I read a letter from a person opposed to SJR10 because the amendment says "Utahns lack the intelligence . . . to figure out issues in the voting booth."
Hmmmm. I read the SJR10 version passed by the Utah Legislature and it doesn't say anything about intelligence. It doesn't say anything about taking away voting rights. It doesn't even say anything about taking away freedoms to decide issues.What it does say is a two-thirds voting requirement is proposed for initiatives that seek to manage wildlife. In light of the past 10 years of initiative abuse, and apparent willingness to mislead people by animal rights groups using politics to take control of everyone's wildlife for their selfish reasons, I think SJR10 is a pretty good idea.
Funny how the "don't eat the meat" crowd doesn't want to talk about the real language in SJR10. Maybe it's because they can't defend their decade of initiative abuse in other states. What are they hiding?