News
Featured Image
Pro-abortion activists rally in New York's Union Square in support of Planned Parenthood, Nov. 28, 2015.Shutterstock.com

PHOENIX (LifeSiteNews) – Pro-abortion activists failed to gather enough signatures by Thursday for a referendum that would ask Arizona voters to “enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution,” according to the Associated Press.

“A newly organized group of abortion rights supporters that filed an initiative in mid-May to protect the right to abortion fell way short of the approximately 356,000 needed signatures,” the wire service reported. “The effort by a group called Arizonans for Reproductive Freedom was a longshot, and while they collected about 2,700 per day that only totaled about 175,000. Initiative proponents often aim to collect at least an extra 30% over the minimum as a buffer.”

Abortion is currently illegal under a 1901 law that criminalizes the killing of preborn babies. The state never repealed the law, originally passed when it was a U.S. territory.

The pro-abortion group plans to try again in 2024.

READ: Mississippi becomes latest state to ban abortion throughout every stage of pregnancy

“This campaign will not stop until abortions are once again legal and accessible across Arizona,” Shasta McManus, the group’s treasurer, stated in a news release. “Since June 24, Arizona has been operating under a law written when the Civil War was still raging and Arizona was not yet a state. This is barbaric and unacceptable and underlines the urgency of this movement.”

Some outlets put the date of the law as 1864, when Arizona passed new laws as a territory, while other news outlets use 1901 as the date.

“This may have started from a moment, but it is growing into a lasting statewide movement,” Victoria Fewell, chair of the initiative stated in the news release from the group. She is an abortionist.

Liberal activists did succeed in placing a question on the ballot that would increase mail-in ballots and expand ballot harvesting.

Analysis by Ballotpedia concluded:

The initiative would rename the early voting list from the active early voting list to the permanent early voting list. Any voter on the early voting list is automatically sent an early ballot for any election at which they are eligible to vote. The initiative would repeal provisions providing for the removal of voters from the early voting list if they do not vote using an early ballot in all eligible elections for two consecutive election cycles and do not reply to a notice sent by election officials.

It would also remove criminal penalties for ballot-harvesting and expand drop boxes.

READ: Republicans must fight back against the plot to rig the midterms

“The initiative would allow a voter to give a voted early ballot to another person to deliver to the mail, polling place, or dropbox,” Ballotpedia explained. “It would repeal the existing law that makes it a felony to collect another person’s ballot. It would make it a felony to collect a ballot and intentionally fail to deliver it.”

Mail-in ballots and drop boxes have come under scrutiny for being targets for voter fraud. Both were expanded in the 2020 elections under the guise of COVID safety precautions.

An analysis from the Public Interest Legal Foundation, an election integrity group, found that 15 million mailed ballots remained unaccounted for from the 2020 election.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

3 Comments

    Loading...