Bedford Ramblings
Steve Mills

I THINK I have made up my mind on voting but anyone want to voice an opinion?

Posted Wednesday, October 15, 2014, at 7:53 AM
View 28 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Here is another article that goes into more depth on the abortion issue http://www.t-g.com/story/2128591.html

    The problem is STILL who to believe. One side says the clinics are not supervised well, but another said that any doctor performing abortion is highly regulated. ?? Is it semantics? One says clinics and the other says doctors.

    Others declare a woman has the right to say what happens to her body and I totally agree, but when does the fetus have rights a well? Just at birth?

    A 48 hour waiting period is not saying no to abortion, just making sure the woman is thinking it over and not reacting. It is a bigger decision than some might think.

    The problem is that once the legislators have it back in their court, what will they do? Will it be a return to the 48 hour rule or something much more restrictive.

    As one advertisement says, it is a poorly written bill. I presume because it does not really spell any real details out, just puts it back in the hands of legislators.

    The other side is saying to put it back in the hands of the people, BUT it is NOT in the hands of the people, it is in the hands of their elected officials who seem to vote more on what is "politically correct" and not what is morally correct. So who knows where that will go?

    I am still in a state of flux.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Wed, Oct 15, 2014, at 10:09 AM
  • Steve,

    In most of my voting life I have looked to The League Of Women Voters to apprise me of political issues in terms I easily understand. Recently I found that Tennessee has several chapters ( Murfreesboro being the closest ) and information regarding candidates and amendments online. Please take a look at the website to enlighten your own decision making .

    Personally I believe no politician has a right to come between me and decisions I make regarding my own body....And that is what #1 is all about...... Opening that door.

    -- Posted by Palindrome on Thu, Oct 16, 2014, at 7:33 PM
  • I personally know three women who have had abortions. All three deeply regret it. That is not to say that all do.

    It would seem that the courts over ruled the law in favor of Planned Parenthood a few years ago leaving the only way to effect change to be a constitutional amendment.

    Planned Parenthood and abortion clinics stand to gain a great deal of money by increasing the number of abortions and by reducing inspections and oversight of their facilities.

    I am not sure who would gain monetarily by voting yes on 1, but there is probably a money trail there also.

    Looking at the opposing views websites I find one to present specific facts with references to law and the other to be vague and opinionated. You decide.

    Here are both sides sites;



    More info on this subject.


    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Thu, Oct 16, 2014, at 7:44 PM
  • Please excuse my ignorance in reading the law. Please answer [in simple terms] this simple question for me [and maybe others who are confused, too] ...

    Voting for #1 means ???

    Voting for #2 means ???

    -- Posted by decorate1956 on Fri, Oct 17, 2014, at 7:13 AM
  • Or maybe I should ask:

    Voting YES on 1 means ???

    Voting NO on 1 means ???

    -- Posted by decorate1956 on Fri, Oct 17, 2014, at 7:17 AM
    John I. Carney
    I ran a story in last Sunday's paper which included descriptions of all four of the amendments, and since that time Jason Reynolds has run a story focusing on Amendment #1. Both of those stories should be available here online.
  • decorate1956...

    Although LWVTN.org describes the debate best....I will say that voting yes on #1 means state politicians can legislate away your rights to personal decisions regarding pregnancy and voting no on #1 means that your decisions remain your's alone and private.

    -- Posted by Palindrome on Fri, Oct 17, 2014, at 10:17 AM
  • I fully intend upon voting yes on both amendments.

    -- Posted by Tim Lokey on Fri, Oct 17, 2014, at 3:17 PM
  • Decide before you go. Don't plan on the ballot giving you a clear picture.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Fri, Oct 17, 2014, at 4:00 PM
    John I. Carney
    This is especially true in the case of Amendment #4. The purpose and the primary affect of #4 is to give veterans' groups the right to hold raffles. But the word "veteran" doesn't even appear in the measure as it appears on the ballot. No one will have any idea what this amendment is about unless they've read or heard something about it in advance of going to the polls.

    Basically -- as I've already reported, and will be following up on soon -- the current laws give 501(c)3 non-profit groups the right to hold raffles. But 501(c)3 is just one particular section of the federal tax code, and not all non-profit groups fall under it. Veterans groups, in particular, fall under a different section of the tax code -- 501(c)19. The proposed amendment would allow 501(c)19 groups to have raffles just as 501(c)3 groups do now. But the amendment only uses those numbers, without describing what they mean, and so someone coming into the ballot who isn't a tax attorney or certified public accountant is going to be scratching his or her head.

  • As for myself I would never have an abortion,but that is my choice.The key word is choice here.Voting yes to amendment 1 will not stop abortions.Let not go back to 1900s when women died in back alleys.I thought everyone wanted the government out of our homes.Seems as if some think it is different when it comes to womens rights.

    -- Posted by lets be real on Sat, Oct 18, 2014, at 12:49 PM
  • Control by legislation what one can not control by design...

    Regardless of the stated desire to limit the scope of government...

    " Lets Be Real " picked up on the hypocrisy ....

    -- Posted by Palindrome on Sat, Oct 18, 2014, at 5:01 PM
  • The real issue is not the amendments themselves, but whether it is an appropriate way to govern by writing narrowly targeted topical amendments into our constitution. Any good constitution has to be able to serve over time, as the environment changes. These are not appropriate uses of constitutional amendments, they are merely pandering for votes.

    -- Posted by lazarus on Sat, Oct 18, 2014, at 7:47 PM
  • MY husband and I've had a LIVELY DISCUSSION over this bill........ He said we are furnishing abortion's for the surrounding state's.. I disagree... Our government needs to get their nose out of private matters. The bill is written so poorly and I can't figure out what it says.. but I don't want a politician deciding the fate of a pregnancy. Good or bad.. I am not the judge.

    -- Posted by Union on Sat, Oct 18, 2014, at 10:47 PM
  • The government has been given far to much control over people's lives already.

    I will never understand why we as American's so freely hand over our freedoms that other countries fight so hard to obtain.

    -- Posted by Dianatn on Mon, Oct 20, 2014, at 11:25 AM
  • There is a deep chasm separating government regulation for the safety and promotion of the greater good from the critically important protection of individual rights. The gray area between them will probably always be shifting..........As it should be........While we consider the importance of each issue. It is easy to see which side of the chasm our currently debated amendments fall.

    -- Posted by Palindrome on Tue, Oct 21, 2014, at 12:33 PM
  • So, while all of your comments state what your opinion is, I am so confused about what is the better of the two, I still am undecided. Between the convincing ads on TV for either vote ... And, with respect John and Jason, reading the stories you both ran in the newspaper, I still have to ask...what vote is the "best" ?

    -- Posted by decorate1956 on Wed, Oct 22, 2014, at 7:45 AM
    John I. Carney
    Our job is never to tell you how to vote, and if we were to attempt to do so, we would be quite correctly criticized. Our job is to lay out the basic information so you can make an informed decision.
  • I am not in favor of abortion since I believe life begins at conception, BUT there are extenuating circumstances that this bill does not address, so my vote would be to keep government out of it and vote no.

    I do think that a society has a right and obligation to define what is murder but that is a discussion going on for many, many years and won't be solved by this bill, It is poorly written in my opinion (maybe intentionally) so again, my vote is no.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Wed, Oct 22, 2014, at 9:22 AM
  • PS: I usually try to refrain from stating my vote, but you asked, so................

    -- Posted by stevemills on Wed, Oct 22, 2014, at 9:23 AM
  • Thank you Steve for being so candid...I feel the very same way...and I think this is why I feel so confused...My stand is God gives us life and it should be God who takes it away...I know all the circumstances of each individual case would come into consideration if and when a decision would have to be made and I pray that would be a decision neither I nor any one of my family members would be faced with...The problem I have with voting YES is I, too, think we have given way too much control to the government.

    -- Posted by decorate1956 on Thu, Oct 23, 2014, at 8:01 AM
  • The thing about this that concerns me is I feel this opens the door for so many other things besides abortion. I am a firm believer of a person's choice of a dignified death. I personally do not want to be put on life support if there is no hope of me ever living a normal life. I think things like this amendment opens that doorway for the government to decide on my end of life fate and I do not want that. I would not impose that sort of life for myself nor my family. I would not want my family to have to deal with me being no more than a vegetable. I have come to believe when you give the government an inch they take a mile and they have taken too much control, as I see it... Of course this is just my feelings on the subject it does not have to be yours

    -- Posted by Dianatn on Thu, Oct 23, 2014, at 9:45 AM
  • You are so right Dianatn.It seems like the other things you mention always concern women. Even God gives us a choice between right and wrong.Let people make their own choice. That's why I am voting no on amendment 1.This should be between a family and God.If Tennessee votes yes then we have just let the government in our bedrooms.

    -- Posted by lets be real on Thu, Oct 23, 2014, at 1:27 PM
  • More info on this amendment. Follow the money trail.


    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Fri, Oct 31, 2014, at 12:38 PM
  • We are all sinners. God gives us the ability to choose right from wrong, and to that he knows our hearts, our motives and just causes us to make the decisions we make. What pray tell do politicians know of those things to do about each of us? I do not believe in abortion,I do not believe in lies or greed - all are sins, and all will be judged along with other sins by God. While we can approve or disapprove it still boils down to God giving us free will. When he looks upon a woman who has been forced into the position to make that choice HE will know the reasons, He will know her heart, HE will know who could have been there for her and that child that was not. I believe that God will judge not only her but also those who could have been there to help know she was not alone, who could have given her the hope she needed at that time. There is so much more involved and so many other things that this bill will effect, and God knows what little tid bits they have hidden in this bill that to get passed would have to hide behind the "baby Killer" guilt trip.How many other will be harmed by this bill that are not seeking an abortion? Too many questions.

    -- Posted by jstus on Fri, Oct 31, 2014, at 11:24 PM
  • The passing of this amendment has sent TN 40 years backwards. Is it not an oxymoron that this bill passed yet Scott DesJarlais was elected? It's a sad day for Tennessee

    -- Posted by Dianatn on Wed, Nov 5, 2014, at 9:46 PM
  • I was surprised at how close the vote was on 1&2.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Thu, Nov 6, 2014, at 6:42 AM
  • I think TN was set back more than 40 years.How can family values voters say yes to amendment 1 and then elect Scott DesJarlais? You are right Dianatn.Tennesseans should be ashamed.This is what happens when everyone don't get out and vote.How soon people forget and elect the same useless incumbents nationwide.

    -- Posted by lets be real on Thu, Nov 6, 2014, at 11:04 AM
  • It's bizarre. All these so called "Christian", anti-abortion, family values republicans electing a guy that cheats on his wife multiple times, impregnates one mistress, then encourages her to get an abortion. But he's a republican...so just bite your lip and vote for him anyway. Then there's the republican that won in Colorado that performed his own long distance exorcism on President Obama and also believes that gay people are possessed by demons. Republicans actually elected this guy! Google Gordon Klingenschmitt and check this wacko out. In Iowa they elected that psychopath hog castrating lady. And republicans are all happy with these mid term results? Strange.

    -- Posted by Rocket Valentine on Fri, Nov 7, 2014, at 8:39 AM
  • RV, I would bet that the Dems have a few "colorful" folks on their roster so I won't get into a slug-fest on things of which I really do not know BUT I can comment on DesJarlais.

    I do not approve of his personal actions (as I know them, of which I know nothing first hand) and I really wish he had not been on the ballot. I went to his opponent's campaign site to learn about her since I view myself as an independent.

    What I read sounded like mantra out of the Democratic Party and very little about what she thought. Or, if she thought exactly like the Party, then I could not support her. (Yes, I am more Republican than Democrat)

    So.... I grimaced (bit my lip as you would say) and voted for DesJarlais. I would have preferred someone else on the ballot, but a non-vote was still a vote for his opponent which I could not do.

    So..., my choice may have won, but I am not necessarily "happy" about it.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Fri, Nov 7, 2014, at 10:03 AM
  • Here is one that got elected again that is even worse is Rep Michael Grimm R-NY facing federal charges.I hope americans don't think it is going to be better now in Washington for we are in for a rude awakening.Thier only purpose is to do nothing but obstruct anything Obama does,even if it may be good for the country.Look how many nominees under Obama they have filibustered,as many as have been filibustered under every single president combined.Now the person over climate change does not even believe it is true.They even think the keystone pipeline is safe for the environment.Its only going to create 42,000 temporary jobs for 2 years.Is it worth it?

    -- Posted by lets be real on Thu, Nov 13, 2014, at 12:45 PM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: