Posted on 11/01/2023 10:51:54 PM PDT by Morgana
As voters in Ohio prepare to vote on Issue 1, a ballot measure that would enshrine the “right” to abortion in the state’s constitution, new campaign finance filings are revealing that pro-abortion groups in favor of the amendment have both outearned and outspent their pro-life opponents by a large margin, with the largest donations coming from groups outside Ohio.
The reporting shows that Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights, the group behind the ballot measure, raised more than $39.2 million this year through mid-October and spent $26.2 million. More than $28.7 million of the money received came from cash donations since August. Nearly $20 million was spent on television ads in support of the measure.
In contrast, the pro-life campaign led by Protect Women Ohio raised nearly $27 million as of mid-October, spending just under $24.3 million. The group has received $16.8 million of its donations since the summer. The group spent nearly $16.5 million on its own ads.
The largest donors to the pro-abortion cause come from out-of-state, including Washington D.C.-based Sixteen Thirty Fund, the New York-based Open Society Policy Center (which is associated with the philanthropist George Soros), and the New York-based American Civil Liberties Union. Other notable donors include former mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York (who has financed abortion measures in other states as well), Oklahoma billionaire Lynn Schusterman, and the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
Though some of Protect Women Ohio’s funding came from out-of-state, a large portion was also from in-state donors, including Protect Women Ohio Action, the Diocese of Columbus, and the Archdiocese of Cincinnati.
Amy Natoce, press secretary of Protect Women Ohio, told the Associated Press it was discouraging to see so many big pro-abortion entities trying to influence the state vote, when she believes it’s not what the citizens of the state actually want.
“It’s no surprise the ACLU is dumping millions of dollars into Ohio to cement its radical anti-parent amendment in our constitution,” she said. “Whether voters are pro-choice, pro-life or somewhere in between, Issue 1 just goes too far and is too radical for Ohioans.”
The vote is scheduled for November 7.
VIDEO ON LINK
What the opponents need to do is put up videos and images of third trimester babies. Accompany that with vivid descriptions of late term abortions.
A lot of people who sign on to “reproductive rights” will balk when realizing that they are voting to have a viable baby killed in the womb by having scissors pushed into their heads!
They already have in many ways this is one of them.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4193386/posts
https://evidencetheexhibition.com/
Shocking crime scene photos from the trial of
America’s Biggest Serial Killer.
1241 N. High Street | Columbus, OH
Saturday, Nov 4 – Sunday, Nov 5
1 – 5 pm
Monday, Nov 6 – Tuesday, Nov 7
11 am – 5 pm
When liberals are confronted with a humane way to end the life of a convicted multi-murderer, there is apparently no method of execution that is acceptable.
However, now we know that it must be OK with them to execute persons by pushing scissors into the back of their skulls and into their brains! After all, that’s how they want to treat the innocent.
Running an exhibit around the state does not address the problem! Not enough audience! The photos need to be in TV ads, on the internet, and on prominent billboards!
Unfortunately, young female voters are easily convinced that the slaughter of their progeny is a necessity to be embraced.
- they tell you to work beyond fertility
- they tell you to hate men
- they tell you to kill your babies
Where do s the anti parent language in the amendment?
Yup...Dead Babies R Us is a multi billion dollar operation.
Right now their radio ads are emphasizing : “If you are raped, the State of Ohio will force you to have the rapist’s child”.
I’ve heard the commercial several times.
So it’s not explicit. Not even implied. But an extrapolation of what it might mean?
Text of Issue 1
Article I, Section 22. The Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety
A. Every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to decisions on: contraception; fertility treatment; continuing one’s own pregnancy; miscarriage care; and abortion.
B. The State shall not, directly or indirectly, burden, penalize, prohibit, interfere with, or discriminate against either: An individual’s voluntary exercise of this right or; A person or entity that assists an individual exercising this right, unless the State demonstrates that it is using the least restrictive means to advance the individual’s health in accordance with widely accepted and evidence-based standards of care.
However, abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability. But in no case may such an abortion be prohibited if in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health.
C. As used in this Section: “Fetal viability” means “the point in a pregnancy when, in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician, the fetus has a significant likelihood of survival outside the uterus with reasonable measures. This is determined on a case-by-case basis.”
“State” includes any governmental entity and any political subdivision.
D. This Section is self-executing.
“Unfortunately, young female voters are easily convinced that the slaughter of their progeny is a necessity to be embraced.”
Maybe the women in the Three C’s will not turn out to vote.
I believe the latest legislation passed and signed by the governor had no exceptions after 6 weeks. So yes, after 6weeks, there could be no termination for rape or incest. The language as written in the amendment doesn’t touch on parental input. Now there’s a possibility there could be a court interpretation that would find against parental input, it’s likely not to get past a conservative Ohio Supreme Court. Plus since parental input is not part of the amendment, the legislature could address it either as a law or as modification to the existing amendment through a vote. They could also sponsor a repeal amendment and put it to the voters. Next November’s presidential election would be a prime time to do that as conservatives are expected to turn out in droves for Trump meaning that passage of a repeal amendment would be much more probable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.