Joe Henderson: Advocates against recreational pot, abortion rights initiatives rely on falsehoods and fantasy

Image via Adobe.

Every election cycle brings a certain amount of hysteria from one side or the other, generally around the theme that IT’S THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION OF OUR LIFETIME.

The longer the braying and bleating go on from pro and con about this issue or that, the more obnoxious the noise becomes. It long since reached 100% on the Ob-Nox-O Meter this year, especially around Amendments 3 and 4.

I refer, of course, to the amendments about abortion and legalized marijuana.

The hysterical arguments by opponents of Amendment 3 lately have been, in a word, ridiculous.

It’s Reefer Madness 2.0.

Do you know, they say with wide-eyed astonishment, that if marijuana is legalized, you won’t be able to go to a restaurant without some pothead at the table next to you blowing weed smoke in your toddler’s face?

In her spot, Casey DeSantis looks right into the camera with the earnestness she learned at her old TV job in Jacksonville and warns you won’t be able to take your kids to the park because dope smoke will be EVERYWHERE!

I guess opponents feel that’s more effective than the insipid one, where the poor sap was planting his marijuana garden before Big Weed laughingly told him that it was illegal. Guess what? It’s technically illegal now, and Amendment 3 wouldn’t change that — not that cops would likely be looking for someone with a few plants in the backyard anyway.

I also noticed the ads never talk about Sen. Joe Gruters saying he wants legislation to prohibit dope smoking in public places. I would agree with that, by the way.

This is just my opinion, but I think proponents made a good argument about regulated marijuana being safer than something bought off the street and laced with fentanyl.

I wonder how many people who voted against Amendment 3 stopped at the local liquor store for a few bottles of Scotch after dropping off their early ballot?

Similar hysteria has surrounded the abortion amendment.

You’ve seen the repeated commercials where sincere-looking mothers say they’re opposed because it would take away the requirement that parents must be required if a minor wants an abortion.

That.

Is.

A.

Lie.

When filling out my ballot, I actually read the bill’s language. It says explicitly, “This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

That hasn’t stopped Pro Birth opponents — big difference from Pro Life — from repeating that lie over and over.

They say a minor wouldn’t need a doctor for an abortion and could terminate the pregnancy basically whenever they want. Donald Trump even spread the lie that babies were being aborted after a full-term birth.

The ballot language says there can be no government interference “before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”

Do they expect anyone to believe a 16-year-old would scoot over to a local hardware store for an abortion? Would someone in the lumber department qualify as a “healthcare provider” in their eyes?

Opponents like to imply that women would use abortion as birth control for inconvenient pregnancies. I am the father of two grown sons, and my wife and I were thrilled when we learned she was pregnant. I know women who’ve had abortions, and it was a deeply personal and distressing decision.

We wouldn’t be here if Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Republican Legislature didn’t overplay their hand on this issue. Florida had a reasonable abortion law, but Republicans — the party of (cough) freedom — wanted control over women’s bodies.

Or, put another way, it’s like their leader Trump said in Wisconsin, “Whether the women like it or not, I’m going to protect them.”

That, in a nutshell, is the pro-birth attitude of the control freaks behind the abortion ban. With the election at hand, their campaign of lies makes it seem they’re worried that too many women won’t like it.