The newly proposed constitutional amendment would go back to voters in November 2026, or sooner, if Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe calls a special election before then.
Republican senators used a series of rare procedural moves to cut off discussion by opposing Democrats before passing the proposed abortion-rights revision by a 21-11 vote. The measure passed the Republican-led House last month.
Immediately after vote, protestors erupted with chants of “Stop the ban!” and were ushered out of the Senate chamber.
Ok. I believe you if you say so.
Many times people say ignorance to push right-wing talking points.
I see, but I am not right wing. I asked about an apparent contradiction I saw, and got a clear answer.
I’ve noticed that when I ask questions I tend to get downvotes, but when I make statements I tend to get upvotes. Is there an assumption not only that right wing people are ignorant, but that ignorant people are right wing? I don’t know how to become less ignorant without asking.
“Just asking questions” is a dishonest tactic the right has been using for a long time now. You asked “how did they subvert the will of the people if they won the vote?”
That question contains multiple assertions. For one, it’s repeating the mandate of the people narrative - the actions of an elected official are not the same as the will of the people. Democracy is a political system meant to serve the will of the people, it’s not itself the will of the people.
It also assumes that no subversion took place… And you can’t know what you don’t know, but it’s giving “change my mind”
That sets the starting line for arguing the will of the people wasn’t subverted by disputing facts, moving goalposts, or some whataboutisms. It frames the conversation in a way that sneaks things in as default assumptions
If you don’t want to be mistaken for doing this, you can word your questions more neutrally/open ended, or be more explicit in requesting information. Adding “am I missing something?” To something that isn’t adding up makes it come across far more neutral and good faith. It’s also just less confrontational, which is good if you don’t have the full picture yet
I guess it’s just down to wording then. I can work on being less confrontational – I didn’t realize I was being confrontational, so I guess that’s part of the problem.
Fundamentally, I reject the idea that “just asking questions” is a bad thing – if there is harm done by people who are just asking questions, there must be something else, like the way they are asking the question, that is troublesome.
Well, “just asking questions” is different from asking questions - the one in quotes isn’t actually a question, it’s a dishonest way to slip in a point and (at a vibes level) “win” a debate with no desire to learn or seek truth
The term comes from Tucker Carlson I think, he’d make baseless accusations against people but phrase them as questions
And unfortunately, things are just that fucking crazy these days. Most political discourse (in general, it’s somewhat better here) is done in bad faith at this point, I think your question would have been interpreted differently not that long ago
People are scared and angry. It helps to proactively signal you genuinely want to engage… At least somewhat
I get the difference – but the trouble is, if I’m asking an earnest question, and somebody tells me I’m “just asking questions,” it’s rather difficult to argue against that.