As Ernst would probably say, about as useful as tits on a hog. Particularly in a place like Iowa. It has to be on TV or it doesnt exist.
2 Likes
boar (male) hog.
Female hogs (sows) nurse their young…
Ask these “personhood” supporters whose life is more important if my life is threatened by a fetus. I want a real answer.
1 Like
It’s exactly the kind of tinkly music backed incoherent and ineffective commercial that is like a parody of liberal political advertising. Any decent ad person could come up with something way better in five minutes.
Shorter Ernst: My support for the “personhood” amendment means exactly what I and my supporters want it to mean. Outsiders can’t say it’s “scary” because they’re not part of the equation. And since it has not yet been enacted, they have no reason to claim that it would harm anyone.
great message but poorly presented to the voters
Republican womb police?
Sounds like that’s what they are looking for.
…or report it to police as some state legislators have proposed
…and snake handler Pentecostal Christians dont think they’ll get bit
1 Like
Indeed. This is why religion is so central to their acculturation as conservatives and indoctrination into the ideology. Little kids can’t fathom the later concepts in life, but they sure can be taught how to practice believing things they’re told based on nothing more than “faith” from an early age, and fanciful religious stories and parables work wonders for that.
1 Like
I agree. The thought that Iowans would replace Tom Harkin with this woman is almost as bad as people in Wisconsin voting in Ron Johnson over Russ Feingold!
1 Like
What I believe is irrelevant since I am not a Party to any of these cases.
As noted during oral arguments, for some of the products covered by the regulation, it is not entirely clear whether or not this is the case. As a result, the Challengers felt Their beliefs compel Them to err on the side of caution because, for People for Whom this issue is a big deal, it is a big deal. You and I might think differently as They do (or We might think the same) about this issue or some other issue; the upshot is this: this particular principle/belief is something with which They deeply Self identify and in such cases being required to violate such principles/beliefs can cause great emotional anguish/torment. Now, the federal government does have at its disposal a less restrictive method, form 700, and even less restrictive methods, such as having the Employee seeking the coverage fill out the form for Themselves, might/do exist. Since the Religious Freedom Restoration Act requires the government to use the least restrictive means available while advancing the government’s compelling interest, any method other than that same said “least restrictive means” is prohibited.