Because it’s not “free speech”. It’s government sponsored speech to describe what voters are choosing, and supposed to be an impartial description of the proposal.
It’s the exact mirror equivalent of the other side calling the fetus an “unwanted parasite”. We know, for a fact, that the framing of questions massively impacts how people vote, which is why requiring objective, neutral wording is mandatory for a democratic result.
Because it’s not “free speech”. It’s government sponsored speech to describe what voters are choosing, and supposed to be an impartial description of the proposal.
Inflammatory language is not impartial.
“Unborn human” seems like the right word. What else is it? Unborn cow?
A bundle of cells that might, a meaningful distance in the future after a woman’s body has been taken away from them, eventually become a human.
So unborn human isn’t far off.
It’s the exact mirror equivalent of the other side calling the fetus an “unwanted parasite”. We know, for a fact, that the framing of questions massively impacts how people vote, which is why requiring objective, neutral wording is mandatory for a democratic result.
Maybe they should just have a Republican section and a Democrat section.
Also abortion is one of those things people dig in about. Words aren’t going to change high held beliefs
Or they could just use neutral language like they’re supposed to.
Elections don’t get decided by the people entrenched on any side. They’re decided by people in the middle.