Attention pro-choice people--DU this article!

[hyphenate]

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=62957


This article is about South Dakota banning almost ALL abortions statewide, including those for women or even children who have been raped, those who are faced with a disease that makes an abortion necessary, and any and all other circumstances. The article itself is well written and leaning to the left, but the people who have commented for the most part are nasty freepers trying to impose THEIR choice on the rest of us!

It will require registration, but to fight back at these ignorant bastards, it should be worth it!

[benddem]

1. I wish I'd never read the

comments. They just show what a bunch of warped personalities those conservatives are.

[hyphenate]

3. I know, but it is necessary

I think, to know what our opposition has to say and the way they think. I'd say a good 90% of them (the men, anyhow) would prefer to have women subordinate to men, pregnant or at least barefoot and at home, not creating a "ruckus" in the company boardroom. In other words, they don't think that women are equal in most ways, and that alone brings their mindset back about 100 or so years.

[politicat]

2. So much ignorance in so few electrons....

I haven't felt like my intelligence was so sucked down since the last time I went to freeperville.

As it happens, for those on the western side of the state, the abortion provider in Grand Rapids is too far away - Boulder, CO and Cheyenne, WY are more convenient. So unless they're going to put pee booths at the border patrol stations, this isn't going to stop any woman who can afford the fee and $40 in gas and a day off work and possibly a hotel room. And since the fees are already out of reach for most poor women, the only ones this is likely to affect are the ones on the edge who were ambivalent about the process anyway, and those who would rather spend their $600 on meth or booze or those who can't escape from someone abusive (a parent, a partner, a job) for the 48 to 72 hours it takes to go away. So it's not going to stop abortion... it's just going to raise the number of children abandoned, forcibly taken into foster care, or on public assistance. Hope the state has the money in their budget.

Is IHS still going to forcibly sterilize Native American women? This still happens; Lakota women with a couple of kids are pressured by the IHS doctors to have tubals all the time; in fact, the pressure starts after the first child. Sometimes, the women aren't even consulted. If that continues, are they going to do the same to white women, or is this some sort of subtle genocidal action to outbreed the Native Americans?

Oh... and one last thing. I know that South Dakota has been trying to woo manufacturers and tech companies to the state because ag in a time of droughts is slow suicide. Well, the state just speeded up the process. It's not likely that any call center, packing center, or development center is going to move to a state where the cost of insuring their workers is going to triple - abortion may not be covered by most insurance (though it is by mine) but pregnancy is, and children are. If the birth rate of a company doubles, their insurance goes up, and by more than double. (Not to mention all the disability/sick time kids and pregnancies cost...)

I predict that a lot of scrips for mifepristone & misoprostol will be written in North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana, Minnesota and Colorado, and that pharmacies just on the other side of the state line can make a killing if they stock mifepristone & misoprostol and the morning after pills.

[hyphenate]

4. There will be ways to fight this

and as we saw from the most recent ban on late term abortions, there are already challenges to the law and local judges have already dismissed the "law" as unconstitutional. This will happen as well with the states, and with the 2006 elections, I think a complete emptying out of the repukes from the congressional chambers will help as well.

One thing which I have been thinking is that among SCOTUS judges, how many of the more conservative judges are actually to the left of the current madministration, and will likely find their choices in cases reflecting that? We know, of course, that Scalia, Thomas and Scalito will vote to the right of *, but a couple of the others might surprise us. We know, for example, that many people out there, and that includes the justices, are outraged at the weakening of our civil liberties, and that even those on the far right are against the further erosion of those liberties. It should be an interesting case which finally ends up at the Supreme Court as a test, and to see what happens at that point.