Menu
What's new
Troll Kingdom

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

South Dakota House Approves Abortion Ban

Caitriona

Caitriona

Something Wicked
It still has to pass through their senate but it most likely will.

SD House Approves Abortion Ban
The South Dakota House has passed a bill that would nearly ban all abortions in the state, ushering the issue to the state Senate.

Supporters are pushing the measure in hopes of drawing a legal challenge that will cause the US Supreme Court to reverse its 1973 decision legalizing abortion.

The bill banning all abortions in South Dakota was passed 47-to-22 in the House.

Amendments aimed at carving out exemptions for rape, incest and the health of women were rejected.

The bill does contain a loophole that allows abortions if women are in danger of dying. Doctors who do those abortions could not be prosecuted.

http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail2817.cfm?Id=0,45916
Click to expand...
 
Too sweeping of a measure.

Its been said that if Row v. Wade dies, it will be taken out bit by bit. I would have to agree with this, because any "nuclear option" like the one described above would be fought tooth-and-nail against in the court of public opinion.
 
FUCK! :rwmad:

I predicted this months ago.

And what the fuck is this shit?!

Amendments aimed at carving out exemptions for rape, incest and the health of women were rejected.
Click to expand...

Even if women are sexually attacked, their choices are to be denied them?!!!

Oh, you best believe I'm on the fucking warpath. :rwmad: :rwmad:

Men. Fucking men.
 
This law is constructed [not providing for rape or incest] to be challenged so it will go to the Supreme Court. It's not good, and the way the court is now who knows what will happen, but there is nothing we can do. If it passes, it will be challenged and then the Court will have a bite at it.
 
Friday said:
Fuck. You.
Click to expand...

Why did you take that bait? It was meant to troll you just like this new law is meant to to be flawed so it will be a test case to challenge abortion laws.

Friday, you're a nice gal, but you fall into knee jerk reactions to stuff like this so often.
 
Sigh.

You're right, Cait. Any other time I would have recognized RW's feces for what it was.

Thanks for the advice.
 
Caitriona said:
It still has to pass through their senate but it most likely will.
Click to expand...


The scariest part of a potential of Roe v Wade reversal has nothing at all to do with the right to an abortion.

Personally, I don't have a strong political feeling one way or the other about the specific issue of abortion. However, overturning RvW would set a precedent that has the potential to allow a legal basis for more government intervention into what we can and cannot do with our bodies, not to mention restrictions which might percipitate therefrom would be, arguably, fundamental privacy issues.

That gives me cause for great concern.
 
no, but we can take away the life and sanity of the prospective mother because daddy committed a crime...I personally prefer to see women's rights take preference over those of a bunch of parasitic cells.
 
Friday said:
Men. Fucking men.
Click to expand...

There are currently 12 women in the South Dakota House of Representatives. You can find a list here

As you can see from their voting record here , of the 12 women Legislators, 9 voted Yea, 3 voted Nay. That means of the 22 Nay votes, 19 were cast by men. The overwhelming majority of female legislators voted in favor of outlawing abortion.

"Men, fucking men" indeed.

What's that? Yeah, you've been PWNED, you man-hating biyatch.
 
Peter Octavian said:
The scariest part of a potential of Roe v Wade reversal has nothing at all to do with the right to an abortion.

Personally, I don't have a strong political feeling one way or the other about the specific issue of abortion. However, overturning RvW would set a precedent that has the potential to allow a legal basis for more government intervention into what we can and cannot do with our bodies, not to mention restrictions which might percipitate therefrom would be, arguably, fundamental privacy issues.

That gives me cause for great concern.
Click to expand...

Actually this is my concern too. The underpinning of Roe v. Wade is Griswold v. Connecticut [privacy]. Once Roe is gone, that might set us all back on privacy too. There's no telling where that can lead us.

I'm not one of the "racing through the streets yelling 'the world is coming to an end'" types, but if a woman's reproductive rights aren't protected, then privacy could be next. We already have a lot of erosion of privacy as it is with the Patriot Act, I'd hate to see what kind of hay could be made with Griswold by the courts.

If all that happens is abortion is kicked back to the states, well... I could live with it. [Course it helps that I am pro-choice but personally against abortion] But, if the language of the decision to over turn Roe is such that privacy can be challenged next, it could get scary.

We'll have to wait and see what happens with any test cases and the language in the opinions.
 
I look at it this way:

Everybody was hooping and hollering when Alito was in the confirmation phase that he'd be so right wing that he'd do this and that against abortion, gun control, and what not. And what was the first thing he did? Basically make it impossible to execute anyone in the country by saying the current lethal injection method is cruel and unusual punishment, because the slapdick being executed may be awake during the process, if the injection isn't done in the right manner/order/whatever.

If he had been that right wing, he would have had the attitude of "eh, slapdick's on death row for murdering and raping and doing nasty shit, let god sort it out" and left things the way they were.

Reading this current law, I don't see a majority of the S.C. upholding it. Its too radical.
 
God Almighty in heaven above, I could not be more tired of this debate. Roe v. Wade is a state's right to choose. This argument does not beg to be re-hashed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top