South Dakota outlaws abortion

[Goofball]

Well my conservative friends, you are getting your wish. This will most likely end up going to SCOTUS.

What do you think?

Will your newly picked conservative judges uphold or strike down this law?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...rnational/home

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

S. Dakota reopens abortion issue
Associated Press

Pierre, S.D. — Governor Mike Rounds signed legislation Monday banning nearly all abortions in South Dakota, setting up a court fight aimed at challenging the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

The bill would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless the procedure was necessary to save the woman's life. It would make no exception for cases of rape or incest.

Planned Parenthood, which operates the state's only abortion clinic, in Sioux Falls, has pledged to challenge the measure in court.

Mr. Rounds issued a written statement saying he expects the law will be tied up in court for years and will not take effect unless the U.S. Supreme Court upholds it.

“In the history of the world, the true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I agree with them,” Mr. Rounds said in the statement.

The Governor declined all media requests for interviews Monday.

The legislature passed the bill last month after supporters argued that the recent appointment of conservative justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito have made the U.S. Supreme Court more likely to overturn Roe v. Wade.

South Dakota's abortion ban is to take effect July 1, but a federal judge is likely to suspend it during a legal challenge.

Mr. Rounds has said abortion opponents already are offering money to help the state pay legal bills for the anticipated court challenge. Legislators said an anonymous donor has pledged $1-million (U.S.) to defend the ban, and the legislature set up a special account to accept donations for legal fees.

Under the new law, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion.

Mr. Rounds previously issued a technical veto of a similar bill passed two years ago because it would have wiped out all existing restrictions on abortion while the bill was tied up for years in a court challenge.

The statement he issued Monday noted that this year's bill was written to make sure existing restrictions will be enforced during the legal battle. Current state law sets increasingly stringent restrictions on abortions as pregnancy progresses. After the 24th week, the procedure is allowed only to protect the woman's health and safety.

About 800 abortions are performed each year in South Dakota. Planned Parenthood has said other women cross state lines to reach clinics.

[Proletariat]

Hopefully this will lead to the states deciding for themselves what they prefer. So, overall I think it's a good thing.

[Major Robert Dump]

Um, wow, no exceptions for incest or rape. Wow.

I know getting pregnant from incest or rape has odds of like one in a million, but still, thats pretty harsh, and you may even see some deranged criminals committing such acts with the intent of getting the victim pregnant because it will punish her further, like a man who rapes a woman because she dumped him.

Of course, you could always just travel to the next state

[Ice]

Um, wow, no exceptions for incest or rape. Wow.

I know getting pregnant from incest or rape has odds of like one in a million, but still, thats pretty harsh, and you may even see some deranged criminals committing such acts with the intent of getting the victim pregnant because it will punish her further, like a man who rapes a woman because she dumped him.

Of course, you could always just travel to the next state

I completely agree. I would very happy with the ban, if it would make exceptions for rape and incest.

[Tribesman]

Um, wow, no exceptions for incest or rape. Wow.

Well Bill Napolli says the exceptions in cases like that are covered , lets see ...... if they were virgins and religeous and the rape was really brutal then it would be covered by the health threat to the mother bit ...feckwit politician shites .
What the hell does some victims religeon have to do with their rights in rape cases and what sort of tosspot is going to determine the level of brutality involved to see if the rape victim is really brutalised enough to be an exception .

[Xiahou]

Um, wow, no exceptions for incest or rape. Wow.

Well Bill Napolli says the exceptions in cases like that are covered , lets see ...... if they were virgins and religeous and the rape was really brutal then it would be covered by the health threat to the mother bit ...feckwit politician shites .
What the hell does some victims religeon have to do with their rights in rape cases and what sort of tosspot is going to determine the level of brutality involved to see if the rape victim is really brutalised enough to be an exception .

No, there's no health exception in the South Dakota law- only to save the life of the mother.

Hopefully this will lead to the states deciding for themselves what they prefer. So, overall I think it's a good thing.

Exactly. I would hope and expect that if states were allowed to decide, most (not all) would pass similar bans and restrictions. Regardless though, at least it would be getting decided by the people instead of being handed down as a non-existant constitutional right created by a 9 member oligarchy.

[Goofball]

I completely agree. I would very happy with the ban, if it would make exceptions for rape and incest.

How hypocritical.

I am assuming that you are in favor of banning abortion because you believe aborting an unborn fetus is that same as murder.

If that is the case, what difference would it make if that fetus was a result of rape? It would still be a human life. How does it all of a sudden become okay to kill it?

I have a lot more respect for the pro-life folks who are in favor of no abortions at any time unless there is a definite health risk to the mother. I disagree with them, but I respect their position and see the logic in it.

But those who say "no abortions ever except for rape" just make me sick.

[Goofball]

Exactly. I would hope and expect that if states were allowed to decide, most (not all) would pass similar bans and restrictions. Regardless though, at least it would be getting decided by the people instead of being handed down as a non-existant constitutional right created by a 9 member oligarchy.

Unless, of course, they overturn Roe. Then they are champions of justice and freedom.

[ajaxfetish]

Well, from a pseudo-pro-choice standpoint, in cases other than rape there was a choice made by the mother. If she was raped, she was robbed of that opportunity. It doesn't quite fit a pro-life argument, but it does fit what I think a pro-choice one should be.

Ajax

[Xiahou]

Unless, of course, they overturn Roe. Then they are champions of justice and freedom.

If they overturned a clearly wrong decision and left abortion to the people to decide? I dont know that Id call them 'champions of justice and freedom', but it'd certainly be making the correct decision.

How hypocritical.

I am assuming that you are in favor of banning abortion because you believe aborting an unborn fetus is that same as murder.

If that is the case, what difference would it make if that fetus was a result of rape? It would still be a human life. How does it all of a sudden become okay to kill it?

I have a lot more respect for the pro-life folks who are in favor of no abortions at any time unless there is a definite health risk to the mother. I disagree with them, but I respect their position and see the logic in it.

But those who say "no abortions ever except for rape" just make me sick.

I can sympathize with the "rape" exception crowd- but I really dont agree with it. It's not the babies fault that it's dad was human garbage, and if you believe it's a life how do you justify killing it just because it was a product of rape? I can understand how carrying a baby to term that is a result of rape could be traumatic, but having it aborted could also be quite traumatic. Instead they could give it up for adoption, or believe it or not, there are cases where the family keeps and raises the child as their own.

Now, if it were up to me to decide, I'd say no exceptions except for the life of the mother- at which point it would be up to the doctor and parents to decide who lives. However, if my choice is between free and unrestricted abortion like we have now, or only if from rape or when the mother's life is endangered- obviously I'd choose the latter since it would be such a vast improvement.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Goof':

As to exceptions for rape or incest, I am unhappy to say I agree with you -- if not with the harshness of tone in your post -- the unborn has committed no crime in such cases, even where others have. Not a happy/fun scenario to contemplate at all, of course.

As to Roe v Wade:

Any SCOTUS decision that establishes a practice/action/communication event as constitutionally protected removes the issue from most legislative restriction (barring a full-on constitutional ammendment). The reversal of such a decision, however, does NOT prevent the isssue, it merely requires the states to legislate any allowance or restriction thereof.

The Warren and Burger courts were, in my opinion, far too willing to broadly interpret various issues as being protected and issue decisions regarding such issues, rather than leaving them up to the states as per the 10th ammendment. The goal of the FF in this ammendment was to leave decisions as local as practicable, in order to keep the central government from becoming too oligarchical and bureacratic in nature. THAT is the oligarchic overstep that X-man references.

[Devastatin Dave]

No exception for incest or rape is beyond my line. I'm pro-life to that point but you have to have an exception for the life of the mother, incest, or rape. This will and should be struck down. I would like to see this decided on the state level for the abortion issue, but with a Federal ammendment that keeps it legal for the life of the mother, rape, or incest. To do otherwise is as barbaric and backwards as partial birht abortion in my opinion.

[Big_John]

time to buy some stock!

[Mongoose]

Does it really deserve to die just because of something that it's father did?


If you acept that abortion is wrong, then the circumstance of the preganacy shouldn't matter as long as someone is not at risk(IE, someone is going to die anyway)

That said, I'm for very early abortions.

[Ice]

How hypocritical.

I am assuming that you are in favor of banning abortion because you believe aborting an unborn fetus is that same as murder.

If that is the case, what difference would it make if that fetus was a result of rape? It would still be a human life. How does it all of a sudden become okay to kill it?

I have a lot more respect for the pro-life folks who are in favor of no abortions at any time unless there is a definite health risk to the mother. I disagree with them, but I respect their position and see the logic in it.

But those who say "no abortions ever except for rape" just make me sick.

I'm Glad I make you sick then. Please proceed and vomit.

Being a child of rape or incest, may scar them their entire lives. It is unfair to the unborn child. That's the logic behind my thinking. I could really care if you think others.

[Big_John]

Being a child of rape or incest, may scar them their entire lives. It is unfair to the unborn child. That's the logic behind my thinking.

well, you should know that that stance is standing on what is possibly the slipperiest slope ever. just fyi.

[Crazed Rabbit]

It will be interesting to see how the court reacts to this. I hope they overturn Roe. They don't have to support this bill, they just have to recognize the non-existence of a right to abortion in the consitution.

Crazed Rabbit

[Xiahou]

Being a child of rape or incest, may scar them their entire lives. It is unfair to the unborn child. That's the logic behind my thinking. I could really care if you think others.

Yes, but in all fairness, lots of things can scar a child for life. Pedophilia can scar a child for life, but no one advocates killing the child to solve the problem. Many people have extraordinarily difficult lives, but I bet an overwhelming majority of them would take a hard life over no life at all.

[Proletariat]

Um, wow, no exceptions for incest or rape. Wow.

From what I gather (just hearing stuff on the radio, haven't read much yet) they took a tough stance just so it would get sent up to the SCOTUS.

Btw, a life is a life is a life to me. I don't understand why people differentiate the way someone was concieved if life is their primary concern. If the mother is going to be reminded of her rape every time she looks at her child, give it up for adoption.

Anyway, the states should decide. If I already don't have or want any say in Canada's laws, why should I care what people do in West Virginia?

[doc_bean]

Um, wow, no exceptions for incest or rape. Wow.

I know getting pregnant from incest or rape has odds of like one in a million,

Actually, women have a higher chance of getting pregnant after being raped than after having 'normal' sex...

[Goofball]

How hypocritical.

I am assuming that you are in favor of banning abortion because you believe aborting an unborn fetus is that same as murder.

If that is the case, what difference would it make if that fetus was a result of rape? It would still be a human life. How does it all of a sudden become okay to kill it?

I have a lot more respect for the pro-life folks who are in favor of no abortions at any time unless there is a definite health risk to the mother. I disagree with them, but I respect their position and see the logic in it.

But those who say "no abortions ever except for rape" just make me sick.

I'm Glad I make you sick then. Please proceed and vomit.

Sorry. I admit to playing the man instead of the ball for a minute there. I will retract the part about you making me sick. However, I stand by my comment that allowing a woman to kill her baby just because she was raped is hypocritical.

If a fetus is a life, then it's a life. No matter how it was conceived, killing it is murder.

[Watchman]

Outlawing abortion has an unpleasant habit of driving women who for one reason or another want one to find "alternative" solutions - Big_John illustrates this quite succintly. At least in the past this went as far as outright infanticide.

And then there's the little issue that the women can go elsewhere to get it done; this happens a lot in Ireland, I understand.

Sort of defeats most of the points.

Do the damn math. Principles are fine. Stupid ones that cause people pointless grief aren't.

[Ice]

Yes, but in all fairness, lots of things can scar a child for life. Pedophilia can scar a child for life, but no one advocates killing the child to solve the problem. Many people have extraordinarily difficult lives, but I bet an overwhelming majority of them would take a hard life over no life at all.

It isn't fair to compare pedophilia to rape/incest. They are two completely different things.

[Watchman]

Care to elaborate ? I'm pretty sure most instances of pedophilia qualify as "rape", you know.

[Mongoose]

But that's not what we're doing...

You say that it shouldn't be protected because it would grow up damaged. Is that really any different then saying that all people who have been abused shouldn't be allowed to live? Yes, we know that they're two different things

[Ice]

Care to elaborate ? I'm pretty sure most instances of pedophilia qualify as "rape", you know.

I didn't mean the act of raping or the act of Pedophilia. I meant, that it isn't fair to classify a child which is a result of rape/incest in the same field as "What would happen if the child was assaulted by a Pedophil?"

[Watchman]

...maybe it's just late and I'm tired or something, but you kinda lost me there mate.

[Kanamori]

To not have the exception for rape or incest seems eerily similar to the state forcing the mother to carry a child that was never hers.

At most, I think Roe would get some amending. This law is so strict though that it may be very difficult to interpret the wording differently, and apply it to the ruling with relevance. It sure may get there, but I wonder if it was too much to succeed.

[Ice]

But that's not what we're doing...

You say that it shouldn't be protected because it would grow up damaged. Is that really any different then saying that all people who have been abused shouldn't be allowed to live? Yes, we know that they're two different things

Like you said, they are different situations. It's just how I feel.

[Ice]

...maybe it's just late and I'm tired or something, but you kinda lost me there mate.

I'm just saying, being a product of rape or incest is different then being exposed to a Pedophil when you are a child.