JLam
Proud Skepkid Parent
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2004
- Messages
- 4,149
Abortion Ban In South Dakota!
- Thread starter JLam
- Start date
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
And, per NPR, in addition to not making provisions for rape or incest, it also makes no provision for cases where the mother's health is in danger. Only risk to life situations are allowed.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
No, they'd just hospitalize her until the child was born. NPR's coverage this morning was interviewing one of the major proponents of the legislation, and she made it crystal clear that this is a stepping stone for them to move similar legislation forward in other states and is a milestone for them in overturning RvW.
Idiots.
Regardless of how one feels about abortion, if this goes to the U.S. Supreme Court now, it is going to fail.
Even if Alito and Roberts are a pro-lifers dream and strike it down (both seem pretty tied to Roe as precedent during their hearings though, so don't hold your breathe on that), the court will go 5-4 to save Roe, since while Kennedy isn't big on partial birth, he isn't going for a full ban.
So what will happen is that Roe will have further precedent and the people who are in the middle get annoyed with the pro-life camp and become more pro-choice.
What a colossal waste of time.
Regardless of how one feels about abortion, if this goes to the U.S. Supreme Court now, it is going to fail.
Even if Alito and Roberts are a pro-lifers dream and strike it down (both seem pretty tied to Roe as precedent during their hearings though, so don't hold your breathe on that), the court will go 5-4 to save Roe, since while Kennedy isn't big on partial birth, he isn't going for a full ban.
So what will happen is that Roe will have further precedent and the people who are in the middle get annoyed with the pro-life camp and become more pro-choice.
What a colossal waste of time.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Breaking news: it seems that the South Dakote legislature was misled. Apparently before voting on the bill they were misinformed that the measure was necessary to help repopulate the human race after attack by the Cylons.
Zbu
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2006
- Messages
- 464
Plus let's not forget that Roe was a big statement for women's rights. I don't like to be the person who has to say they voted for women to lose the right to their own body. That will definitely create a schism in this country, especially since the Supreme Court is 8/9ths male.
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 53,097
I've always maintained that the anti-choice crowd would rue the day that Roe got overturned.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Yeppers. The thing that keeps getting pointed out is that Roberts, and, especially, Alito are judges that strongly favor incremental change.
brodski
Tea-Time toad
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 15,516
Can you eplain why? Would overturning it lead to fewer restritions on abortions?
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Yeah, silly South Dakota. It doesn't even have a blasphemy law.
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 53,097
I think there are a lot of people now who may vote for an anti-choice politician, because they like them for other issues, knowing that even though they are anti-choice, they can't really do any harm, because the courts will slap them down. If that protection is lost, then it becomes a single issue for a lot of voters, especially young women who may not vote in great numbers now. In addition, some states (red/blue, I can never remember which is which), will then ammend their constitutions to explicity make it legal. And then the loonies will have no recourse.
Yeah, I'm sure your queen was appalled.
Question for all the fitfully righteous people who share Claus' sentiment, if not his arrogance:
What's so surprising about South Dakotans acting like South Dakotans? This isn't friggin' New Jersey we're talking about here.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Except to make it a federal issue, and ban it despite the states. Observe how well states' rights work for medical marijuana. The loonies are more than happy to trample a principle of government in favor of a principle of morality.
Cleon
King of the Pod People
If you think South Dakota's bad, you should take a trip south of the Mason-Dixon line sometime...
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Yeah, none of those "marital aids" down there my friend.
Rob Lister
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2004
- Messages
- 8,504
Yes.
Not only would it soon be legal everywhere, it may well become overtly constitutional rather than just an interpretation of the constitution.
some states will instantly ban it to one degree or another.
Initially, it will (only) slightly reduce the number of (legal) abortions because those with the wherewithall to travel will simply go to a state that allows it. That without the wherewithall are the already poor and downtrodden and each and every case (poor teen un-wed mother/death from back-ally abortion) will become a horror story very suitible for cause-pushing media promotion.
Very shortly thereafter only those that promote freedom of abortion will get elected. A constitutional amendment would likely be forthcoming also.
Demonstrably unenforceable.
Unlike this law.
Don't f****ng patronize me until your own country respect womens' rights.
.......hey, I forgot: Aren't you a woman? How do you feel about this law? What will you do about this?
I fear what I will find.
I can bring those, unless I will face incarceration. We've had those for decades.