Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

S. Dakota Abortion Law Faces A Big Test

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 09:18 PM
Original message
S. Dakota Abortion Law Faces A Big Test
Voters to Decide Broad Ban's Fate
(snip)
South Dakota is the unlikely home of this year's most intense duel over abortion, a Nov. 7 referendum to decide the future of HB 1215, a measure that would institute a broad ban on abortion. No exceptions would be allowed for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest -- the procedure would be permitted only when the mother's life was in jeopardy.

Partisans across the nation are delivering money and tactical advice on an issue that has divided residents of the state. South Dakota's fight could be a harbinger of political battles across the country should the Supreme Court strike down Roe v. Wade , the 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

"This has become the focal point in the country for the choice debate," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, which is channeling cash into the campaign. "The stakes are very high, especially for us to win in November and again say America is pro-choice, America doesn't think politicians should be involved in these private decisions, and enough is enough."

A fresh poll suggests voters are inclined to oppose the law as too severe. In a late-July sounding, opponents of the ban held an eight-point lead, with 14 percent undecided.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/27/AR2006082700773.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. if you don't include exception for rape/incest...
...I hope you DIAF. Seriously. That's just so fucked up to FORCE a woman to carry a rapist's fetus to term.
In that situation, I would probably be suicidal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. And then if the woman has the kid and puts him into the system
he becomes another child that the fundi's complain about......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. yup
They don't give a damn about the kid once it's out of the womb.

But I wouldn't make it that far. I really would be suicidal if I was forced to carry it. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. I think I would be too....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noonwitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 07:34 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. I wouldn't be suicidal, necessarily, buy I probably wouldn't take as good
of care of myself and my baby if that were the situation, as opposed to a pregnancy I wanted. Maybe I would smoke a cigarette once in a while, I might take advil for a headache, drink a cup of coffee once in a while.

And maybe I wouldn't do any of these things. But the inclination would be stronger than if I planned a pregnancy and wanted to have a baby.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #2
15. They have a PRISON waiting for him especially if he's BLACK
Keeps the necks employed watching naked men shower in groups
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ka hrnt Donating Member (235 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. Hmmm...
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 10:30 PM by Ka hrnt
"...the procedure would be permitted only when the mother's life was in jeopardy."

Juxtapose that quote re: the law with your statement:

"In that situation, I would probably be suicidal."

That raises a sticky question; would that be considered a "loophole" (for lack of a better term)? Ai ai ai...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. Because there are no exceptions, I think the voters will overturn it
but I wouldn't celebrate too quickly even if they do. Then the legislature might just turn right around and pass an abortion ban with the rape/incest exception in it. Some of the "mushy middle" types might go along with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 09:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. the motive for the pro choice campaign blows my mind
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 09:36 PM by tocqueville
"America doesn't think politicians should be involved in these private decisions, and enough is enough."

well it should be exactly the contrary. Politicians should be involved in those questions and legislate. Because abortion is only partly a "private" matter, it's mostly a social matter. Basically all the reasoning behind abortion is flawed when you take it from the "privacy' standpoint. That's exactly what allows fundies to attack it on "ethical" grounds. If you make abortion primarily a social and woman rights issue (meaning right to welfare) - which it is, then the "ethical religious" approach becomes irrelevant. Never fight the fundies on their own terrain.

besides it's not even politicians that are really involved, but judges. Which is even worse since they are appointed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 06:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. Excuse Me, But There Isn't Anything MORE Private
A Woman's Autonomy, or right to self-determination, is essential for equality. Otherwise, women are not adults, endowed by their Creator with the rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. You can't have it both ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrPrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. So you are claiming...
Fundamentalists, who generally have NO ehtical arguments, just specific political one on issues, presumeably have a 'good' ethical argument that is challenges the flawed private standpoint regarding abortion?

Well fuck me...so what is the flawed reasoning, pray tell? Can you give us a persepctive on say the ethical stand of the Catholic Church, who for centuries maintained Aquinas's definition that life was post-coitus, ONLY to change this legislation in the late 19th century purely for increasing the Catholic birth rate? That don't sound very ethical to me -- that's sounds all rather SOCIAL, actually. To ignore the undercurrent of traditional religious control over women, to ignore racial 'panic', to ignore the hyprocrisy of 'life' vs. human rights, is to ignore some of the key elements of the Pro-Life movement -- not to mention it makes a lot of money and is an emotive button in which fundamnetalist groups like to use in order to organize other 'political' causes.

So many people are fooled by the 'religious' tag that they tend to forget that religions are POLITICAL MOVEMENTS and everything they do is SOCIAL or 'religious' -- so when fundamentalist religious groups speak on social and political issues, there are ALWAYS people, like yourself, that are trained to view them in amoral, intellectual vacuum and ignore CONTEXT.

The CONTEXT being secular societies with a well-developed system of PERSONAL rights and responsibilities, none of which has anything to do with 'religious' ethics and was IN FACT won by the people against strong opposition by religious authority.

Let's not forget that little part, shall we.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
7. Everyone should have broad ban
I've got a cable modem. My sister down the street has DSL. At work we have a T-1.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
8. How about feeling relief, Ms Brandt?
Shear, unadulterated relief, and gratitude at this point for the choice I still have, my daughters have and to the women before me who made it possible.


"I don't want anyone to feel what I did," Brandt says." Bullshit.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 06:31 AM
Response to Original message
11. ah yes. . . this is the ban that might be exempted for some
"Good religious girl who has been raped & sodomized, just as bad as it can be"? WTF was that quote?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nodehopper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Bill Napoli's masturbatory fantasies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. That's it...
Other exceptions would surely be his daughter, and her friends. .. and maybe the preacher's daughter.. you know, a case by case basis, with him getting to give the old "thumbs up or down" on it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
17. I'm here in Rapid City vacationing...
...and I have seen NO signs or bumper stickers or anything about this referendum. It's strange.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
18. The law should specify that...
...those who voted for the draconian No abortion in ANY case law:

Would not have any abortion in ANY CASE - no matter where in USA. Their children will not have any abortions either, till they become adults.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 17th 2024, 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC