Abortion banned in South Dakota (1 Viewer)

[erawamai]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060223...gUDW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

That's right boys and girls. No abortions in South Dakota.

The South Dakota law concludes that life begins at conception based on medical advances over the past three decades.

Proposed amendments to the law to create exceptions to specifically protect the health of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest, were voted down. Also defeated was an amendment to put the proposal in the hands of voters.

I'm sorry, but what? No abortion? Not even in the case of rape or even incest or if the mothers heath is in danger?

I guess this pretty much shows that there are too many people missing a few cogs in the mid west of the USA.

 

[withoutaface]

:/

 

[Not-That-Bright]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060223...gUDW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

That's right boys and girls. No abortions in South Dakota.



I'm sorry, but what? No abortion? Not even in the case of rape?

Surely the ACLU will challenge this at the supreme court?

 

[Xayma]

Most likely they would. But I can't see it getting to the supreme court. I think they will refuse it allowing the lower courts standing to decide (which most likely would be against the bill). They don't have the numbers to get it through without the consent of the governor but (assuming its 2/3) as it was 23 to 12.

 

[erawamai]

From what I've read the law is timed for a Supreme Court challenge of Roe v Wade since the liberal Justice O'Conner is to be replaced someone not so moderate (Samuel Alito).

http://www.prolifeamerica.com/index.cfm
These fellows seem very happy.

You have to wonder about a state that would make it illegal to abort if the father raped his 13 year old daughter.

 

[Phanatical]

You forget, pro-lifers consider (rightfully) that the unborn child is still a human life entitled to the same rights as anybody else. Are you suggesting that these people should just stand back and allow what they consider to be murder, just to make it easier for a few femocrats to sleep at night, safe in the knowledge that they can get away with murder if it liberates women?

 

[erawamai]

You forget, pro-lifers consider (rightfully) that the unborn child is still a human life entitled to the same rights as anybody else.

They weigh the rights of an unborn as greater than any life in being.

What do you think phantical. At least they have taken a consistent pro life stance. If a 13 year old is raped by her father she has to have the baby.

I mean if you do like inbred and pregnant teenagers perhaps you have found your dream place of residence! SD USA!
-----------------------
Your friends in the USA don't even allow the morning after pill despite it not actually terminating life.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

From what I've read the law is timed for a Supreme Court challenge of Roe v Wade since the liberal Justice O'Conner is to be replaced someone not so moderate (Samuel Alito).

http://www.prolifeamerica.com/index.cfm
These fellows seem very happy.

You have to wonder about a state that would make it illegal to abort if the father raped his 13 year old daughter.

Yea I do worry about how the new court will rule on Roe V Wade... while rehnquist's replacement didn't really tip the scales alito will most definately :/

 

[Phanatical]

I don't agree with applying the rule of no abortions on everybody. It's too charged and controversial a situation just to apply a blanket ban. But I don't see a problem with their ethics. They aren't putting the rights of the unborn child ahead of the mother - they're applying the same right to life to both.

 

[erawamai]

I don't agree with applying the rule of no abortions on everybody. It's too charged and controversial a situation just to apply a blanket ban. But I don't see a problem with their ethics. They aren't putting the rights of the unborn child ahead of the mother - they're applying the same right to life to both.

You don't see a problem with their ethics? They are going to force women who are raped by a family member have the child. Not even allow an abortion if the mothers life is in danger?

And you think this has to do with pleasing feminists?

While no one likes the stereotype the mid west of the USA as inbred rednecks this perhaps is too good an opportunity to pass up.

 

[Phanatical]

They're going with the lesser of two evils. To them, IT'S STILL MURDER, whether or not the child was wanted or not.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

They're going with the lesser of two evils. To them, IT'S STILL MURDER, whether or not the child was wanted or not.

How is it the lesser of two evils?

 

[erawamai]

They're going with the lesser of two evils. To them, IT'S STILL MURDER, whether or not the child was wanted or not.

They would prefer the mother die than for their to be an abortion.

Did you not read? Blanket ban. No exceptions even if the mother may die as a result of the birth.

Proposed amendments to the law to create exceptions to specifically protect the health of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest, were voted down. Also defeated was an amendment to put the proposal in the hands of voters.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

They would prefer the mother die than for their to be an abortion.

Does this mean that even if both the baby and the mother would die, but they could save the mother, they have to let the mother die?

 

[erawamai]

Does this mean that even if both the baby and the mother would die, but they could save the mother, they have to let the mother die?

What?

 

[Xayma]

Does this mean that even if both the baby and the mother would die, but they could save the mother, they have to let the mother die?

No, an exemption exists if the fetus dies while trying to save the mothers life. But you can't kill the fetus directly afaik.

 

[erawamai]

How does this concern Australia?

It flows on mathmite. Reasoning in a Supreme Court case is persuasive in Australia.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

If anyone in South Dakota wants an abortion they have 6 bordering states to choose from...

North Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa, Montana, Wyoming.

 

[erawamai]

Not an American supreme court case, or Australians would have easy access to firearms.

Nevermind

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Say they're in a situation... where it's inevitable that both the baby and the mother are going to die if someone isn't done soon, however the mother could survive if the baby was removed (but not vice-versa) - would this law prevent them from removing the baby, condemning the woman to death and not saving the baby?