Your implication that texas republicans only think there should be government involvement in areas that are guaranteed by the constitution is a huge strawman. Further, I see no reason why you'd drag in an entirely unrelated political issue (abortion) other than to flamebait.
I'm all for eschewing flamebait, but in this case you're being part of the problem.
It absolutely does provide legal rights. The fact that some of the people involved choose to have it do so because they believed those rights to be inherent moral rights is interesting background knowledge, as is the fact that some subset of those people thought that the origin of those rights was some divine creator, but neither is particularly important. All laws ultimately rest on the lawmakers’ beliefs about values, so the fact that that is also true of the US Constitution isn't some consequential observation.
And to circle back: I didn't bring up abortion.
Otherwise, I think I'll just keep saying what is obviously true and justified and fair to say about them.
As for "unrelated" political issues: sorry, but they are all related.
>Otherwise, I think I'll just keep saying what is obviously true and justified and fair to say about them.
Just to be clear, you think that "there should be government involvement in areas that are guaranteed by the constitution" (as mentioned in my previous comment) is "obviously true and justified and fair to say" about texas republicans? I read a few statements from texas government officials[1][2] and it's clear that their stance is more nuanced than the one you're implying. Specifically, they're against abortion because they want to prevent "unborn babies" from being "killed", not because abortion isn't a right enumerated in the constitution.
[1] https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/ag-paxton...
[2] https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-statement-on...
>As for "unrelated" political issues: sorry, but they are all related.
Explain how energy policy is related to abortion (using any reasonable definition of "related").
No they aren’t. Thinking they are is a mental sickness perpetrated by hyper partisans to get you riled up into an “us vs. them” mentality. Texas is more “pro-choice” than Mississippi and Mississippi is on the national eastern grid.
I'm sure there's arguments that this powerless 46% Democratic minority is balanced out by a 46% Republican minority in a reliably blue state, but still.. it seems messed up that voting works like this.
Strategically, the democratic focus on a few issues that alienate more traditional democrats strongly amplify that effect.
That's easily explained by the fact that Texas is a "safe" republican state whereas west virginia is a swing state. From the wikipedia page on Manchin's last election in 2018:
>Because of the heavy Republican lean of his state, Manchin was ranked by many outlets as one of the most vulnerable incumbents up for reelection.
But the Democrats swerve to the left has rolled back the gains we were making from the Latino demographic changes.
maybe the Union will break up and we'll have our own countries like this, but we're too geographically intermingled - it'd take violent pogroms.