Skip to comments.Abortion ban defeated in groundbreaking Albuquerque referendum
Posted on 11/20/2013 4:14:03 AM PST by markomalley
Voters in Albuquerque easily defeated a ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, dealing a major blow Tuesday to pro-life advocates who had hoped that a win using the citys referendum process would be a model that other municipalities could follow.
The groundbreaking vote marked the first time a city had been asked to approve an abortion ban, and national groups on both sides of the issue were closely watching to see how it would turn out.
Advocates of the ban admitted defeat late Tuesday, but said they dont feel discouraged.
It is a brilliant strategy and we will see to it that this effort is introduced in other cities and states, said Father Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life. The fact is, of course, that children have in fact been saved through this effort, simply because we have raised the issue of fetal pain, which does not even cross the minds of many abortionists.
With 80 percent of voting centers reporting Tuesday, opponents had 54.3 percent of the vote to supporters 45.7 percent, giving pro-choice advocates a fairly easy win.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
“Pro-choice” my @$$. They’re baby killers. When does the baby get to make its “choice”?
New Mexico is a lost cause for conservatives. That ‘Latinos are conservative really” BS wears very thin.
It’s one town. We essentially won the whole of Texas yesterday, which would indicate the court won’t hear challenges to North Dakota’s bill either.
We wouldn't be having these abortion fights, referendums, marches, etc. if Roe vs Wade would have been shot down.
States regulated abortions prior to 1973. The fedzilla had nothing to do with it. That's the way it should be.
America is aborting it’s future.
Hard to believe Americans would have voted for Dr. Mengele.
I would say, hammer away with the scientific facts.
It is an unfortunate reality that too many people see abortion as a religious issue, and fail to see that the science (mostly) supports the religious view. Trying to convince someone that abortion is wrong because God puts a soul into every single product of conception is a no-go right from the start. On the other hand, pointing out that the product of conception has a brain and is capable of feeling from three weeks on—which is all based in observational science—is a much better way to reach people (IMO). Once you point out that scientifically, the unborn fetus is alive and feels, then go ahead and discuss God’s word about murder.
We can win this fight, but not if it is presented as “the fetus is alive because the Bible says so!”
The question I always ask is “who gets to decide which unborn children deserve the death penalty?”
In fact, is the pro-abortion side that uses relativistic, "scientific," arguments.
No doubt a large number of Catholic Democrats turned out to support the murder of the unborn, as they do in most states. They are Democrats first. Shameful.
When they make mandatory sterilization mandatory with every abortion, perhaps people will begin to understand.
what’s wrong with people
Another problem with this referendum is that it would have only applied to Albuquerque proper. Anyone wanting an abortion would simply have to to another NM city.
All social issues need to be regulated by the states.
True of homosexuality as well IMO.
It states take charge, the liberals lose on all these issues.
Science is not relativistic. It is pretty rigid, in fact.
The pro-abortion side actually does not try to use much science; they stick with sociological arguments. "Of course, the fetus is alive," they'll say, "but it doesn't contribute anything to society. Furthermore, it isn't human because it has not learned anything yet." I could keep piling on the pro-abortion arguments, but the bottom line is that they avoid the use of science.