, the Ohio Ballot Board rejected using the full text of a proposed reproductive rights amendment on the ballot in November, adopting instead summary language written by the Ohio Secretary of State’s Office that was criticized for being incomplete and inaccurate.

 

The board’s approval of the language – which is now titled Issue 1 for the November general election – was the next step in the process of voters deciding whether or not the Ohio Constitution will include the right to abortion, as well as contraception, fertility treatment, miscarriage care, and continuing one’s own pregnancy. Those last four items were all left out of the language approved by the ballot board majority.

 

The summary language does not change what the actual amendment would state in the constitution, but would be the last representation of the amendment voters read before the casting their approval or rejection.

 

The full text of the amendment will be available at boards of elections during the election, but not in the ballot booths with voters. LaRose said posters with the text will be accessible at voting locations.

 

In the summary language approved by the board, the medical term “fetus” is changed to “unborn child,” and the amendment’s “decision” language is changed to “medical treatment.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/larose-rewrites-ballot-language-for-abortion-rights-vote-this-november-ocj1/

Very cool state to live in

1 hour ago, bumsquare said:

Very cool state to live in

It’s going to be a cooler state come November when reproductive rights are enshrined in the Ohio Constitution and marijuana is legal. 

8 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

It’s going to be a cooler state come November when reproductive rights are enshrined in the Ohio Constitution and marijuana is legal. 

 

2 hours ago, ColDayMan said:

LaRose Rewrites Ballot Language for Abortion Rights Vote this November

 

In a 3-2 split decision Thursday, the Ohio Ballot Board rejected using the full text of a proposed reproductive rights amendment on the ballot in November, adopting instead summary language written by the Ohio Secretary of State’s Office that was criticized for being incomplete and inaccurate.

 

The board’s approval of the language – which is now titled Issue 1 for the November general election – was the next step in the process of voters deciding whether or not the Ohio Constitution will include the right to abortion, as well as contraception, fertility treatment, miscarriage care, and continuing one’s own pregnancy. Those last four items were all left out of the language approved by the ballot board majority.

 

The summary language does not change what the actual amendment would state in the constitution, but would be the last representation of the amendment voters read before the casting their approval or rejection.

 

The full text of the amendment will be available at boards of elections during the election, but not in the ballot booths with voters. LaRose said posters with the text will be accessible at voting locations.

 

In the summary language approved by the board, the medical term “fetus” is changed to “unborn child,” and the amendment’s “decision” language is changed to “medical treatment.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/larose-rewrites-ballot-language-for-abortion-rights-vote-this-november-ocj1/

 

Also all polling places will be moved to inside Catholic churches

38 minutes ago, GCrites said:

 

Also all polling places will be moved to inside Catholic churches

 

And mandatory gender checks for all. 

Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights (OURR) has sued the state for approving ballot language intended to tilt the scales on the measure. Hopefully the Ohio Supreme Court will look past their partisan leanings and agree with the lawsuit. LaRose is a hack. He doesn't belong in politics.

 

https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2023/08/28/abortion-petition-writers-sue-ohio-ballot-board-for-deceptive-summary/

A powerful ad...

 

 

Want to Protect Your Right to Birth Control? Issue 1 is About More than Just Abortion

 

In the Nov. 7 general election, Ohioans will decide whether or not to approve Issue 1, a constitutional amendment for reproductive rights.

 

While the language of the amendment focuses primarily on abortion, it also lists other rights that would be cemented into the state constitution, including miscarriage care, fertility treatments, contraception, and the right to continue one’s own pregnancy. Today we will look at how and why the proposed amendment seeks to protect access to contraception.

 

The use of contraception is not illegal in Ohio, and though it’s commonly called “birth control,” the medications are also used for other conditions, like ovarian cysts, polycystic ovary syndrome and endometriosis symptoms.

 

Push to ‘reconsider’ contraception case

 

Contraception has long been a target of debate, with fears of further regulations increasing after U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas brought up Griswold v. Connecticut during his concurrence to Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, the 2022 decision that overturned the half-century of abortion legalization given in Roe v. Wade.

 

The ruling in Griswold overturned a Connecticut law from the 1800s that banned the use of “any drug, medical device or other instrument in furthering contraception,” particularly in marriages. The question at the heart of the Griswold case: “Does the Constitution protect the right to marital privacy against state restrictions on a couple’s ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives?”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/want-to-protect-your-right-to-birth-control-issue-1-is-about-more-than-just-abortion-ocj1/

voting no. This is a bad amendment. 

Voting yes. This is a well crafted amendment that enshrines basic human rights relating to reproduction, miscarriage treatments, birth control, and fertility treatments into the Ohio Constitution. It is very important to me to protect my 11 year old daughter from the extremists who have taken over our state government. 

Conservative voting yes. 

 

Some personal context... My wife and I had a miscarriage prior to Roe v. Wade being overturned.... Our second shot was after it was overturned.... Nothing will anger you quite like a doctor sitting with your wife and advising her of doctor's she could recommend in Western New York or Michigan if we had similar complications... 

 

Fortunately, we now have a healthy 9 month old... but the government has absolutely no right limiting options to women. 

^friends of mine have had a similar situation. Pregnancy is very dangerous, and we shouldn't let the government get in the way of life-saving healthcare. 

Voting Yes. My wife had complications during pregnancy which nearly cost the lives of her and our child. Thankfully they are both healthy now and doing great. But I have no patience for "Christians" forcing their views on the rest of everyone and limiting options for families (women especially) when making life altering choices. 

My wife had 3 miscarriages and we have 2 healthy children. 2 of the miscarriages required a D&C which can be considered an abortion procedure. Additionally, she used an IUD for birth control because oral contraceptives don't agree with her. IUDs can be considered abortifacients but I don't think the state needs to be in our bedroom dictating the type of birth control we use. An Amendment is appropriate to protect these rights ad to keep government out of our health decisions.

1 hour ago, YABO713 said:

Conservative voting yes. 

 

Some personal context... My wife and I had a miscarriage prior to Roe v. Wade being overturned.... Our second shot was after it was overturned.... Nothing will anger you quite like a doctor sitting with your wife and advising her of doctor's she could recommend in Western New York or Michigan if we had similar complications... 

 

Fortunately, we now have a healthy 9 month old... but the government has absolutely no right limiting options to women. 

I think the current ban is much too restrictive, but this amendment opens the floodgates waay to far the other way. I think there can be a reasonable compromise had through the referendum end vs the amendment way.

My wife has had multiple miscarriages too so I understand the pain of that. She even had to have a procedure to have the dead child removed. It was tragic. I think that the Pro-yes people are very misleading in this area though. 

 

Both sides need to find middle ground. This amendment is far from it though.