• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Ohio Republicans plan to disregard voters.

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Like I said in the OP, it does not matter what the peasants want, this matter will be decided for them by their betters.
We can always hope that the peasants (sometimes referred to as voters) will eventually have a say. Ohio is way up north, quite close to Canuckistan, actually, and prime candidate for a switch from red to blue. They've quite enough urban areas to manage that, and it's well-known that they've pretty much always been a swing state. Even more importantly, they're also known as a bell-wether state -- and if the Republicans **** the voters off enough, that bell-wether status might be most welcome to the Democrats.

I've lived long enough to know that voters (I"m one) sometimes get really tired of being taken for granted, and make their own determination. It's often quite fun, watching the surprise of the party that got slapped by a miffed electorate.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
No one is looking to take away an individual's right to choose not to have an abortion. Someone else choosing differently for themselves in no way infringes on the rights of any individual to choose for their own self. With freedom of choice, everyone retains their individual freedom of choice and of individual autonomy. These are individual rights, so the only way when one side loses is when one individual is denied their own individual freedom of choice.
What about forcing people to go against their conscious and religious beliefs?

Ie: Catholic hospitals and staff.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Examples of this?
Trump administration.....
Biden administration.. .
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
This appears to be the hospital forcing
the nurse to do the task, not government.
Government only requires non-discrimination
by the hospital.
Added on additional info.

One during Trump administration

Other Biden administration.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
No one is looking to take away an individual's right to choose not to have an abortion. Someone else choosing differently for themselves in no way infringes on the rights of any individual to choose for their own self. With freedom of choice, everyone retains their individual freedom of choice and of individual autonomy. These are individual rights, so the only way when one side loses is when one individual is denied their own individual freedom of choice.
I see the issue of bodily integrity as irrelevant to the issue. Abortion, as a moral or religious issue strikes me more as a crime against the fœtus than a violation of the mother's rights.

There are already laws prohibiting murder, and parents already have legal obligations to their children. The new anti-abortion legislation is simply an extension of existing law to include the fœtus; conceived as a person, or at least sanctified by God.

My objection to the right-to-life legislation rests on the non-personhood of the fœtus; it's lack of features entitling it to a claim of moral consideration.
 

Sand Dancer

Currently catless
Indications are that they are going to go through with the amendment and that they are going to review every law concerning abortion that is on the books in Ohio. It's a six part complicated amendment with ambiguous wording, and it boths allows and disallows abortions. I think the amendment was poorly written. Whoever was responsible for writing the amendment really failed the people here. But whatever. Ohio has its amendment and the legislature is going to sit down and go through every single abortion law instead of leaving it to judicial review because they didn't get someone to write a properly clean, clear amendment from the very beginning. I wonder if there wasn't some deliberate confusopoly involved.

Why can't they help the poor, sick and marginalized instead of sticking their noses in where they're not wanted?
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic Bully ☿
Premium Member
Trump administration.....
That's the employer, not the government.
Biden administration.. .
Nope. That was about providing health care insurance coverage for birth control, not abortion.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic Bully ☿
Premium Member
What about forcing people to go against their conscious and religious beliefs?

Ie: Catholic hospitals and staff.
Example? Half the hospital beds here in Washington state are in Catholic hospitals. I haven't heard of any of them being forced to provide abortions, and the right to an abortion is written into our state constitution.
 
Last edited:

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
That's the employer, not the government.

Nope. That was about providing health care insurance coverage for birth control, not abortion.
The first one wasn't.

The second one does.

Both have to do with the right for a person to object and opt out based on that person's sense of conviction.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Example? Half the hospital beds here in Washington state are in Catholic hospitals. I haven't heard of any of them being forced to provide abortions, and the right to an abortion is written into our state constitution.
The Biden link that seeks to force people against their religious position. At present they're not forced but in the future it appears if Biden gets his way, that will become another issue.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic Bully ☿
Premium Member
The Biden link that seeks to force people against their religious position. At present they're not forced but in the future it appears if Biden gets his way, that will become another issue.
If you can't provide health insurance that meets government standards, then get out of the health insurance business. Part of the government's business is to protect consumers from sub-standard insurance.

Providing health insurance is not the same as being forced to perform abortions. Does your insurance broker perform abortions, or do they sell insurance? Should your insurance broker have control over your personal healthcare decisions? Nope. The insurance broker should be concerned with the actual healthcare insurance product, not which procedures the patients will access.

If you have health insurance that provides contraception, the insurance is not forcing you to use contraception. If your health insurance provides abortion care, it can't force you to get an abortion any more than it could force you to get any other medical procedure.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
What about forcing people to go against their conscious and religious beliefs?

Ie: Catholic hospitals and staff.
What makes you think that those organizations would be forced to do abortions? Once again, abortions are a specialty. That abortions are legal is part of my states constitution. Catholic hospitals are not forced to offer abortions.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic Bully ☿
Premium Member
What about forcing people to go against their conscious and religious beliefs?

Ie: Catholic hospitals and staff.
Let's go ahead and look at this from the other side. Catholic hospitals will perform abortions when the patient's life is in danger, such as in the case of an ectopic pregnancy or severe trauma (from something like a car accident) where the placenta has detached, resulting in severe hemorrhaging. They are health care professionals, and know when this is necessary. Do you want the state interfering in this medical discernment with the threat of jail and/or lawsuits for saving the patient's life? That's what is happening in states with severe abortion bans. Politicians are not healthcare professionals, and are not really qualified to make that decision sight unseen. The doctors are not lawyers, and should not have to lawyer up in order to save someone's life.
 

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
Why can't they help the poor, sick and marginalized instead of sticking their noses in where they're not wanted?
In this case, I don't think the the Ohio legislature has much choice. The voters voted to adopt a poorly written amendment on abortion.
The legislature is now obligated to see this through to the best of their ability. They are amending their constitution. Hopefully, Ohio didn't screw themselves over too hard.
 
Top