Question

Democrats voted to allow the buying and selling of humans.

Answer 1

Walter Hudson, a Minnesota State Representative, tweeted that Democrats "voted to allow the buying and selling of humans," what he lacks to explain is that he is referring to a reproductive matter, more specifically surrogacy. I looked up the bill he was discussing, House Bill 3567 and found that basically this bill supports adopting portions of the Uniform Parentage Act, specifically the section on egg and sperm donation. You can read the full bill here https://www.house.mn.gov/hrd/bs/93/HF3567.pdf, but it doesn't specifically support the "buying and selling of humans," which makes it seem like Hudson is talking about human trafficking or slaves of some kind. Hudson is defining the situation in alignment with his beliefs that surrogacy is morally wrong, shown by this exaggerated statement.

Comments

I like how you researched the bill he was referencing and linked it here, that was helpful in tracing the information to its source. I wonder if there are other sources that might further discredit Walter Hudson when it comes to his claim, or other claims in general? I think you were able to disprove this quickly but it might benefit to add further information on Hudson or to go into more detail on the Uniform Parentage Act, to further explain why this is misinformation.

Answer 2

In the tweet shared by Minnesota's State Representative, Walter Hudson, he states that democrats recently just "voted to allow the buying and selling of people." However, in his tweet, Hudson fails to share any background research, statistics, etc. to support this claim he made. Additionally he failed to provide the context of the statement, and after researching the bill he was referring to (https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.php?number=HF3567&version=0&session=ls93&session_year=2024&session_number=0), it is in fact entirely related to reproductive rights and responsibilities, along with surrogacy requirements in Minnesota. Hudson's way of phrasing this tweet misleads the reader to thinking he is talking about an entirely different concept, such as human trafficking. No where in the House Bill 3567 does it mention human trafficking. This evidence proves the tweet to be extremely misleading. 

Comments

Thank you for giving the exact bill this came from. Shows the highest tier of evidence that Walter Hudson was purposely being misleading in effort to get people to stray away from the Democratic Party. It is always good to full explore claims that politicians make to see what they are talking about or where they acquired this information from.