California - Abortion measure to be on ballot

Sacramento Bee ^ | 05/17/05 | Gary Delsohn

[Fred]

A proposed constitutional amendment making it harder for minors to get abortions has qualified for the next election ballot, the secretary of state's office announced Monday.

The measure would prohibit abortions on unemancipated minors until 48 hours after an abortion provider notified the minor's parents or legal guardian. There would be possible civil fines for failing to do so.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has said he will call a special election for November if he's unable to reach agreement with Democrats in the Legislature on three other initiatives he has proposed.

Schwarzenegger has said he favors the general idea of parental notification before minors could get abortions, but he has not spoken out on this specific measure.

The measure would require physicians to report all abortions performed on minors and for the state to track them statistically. The secretary of state's release said the initiative is sponsored by Paul and Barbara Laubacher of Sacramento, who are both registered nurses. They could not be reached for comment.

[Fred]

Sorry if posted already

[Sacajaweau]

I think the big message might be that parents want to know what is going on and they will be helpful to their young daughter. I don't think kids really know how much (in most cases) that they are loved.

This certainly isn't being put forth by very young girls who are manipulated by their "boyfriend" or Planned Parenthood. I often wonder how many of them have been threatened by their "boyfriend"....who might be guilty of statutory rape.

[Carry_Okie]

I would be surprised if it didn't pass.

[CounterCounterCulture]

Ditto. We'll be outspent something like 10 to 1 and we'll win anyway since it has overwhelming support.

Meanwhile, the Democrats will be lining up their judicial oligarch blocks like they did with partial birth abortion bans.

[CounterCounterCulture]

ping

[goldstategop]

This is a pro-choice state but a parental notification measure should pass handidly.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[Carry_Okie]

We'll be outspent something like 10 to 1 and we'll win anyway since it has overwhelming support.

Well, it may be ten to one but it won't be much. They'll be putting every dime into fighting the measure on union confiscation of political funds. Stealing political funds is a matter of life and death for the Slave Party.

[F16Fighter]

Nice try, Kal-ee-fornia...

Too bad this measure could pass 99%-1%, and then the usual one liberal judge will negate it as "unconstitutional."

[TatieBug]

Here comes Planned Unparenthood and the gang! This could just pass...will work for it.

[Froufrou]

I think the 'emcipation' thing is too large a loophole to make this a slam-dunk. In Texas, for example, if you had a child with a truancy problem you could go to a judge and have the child declared an emancipated minor, meaning you could not be sent to jail for the child's truancy.

I think that's no longer the case; I'm just giving an example of how emancipation leaves age out of it...and that could be a good or a bad thing...it depends.

[CounterCounterCulture]

They'll be putting every dime into fighting the measure on union confiscation of political funds.

Agreed. That's how we were able to get Prop 227 (English only) passed as the unions had to unite to defeat Prop 226 and left the teachers unions and La Raza types to fend for themselves to fight 227.

[Conservative4Life]

It won't matter, the MEN IN BLACK either at the state supreme court of Lords or the 9th circus ct of appeals will overturn the 'will of the people' just as they did in Mass. Neb, and other states

[Froufrou]

I'd like to apologize for the typos. It seems the poster here is rather slow and I type in such a blur that I don't even notice some of the letters go missing!