Abortion: Bad News/Good News

First the bad news:

Librarians in Oklahoma received the above email memo in their inboxes. It warned them of the risk termination, jail time, and a $10,000 fine if they help library visitors find information about abortion. Oklahoma’s Metropolitan Library System advised staff that, with abortion now illegal statewide, they should avoid even speaking the word “abortion,” especially since patrons might try to trick them into using it so as to report them.

Library staff should avoid speaking the word “abortion”? So much for free speech in America… or at least in Oklahoma.

Now for the good news:

The question presented to Kansas voters yesterday was whether abortion protections should be stripped from the state constitution. A “yes” vote would have allow the state’s Republican-led legislature to pass future limits on abortion — or to ban it altogether — in its coming session in January. A “no” vote would leave those protections in place.

Kansas voters cheer the outcome of the vote on abortion rights. Photo credit: Dave Kaup/AFP/Getty Images

Kansas voters in the traditionally conservative state overwhelming voted to support abortion rights. More than 60% wanted to maintain those abortion protections.

The vote sent a decisive message to Republican lawmakers about the issue’s popularity in the first political test since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June. Subsequent to the Supreme Court’s ruling, more than a dozen Republican-led states have moved to ban or further restrict abortion.

Let’s hope this message will give pause to GOP lawmakers, letting them know, loud and clear, that their constituents want women to maintain their reproductive rights granted in Roe v. Wade.

Oh, who am I kidding? Republican lawmakers don’t give two shits about what their constituents want. Unless those constituents are mega donors who are willing to buy politicians to do their bidding. I’m just saying.

25 thoughts on “Abortion: Bad News/Good News

  1. Mister Bump UK August 3, 2022 / 11:49 am

    Note that this was passed by referendum. We should all have more of them.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Marilyn Armstrong August 3, 2022 / 12:23 pm

    I know they don’t care about me, but you would think they’d at least care about the people who presumably elect them. Who knows? Reality has left the planet.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Fandango August 3, 2022 / 12:44 pm

      They only care about the people who give them boatloads of money.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. writerravenclaw August 3, 2022 / 1:46 pm

    I would never have an abortion, that being said, that is my choice. I understand other women if they do, it is their choice.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Fandango August 3, 2022 / 2:03 pm

      Yes, it’s your choice and it’s their choice. So you are, indeed, pro-choice.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. Marleen August 3, 2022 / 8:15 pm

    I heard twice as many people voted yesterday as did in 2018 (and three times as many as 2014). About twenty percent who voted yesterday (that is, or, by all means including mail-in and early) only voted on the one subject (while it is primary season for both parties).

    Liked by 3 people

  5. lifelessons August 3, 2022 / 8:27 pm

    Hear hear. Campaign finance laws need to be changed. That is the crux of the matter!!!!

    Liked by 3 people

  6. Lauren August 3, 2022 / 10:43 pm

    Perhaps any man that gets a woman (not his wife) pregnant, should be forced to have a vasectomy so as to not cause any other woman to be in the same state.

    Liked by 4 people

  7. Jay August 4, 2022 / 8:19 am

    Things are getting scarier and scarier. I’m not one to believe end of the world stuff, but if the world is about to end, could it move quickly? I wonder what the next rights they will strip off people are.

    Liked by 2 people

      • Jay August 5, 2022 / 5:38 am

        Maybe next up is the right for women to vote? Then they can go after anyone who’s not white’s rights too until slavery becomes legal again? I’m not (totally) serious… I hope.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Fandango August 5, 2022 / 12:37 pm

          I hope not also, but the way things are going….

          Liked by 1 person

      • mosckerr August 18, 2022 / 12:45 am

        T’NaCH — common law. New Testament — theology. The one shares nothing in common with the other. Hence the church has a reputation for war crimes guilt and has nothing what so ever to do with justice. How come missionaries fail to make mention of this horrible, disgusting, and absolutely vile gospel bad news?

        Like

  8. jegoldie August 4, 2022 / 11:02 am

    “Republican lawmakers don’t give two shits about what their constituents want.” What about what their wives think? It would be hilarious if they just said “NO!” to their husbands.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Carol anne August 4, 2022 / 6:16 pm

    Makes me glad I don’t live in the USA! And republicans suck!

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Marleen August 4, 2022 / 7:54 pm

    Proclaimer: I’m sure I haven’t separated the paragraphs, below, in the same way as what the writer(s) did [or correctly].

    Observation: Perhaps, if the Republican “justices” don’t think a right to family planning is a significant part of American history, they might rethink women owning property as well.

    https://kshs.org/kansapedia/kansas-constitutions/16532

    ….

    The first attempt to write a constitution emerged as a movement—the Topeka movement—in reaction to unfair elections that gave the proslavery party initial control of Kansas’ territorial government. The so-called “bogus” legislature convened at Pawnee on July 2, 1855. Freestaters gathered in convention at Lawrence on August 14 and Big Springs on September 5, and delegates assembled at Topeka on October 23, 1855, to draft a constitution.

    The document was approved on December 15 by a vote of 1,731 to 46. The proslavery—”Law and Order”—party did not participate in the voting on the document.

    The Topeka Constitution prohibited slavery in the state. It also limited suffrage to white males and “every civilized male Indian who has adopted the habits of the white man.” Congress rejected this constitution and the request for admission to the Union.

    Read the Topeka Constitution [link]

    In 1857 some Kansas residents organized a second constitutional convention. This convention was authorized by the proslavery territorial legislature to meet at Lecompton to draft a constitution.

    In June 1857 more than 2,000 proslavery voters elected delegates to that convention. After an organizational meeting September 7, the delegates conducted their business from October 19 to November 8, and produced a document which was submitted to the voters. But the vote was to be on a special slavery article only: in other words, “for the constitution with slavery” or “for the constitution without slavery.” Because a vote “for the constitution without slavery” meant Kansans could keep the slaves they already owned, freestaters refused to participate. On December 21, the “constitution with slavery” won 6,226 to 569. Months of controversy followed.

    A bitter debate on the national level followed.

    Read the Lecompton Constitution [link]

    Visit Constitution Hall in Lecompton where this document was written.

    While the proslavery party prepared to draft its Lecompton constitution, Kansans held an election on October 5, 1857, for members of a new free state legislature, which was called into special session by Governor Frederick P. Stanton on December 7. Legislators scheduled another election on the Lecompton Constitution for January 4, 1858. This time voters overwhelmingly rejected the proslavery document and, subsequently, authorized yet another constitutional convention.

    Despite this show of support for a “free” Kansas, President Buchanan submitted the Lecompton document to Congress on February 2 and recommended that Kansas be admitted as a slave state. Many Northern Democrats split with their party’s president on this issue. Subsequently, the Senate voted for admission and the House for resubmission. A compromise—the English bill, providing for an up or down vote on the constitution in Kansas Territory—passed both houses on April 30, 1858.

    The Lecompton Constitution was rejected on August 2, 1858, by a vote of 1,926 to 11,812. While the debate shifted to the national scene, delegates for the territory’s third constitutional convention were elected on March 9 and assembled in Leavenworth on March 25, 1858.

    Although similar to the Topeka Constitution, the Leavenworth document was more radical. The word “white” did not appear in this proposed document, and it would not have excluded free “Negroes and mulattoes” from the state. The Leavenworth Constitution was ratified on May 18, 1858. But serious efforts on its behalf ended with the defeat of the Lecompton document in August.

    Read the Leavenworth Constitution [link]

    With the free state faction firmly in control, the 1859 territorial legislature approved the convening of a fourth and final constitutional convention. In early June delegates were elected to gather at Wyandotte on July 5. Thirty-five Republicans and seventeen Democrats were chosen to attend the convention. This was the first time delegates carried the now familiar political party labels, the Republican party having been formed in the territory just a few weeks before. By this time the issue of slavery was all but decided in the territory, so the decision to make Kansas “free” was no surprise. The delegates did not adopt a clause excluding blacks as had been proposed earlier, but they failed to remove “white” from several significant parts of the document.

    Read the Wyandotte Constitution

    In addition to the more mundane tasks of little controversy, the Wyandotte convention had to resolve some other controversial issues.

    The first three constitutions written in Kansas adopted the boundary lines for Kansas Territory. The eastern, southern, and northern borders were the same as they are today. The western border, however, extended as far as the Continental Divide and included the Pikes Peak gold fields. Although not a major issue at earlier assemblies, at Wyandotte the boundary question caused much controversy. Many delegates saw this huge territory as a disadvantage and sought to fix the western border far to the east of the Rockies. Democratic delegates also wanted the state’s northern border extended to the Platte River. Republicans united to defeat this effort. The old northern border was retained and the western border was fixed at 102 degrees west longitude (the 25th Meridian). Kansas emerged from the convention with its present rectangular shape.

    There was some support among the male delegates for granting equal voting rights to Kansas women. The majority, however, would not accept this “radical” idea, and suffrage was granted only to “Every white male person, of twenty-one years and upward.” By this clause, blacks and Indians also were denied the vote.

    Largely because of the efforts of Clarina Nichols, however, the Wyandotte Constitution included some rights for woman. Women were allowed to participate in school district elections and to own property. The state legislature was to “provide for their equal rights in the possession of their children.”

    On July 29, this free state constitution was adopted and signed. Because they objected to several key provisions, all seventeen Democrats refused to sign. The subsequent campaign for ratification of the Wyandotte Constitution was a bitter partisan contest.

    On October 4, 1859, supporters won by nearly a 2 to 1 margin–10,421 to 5,530. After the October vote, official copies of the proposed constitution were prepared and sent to the President of the United States, the president of the Senate, and the speaker of the House of Representatives.

    The House acted first. A bill for Kansas’s admission was introduced on February 12, 1860. Within two months, the congressmen voted 134 to 73 to admit Kansas under the Wyandotte Constitution. William H. Seward of New York introduced a separate bill in the Senate on February 21, 1860. A long-time champion of the free state cause in Kansas, Seward appealed for immediate action, but the admission bill was referred to committee and finally carried over to the next session.

    With the election of Abraham Lincoln, southern states began to leave the Union and opposition to Kansas’ admission decreased. The senators from South Carolina were the first to withdraw from Congress. Those from Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida followed them. These last six senators left their seats on January 21, 1861, and later that same day the Senate passed the Kansas bill.

    A week later the House passed the bill as amended and sent it to the president for his signature. Ironically, it was President James Buchanan, a man despised by most free state settlers in Kansas, who signed the bill making Kansas the 34th state on January 29, 1861.

    The joy over the adoption of the Wyandotte Constitution and the imminent prospects for statehood where tempered somewhat in late 1859 and 1860 by a severe drought and famine. The January 29, 1861, bill signing was clouded a bit by the prospects of a civil war on the national horizon.

    Additional Resources: Wyandotte Constitution

    Check out this online exhibit that has information about the Four Different Constitutions. In addition to the text of each constitution, Kansas Memory contains numerous items related to the various constitutional conventions.

    Kansas Constitutions Bibliography

    Entry: Kansas Constitutions
    Author: Kansas Historical Society
    ….

    Liked by 1 person

    • Marleen August 4, 2022 / 7:59 pm

      I don’t know what I did wrong. I tried to put “property” in boldface too.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Marleen August 7, 2022 / 3:07 pm

      https://www.npr.org/2019/04/26/717449336/kansas-supreme-court-rules-state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion

      ~

      “The State may only infringe upon the right to decide whether to continue a pregnancy,” the ruling continued, “if the State has a compelling interest and has narrowly tailored its actions to that interest.”

      The court took up the question of a constitutional right to abortion after two abortion providers in Overland Park, Kan., doctors Herbert Hodes and his daughter, Traci Nauser, challenged a ban on dilation and evacuation abortions passed by the Legislature in 2015.

      The law … prohibits dilation and evacuation abortions except when necessary to preserve the life of the mother, prevent impairment of a major bodily function of the mother or where the fetus is already dead. The law was the first in the nation to ban the procedure, which is used for nearly all second-trimester abortions.

      The procedure only accounts for 9 percent of abortions in Kansas. Anti-abortion-rights activists call it “dismemberment abortion,” but it is known medically as dilation and evacuation, or D&E.

      In July 2015, Shawnee County District Judge Larry D. Hendricks blocked the law from taking effect, ruling that the Kansas Bill of Rights “independently protects the fundamental right to abortion.”

      Hendricks also determined that alternatives to D&E weren’t reasonable, “would force unwanted medical treatment on women, and in some instances would operate as a requirement that physicians experiment on women with known and unknown safety risks as a condition (of) accessing the fundamental right of abortion.”

      ~

      Liked by 1 person

    • Marleen August 8, 2022 / 12:40 am

      Prosecutor “Suspended” By DeSantis says
      Florida Constitution Provides for Privacy

      Liked by 1 person

      • Marleen August 8, 2022 / 1:32 am

        Interesting. This is the press conference during which the suspension — if the governor can legally actually do that when the prosecutor is elected — was announced. The first person who speaks after the governor speaks the first time is a sheriff who doesn’t want someone running around in Florida committing crimes with a concealed firearm. Meanwhile, the example DeSantis had brought up was trans surgery on kids. (That’s all rather different than prying into a woman’s privacy.) A congressman reads from their state constitution; seems the governor can suspend people in certain circumstances.

        Liked by 1 person

  11. Lolsy's Library August 5, 2022 / 1:23 am

    I was totally like “YES”!!! when I heard yesterday, and then I thought about something along the lines, like your last paragraph. It proves though why it is so important to vote!

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Julydase August 5, 2022 / 8:09 pm

    Republicans NOR Democrats give two shits what their constituents want. The vast majority of both parties go into politics to line their own pockets. As for abortion, I don’t believe in it, but feel it’s a decision best left to the individual woman. I think we should have a popular vote in the U. S. to decide its legality, and not leave it in the hands of politicians.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. leigha66 August 7, 2022 / 11:41 pm

    That email to the librarians is downright scary. And I thought book banning was bad.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.