Ohio GOP State Rep Wants To Outlaw Contraception

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Ohio GOP State Rep Wants To Outlaw Contraception
July 1, 2022

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports:

State Rep. Jean Schmidt, a Clermont County Republican, said during a radio interview this week that she would entertain a debate about outlawing birth control in the wake of the United States Supreme Court overturning constitutional protections for abortion.

Schmidt made the comments during a Wednesday interview with 700WLW’s Bill Cunningham in which she also said companies that provide travel expenses for employees to get abortion care could face legal consequences.

Schmidt is the sponsor of a bill in the state legislature that would eliminate abortion from the time of conception, effectively outlawing it in the state. Schmidt, who previously called a pregnancy caused by rape an “opportunity” for women, said there would be no carveout for pregnancies caused by rape or incest.

Read the full article.

According to Schmidt, rape is an opportunity because “that baby might grow up to cure cancer.

Schmidt appeared on JMG in April when she introduced Ohio’s version of a “Don’t Say Gay” bill.

Her first appearance on JMG came in 2009 when as a member of the US House she whispered to a notorious racist anti-Obama birther, “I believe you.”

First abortion. Now birth control?

cleveland.com
Ohio state representative says she would consider banning birth control following abortion outlaw
State Rep. Jean Schmidt, a Clermont County Republican, said during a radio interview she would entertain a debate about banning birth control.

Link to tweet

[HUAJIAO]

1. Just from that photo, that woman looks like she is filled with self-hatred,

so full she lives in constant emotional pain and lashed out at everyone else trying to relieve the pain. It won't work, lady.

[CurtEastPoint]

2. then she'd outlaw her own mean face, right Mean Jean? That's BC for anyone!

[Rebl2]

5. She looks

a bit off her rocker if you ask me. There are lots of young republicans that will not agree with getting rid of birth control.

[CurtEastPoint]

6. She's been spreading that nastiness around for years. And I hope you are right. I think you are.

[RKP5637]

3. Creepy looking as hell!!! n/t

[Ritabert]

4. How old is that woman? 100?

[CurtEastPoint]

7. omg I just looked it up! She's 2 years younger than I am! It's the ugliness and hate in her.

[subterranean]

8. For some reason I can't help thinking of a George Carlin quote

about the type of people who are most outspoken against abortion.

[packman]

9. Some people, either thru appearance or soul, have natural birth control

apparently she has been blessed with both

[LetMyPeopleVote]

10. The right to privacy has been under attack for a while

This is the asshole who drafted the Texas abortion law. This asshole wants to strike down the implied right of privacy by getting Roe overruled which would/could lead to striking down the right to same sex marriage. interracial marriage, gay sex and other rights

There is a pattern here. These assholes want to get rid of Griswold and undo the right of privacy. That would cause Lawrence v. Texas (consensual same sex intercourse), Cooling v. Virginia (inter-racial marriage), birth control and same sex marriage to be overturned.

Link to tweet

https://www.comicsands.com/jonathan-mitchell-overturn-gay-marriage-2655065691.html

Though Mitchell's brief, also signed by his co-counsel Adam Mortara, dedicates much of its time to the Texas abortion law's defense, it also questions "lawless" pieces of legislation, namely the Lawrence v. Texas ruling, which decriminalized gay sex nationwide, and the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling, which legalized same-sex marriage.

Though the brief does not say reversing Roe v. Wade would threaten the same-sex marriage ruling, it does say that

""the news is not as good for those who hope to preserve the court-invented rights to homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage …
"These 'rights,' like the right to abortion from Roe, are judicial concoctions, and there is no other source of law that can be invoked to salvage their existence."

It goes on to add that while the Supreme Court should not necessarily overturn Lawrence and Obergefell, it should consider these two rulings as "lawless" as Roe v. Wade and, by extension, Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

"This is not to say that the Court should announce the overruling of Lawrence and Obergefell if it decides to overrule Roe and Casey in this case."
"But neither should the Court hesitate to write an opinion that leaves those decisions hanging by a thread. Lawrence and Obergefell, while far less hazardous to human life, are as lawless as Roe."

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet