(05-07-2022 05:44 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Interesting to read your posts and reasoning, Lad.

All it takes to introduce a bill is one legislator. It takes a majority in both houses to pass it.

So, if one legislator were to introduce a bill saying every taxpayer in (name a state) would have to "donate" $1000 to a reparations fund, does that indicate that that is the future course of said state?

Believe me, I am not moving to Costa Rica or California based on one or even a couple of extremists (left or right) do.

I think most legislatures are peopled with persons more to the center. A combination (in Texas and other Red states) of a solid bloc of Democrats and a share of Republicans will result in more moderate laws in those states. As I said, I think the passage of those "trigger" statutes were primarily political ploys.

But time will tell. I expect the first legislatures after the returning of the question to the states will give us a preview of things to come.

Personally, I think all the angst I am hearing about the dismal future of same sex marriages, interracial marriages, and the inspection of autos leaving the state are just so much "The sky is falling", as are the claims that the ruling is the result of decades of grooming judges to make just this ruling (I posted a video). I also think the claims of a fascist takeover are overblown.

Let's use common sense. The Red team is not monolithically anti-abortion, no matter what Joy Behar or Elizabeth Warren says. Even the much hated Texas and Mississippi laws do not ban abortion. The argument is over WHEN to disallow it.

It will take some time, but most red states will gravitate toward the middle, while most blue states will go even farther left, so the eventual result will be more abortion, not less.

I guess the Green New Deal should never be used by you as a talking point against Dems, after all, it hasn’t been passed…

I agree that what a single politician suggests isn’t indicative of where a state will go. But as you get more support, and the proposal moves further in the direction of being signed, that evidence gets stronger and stronger. And my example has actually made it out of committee.

Time will tell if Louisiana and other states act more moderately as you suggest they do, and hopefully you’re right. But at this moment, I don’t see these states vocalizing that they will act more moderately - I see the opposite. So I don’t share the same optimism about the future of reproductive health laws.

I’ll add that moving further left of abortion access does not inherently mean more abortions will happen - it means more LEGAL abortions will happen. And heck, if coupled with increased support or funding for sex education and contraception access, you may actually see a decrease in abortions (see Colorado’s work with IUD access for example).