Looks like Kansas is a rad more progressive than it's elected leaders thought!

I’m going to sound sanctimonious or naive as hell, or both. But I don’t believe the death penalty deters crime. I believe killing people, even mass murderers, is immoral. And the way our system works, the death penalty is a waste of taxpayer money. If you believe in an eye for an eye, you’re going to disagree. Originally Posted by Tiny

It definitely stops recidivism from the that person though.

Except a fetus is not a human just like an egg is not a chicken.

Are you expecting chicken nuggets out of eggs from your local grocery store?

Of course not.

That is why a majority support access to abortion in the first trimester....even in Kansas. Originally Posted by WTF

I agree with WTF on something finally. The problem is neither democrats or republicans are on the same page as the populous. Dems want to kill babies until they’re 10 years old, and Republicans don’t care if it’s the day after a 10 year old was raped by their brother. Until someone steps up and creates some sane guidelines the bickering will never end.

Maybe we can convince Republicans that the the fetus is going to grow up and kill their kids and grandkids and they'll then be able to justify the abortion.

I agree with WTF on something finally. The problem is neither democrats or republicans are on the same page as the populous. Dems want to kill babies until they’re 10 years old, and Republicans don’t care if it’s the day after a 10 year old was raped by their brother. Until someone steps up and creates some sane guidelines the bickering will never end. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Roe was the sane guideline. But y’all rejoiced that it was overturned.

I see that Jism is lying again. He is right about democrats being in favor of post birth abortions. Some of them have actually come out in favor of that like Obama. However, the lie about what conservatives believe is a toxic lie that will get you condemned.

I’m going to sound sanctimonious or naive as hell, or both. But I don’t believe the death penalty deters crime. I believe killing people, even mass murderers, is immoral. And the way our system works, the death penalty is a waste of taxpayer money. If you believe in an eye for an eye, you’re going to disagree. Originally Posted by Tiny

Since we hardly do it any more, how would we know? Let's start doing it on all cases that are slam dunks like the two I mentioned, we'll give it a while and see if hundreds of executions a year deters anybody.


And 1bm1 is right ( for a change ) it stops recidivism which is what Eric Adams is complaining about.


And that waste of taxpayer money is a canard since it isn't necessary to spend that much money if we do it my way. There is no immorality to killing the immoral. You just have to do everything possible to make sure you have the right person like catch them at the scene of the crime with a gun and GSR on their hands. Why in the world would it take more than 10 minutes to convict that person?


But sure, if you don't want to execute anybody for "any" reason, that's a whole different story.


And I'm just compromising here. If you want to know how I really feel, did you see the video of those guys attacking an Asian woman and the last guy to leave kicks her in the head?..... I would execute him in a heartbeat if I had the power. Now that just might make the next guy think and if not him, maybe the next guy or the next guy.

Roe was the sane guideline. But y’all rejoiced that it was overturned. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Roe wasn’t a guideline, at all. If you think power being returned to the people, be it on abortion or anything else, you want authoritarianism. An overwhelming majority believe 1st trimester abortion should be legal, and are against late term barbarism. If politicians do their job, and actually listen to their constituents not fringe radicals on both sides, it’s likely that this will end up the law in most places.

Roe wasn’t a guideline, at all. If you think power being returned to the people, be it on abortion or anything else, you want authoritarianism. An overwhelming majority believe 1st trimester abortion should be legal, and are against late term barbarism. If politicians do their job, and actually listen to their constituents not fringe radicals on both sides, it’s likely that this will end up the law in most places. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

That would seem to be true. What we don't know yet but in a few months or years, we likely will, what will happen economically to those States that completely outlaw abortion? Will the rest of us treat them as a Pariah State? Will the NBA and NFL, those bastions of "equity, equality and social justice", try to punish those States by saying, "we will no longer play our games in those States"? Will big business owners move out of those States?


And finally, how will it effect elections moving forward?

There is some polling going on here in Kansas right now. They're trying to determine how unclear the amendment was written. Initial results show that a good number of people didn't know exactly what they voted for because of the wording of the bill. Forget the lies told by paid celebrities, TV anchors, and corrupt newspapers, the bill was written for the ballot by pro-choice activists in the Kansas government.

If it is found that a certain threshold of people did not understand because of confusing wording then they could sue to overturn the results of the election. This happened in Missouri about 20 years ago. The forces opposed to a bill wrote such a bad ballot measure that a judge overturned the election results and forced a new vote.

Chuck Todd highlighted a couple of things on Meet the Press this morning. In Kansas, since the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, about 70% of the people who registered to vote were women. Only 30% were men.

And he highlighted a poll. If I remember correctly, about 45% of Americans said they were more likely to vote for politicians who were pro choice because of the Supreme Court decision. And about 25% were more likely to vote for pro-life candidates. The rest said it didn't make much difference.

Todd speculated whether this could upend the midterms. Meaning, are Republicans really a shoo in now, for the House anyway?

I'd argue they're not. The big issue should be the inflation and the economy. People are loosing purchasing power. Prices of goods and services are going up faster than wages. But not only do you have the abortion issue, unfortunately Trump is still trying to make this election all about him. Thanks to Trump, we have some weak candidates, like Mehmet Oz and Herschel Walker, whose main qualification is that they believe massive voter fraud occurred. Also the Democrats are mounting a massive campaign saying people need to vote for their candidates or America will become some kind of autocracy ruled by Trump. Now that's just not true, but this will get some Democrats and independents excited enough to go to the polls and vote against Republicans.

To clarify, although I'm not a lawyer and pro choice, for the first 12 weeks anyway, I believe the Supreme Court made the right decision based on the Constitution. But they sure picked a bad time to come out with it.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Could not have been a more worse time for Republicans!

There is some polling going on here in Kansas right now. They're trying to determine how unclear the amendment was written. Initial results show that a good number of people didn't know exactly what they voted for because of the wording of the bill. Forget the lies told by paid celebrities, TV anchors, and corrupt newspapers, the bill was written for the ballot by pro-choice activists in the Kansas government.

If it is found that a certain threshold of people did not understand because of confusing wording then they could sue to overturn the results of the election. This happened in Missouri about 20 years ago. The forces opposed to a bill wrote such a bad ballot measure that a judge overturned the election results and forced a new vote. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

I just read the wording, here, and it is indeed very confusing:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...allot-language

The article, in a left of center publication, says the Republican legislature in Kansas came up with the wording. If true, it looks like they may have jacked with the wording, so that the right answer, if you're pro-life, is "yes," figuring more people who don't read the question would answer "yes" than "no." If so it backfired on them.

Chuck Todd highlighted a couple of things on Meet the Press this morning. In Kansas, since the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, about 70% of the people who registered to vote were women. Only 30% were men.

And he highlighted a poll. If I remember correctly, about 45% of Americans said they were more likely to vote for politicians who were pro choice because of the Supreme Court decision. And about 25% were more likely to vote for pro-life candidates. The rest said it didn't make much difference.

Todd speculated whether this could upend the midterms. Meaning, are Republicans really a shoo in now, for the House anyway?

I'd argue they're not. The big issue should be the inflation and the economy. People are loosing purchasing power. Prices of goods and services are going up faster than wages. But not only do you have the abortion issue, unfortunately Trump is still trying to make this election all about him. Thanks to Trump, we have some weak candidates, like Mehmet Oz and Herschel Walker, whose main qualification is that they believe massive voter fraud occurred. Also the Democrats are mounting a massive campaign saying people need to vote for their candidates or America will become some kind of autocracy ruled by Trump. Now that's just not true, but this will get some Democrats and independents excited enough to go to the polls and vote against Republicans.

To clarify, although I'm not a lawyer and pro choice, for the first 12 weeks anyway, I believe the Supreme Court made the right decision based on the Constitution. But they sure picked a bad time to come out with it. Originally Posted by Tiny

Yeah. Michael Savage criticized the supreme court timing of it in his youtube video podcast. I read his video description. basically, its right decision, wrong time.

... Some o' you mates are SO WRONG about this. ... <sigh> ...

... It's about doing the right thing - not the election.
Sending the decision back to the states is the proper
thing to do... And should have been done a long time ago.

WHY is it always "let's try to fool the voters" and also
"we'll wait 'til AFTER the election to do it"... ???

WHY try to lie and cheat and fool them? ... That's how
the liberals do things...

IF the idea of changing Roe/Wade is proper - you DO IT
and live with the result... And leave the election decisions
up to the voters. ... And the voting rules and laws.

What good is having a backbone if you can't live-with
the TOUGH decisions?? ... Do the right thing and stand by it. ...

... For WHAT could be better than that? ...

#### Salty

191 countries ban abortions after 12 weeks and only 7 allow it Libtards love being part of the global community in the past suddenly don't mention it When Biden was in France Emmanual Macron expressed his outrage over the Supreme Court ruling even though his own country bans it after 14 weeks Biden then handed him a check for a 1 billion dollars to build a vaccine factory in Africa