Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="zubenelgenubi" data-source="post: 5353215" data-attributes="member: 63706">Probably because it didn't actually change anything. It simply affirmed that the state constitution did not have built-in protections for the right to murder babies, or require that the government use taxpayer money to pay for the murder of babies. It also affirms that any laws about baby murder would be written and voted on by the legislature. It was basically a redundancy, and completely unnecessary.But based on the reporting, I'd bet a lot of people thought they were voting against a constitutional baby murder ban. Those people probably have low reading comprehension, and do whatever the bots on Twitter say to do.</blockquote>