New South Dakota law targets abortion ballot initiative: Allows people to withdraw signatures from petitions

[essentialsaltes]

LINK

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem has signed a bill to allow signers of ballot initiative petitions to revoke their signatures — a move opponents decry as a jab at direct democracy and a proposed abortion rights initiative, which would enable voters to protect abortion rights in the state constitution.

--
Another example of Republican-led states trying to avoid the will of the people on the topic of abortion. This likely won't be successful, because the ballot initiative has thousands of signatures over the required number to qualify for the ballot. And despite claims that South Dakotans were 'deceived' by the nature of the initiative, it seems doubtful that thousands of people will withdraw their signatures. The new law clearly targets the current initiative in that it took effect immediately upon the governor's signature. This is a last ditch effort to stop this from reaching the voters.

 

[Desk trauma]

When they said let the people decide it clearly wasn’t supposed to include THOSE people.

 

[Fantine]

Our state has petitions and there us a big 'decline to sign' campaign.

Can't pro lifers find a better way to prevent abortions than subverting democracy and tampering with voter initiatives?

How about kindness? Respect? Community support? Health care? Daycare?

Ugh.

 

[Desk trauma]

Our state has petitions and there us a big 'decline to sign' campaign.

Can't pro lifers find a better way to prevent abortions than subverting democracy and tampering with voter initiatives?

How about kindness? Respect? Community support? Health care? Daycare?

What of it? None of that enforces conservative sexual ethics nor makes women suffer for not adhering to them which has been shown to be more important than reducing abortion.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Our state has petitions and there us a big 'decline to sign' campaign.

Can't pro lifers find a better way to prevent abortions than subverting democracy and tampering with voter initiatives?

How about kindness? Respect? Community support? Health care? Daycare?

Ugh.

I have a better idea. Why don’t they just bring people to faith in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior? Then abortions would be zero because they just wouldn’t get abortions out of adherence to their religion regardless what the law says. Instead they seem hell bent on using the jackboot of the law to reduce abortions. Fun note, one these two routes they are commanded to do by their Messiah, for some reason they like to use the other.

 

[Desk trauma]

Instead they seem hell bent on using the jackboot of the law to reduce abortions.

Only if it’s done in a way that they approve of, a Colorado program reduced the abortion rate by half among the demographic targeted but did so with birth control so not one word of praise from pro-lifers.

 

[Love365]

Free childcare is best way to stop abortions.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Only if it’s done in a way that they approve of, a Colorado program reduced the abortion rate by half among the demographic targeted but did so with birth control so not one word of praise from pro-lifers.

I know they tell us they want to “Save the Babies” but their actions seem to suggest there are other goals they are pursuing.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Our state has petitions and there us a big 'decline to sign' campaign.

Can't pro lifers find a better way to prevent abortions than subverting democracy and tampering with voter initiatives?

How about kindness? Respect? Community support? Health care? Daycare?

Ugh.

It’s been a while since conservatism and evangelicalism have considered “persuasion” to be an effective means of conversion. Maybe 30-40 years ago, it was at least considered part of the arsenal, but not anymore.

 

[Bradskii]

LINK

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem has signed a bill to allow signers of ballot initiative petitions to revoke their signatures — a move opponents decry as a jab at direct democracy and a proposed abortion rights initiative, which would enable voters to protect abortion rights in the state constitution.

I don't see a problem with this. If I voted on something and then changed my mind before the vote took effect then I'd want my vote revoked. I don't see this as any more than someone asking 'Are you sure?'

And yes, I know why it's being done in this case. And there's fat chance it will succeed.

 

[Fantine]

How did the early church grow?
"See how these Christians love one another."

That's what's lacking in the religious right.