South Dakota getting the ball rolling on Roe v Wade
Governor Mike Rounds of South Dakota signed a bill into law that basically makes abortions illegal unless a women will die as a result of childbirth. Great stuff. If you are a woman living in South Dakota make sure you demand that your rapist uses protection...
Of course this will be under appeal for next 10 years, hopefully by that time South Dakota will join other developed nations in realizing the value of laws protecting a woman's right to choose.
Of course this will be under appeal for next 10 years, hopefully by that time South Dakota will join other developed nations in realizing the value of laws protecting a woman's right to choose.
posted by mochi at 8:54 PM
10 Comments:
Interestingly, it comes along at about the same time as the budget that says "bye bye" to child support enforcement.
Of course, it's a given that anti-choice activists, sponsors, and policitians will all sing a different tune when their mistresses, wives or daughters want abortions.
My prediction is that if they have enough success with this, their next target will be birth control (devices and pharmaceuticals).
Speaking of developed nations, the Netherlands, (the world's example of liberal utopia) has legalized abortion, euthanasia, recreational drug use, prostitution, and a host of other things--aren't they considering forcing blacks to have abortions and a ban on Muslim women wearing burqas?
...we are sooo far behind aren't we!
-Jack
On top of their propensity toward socialism, The Netherlands also enjoys very low crime rates and a decent economy. They must be doing something right.
I submit that more people would flock there as they do to the United States if their language wasn't unlearnable!
They must have a low crime rate because they keep a thumb on those blacks!
-Jack
(said tongue-in-cheek, Smorg:)
One would at least think that the rape and incest scenarios would be given consideration by those crafting the law. I think even they have admitted that this action is not meant to save the lives of the unborn, it is simply a token volley to usher in their war against Roe v Wade.
I should clarify: their war was already begun. The token volley is to engage in a new long-term court battle.
Shea,
I think that it was mentioned by the some on the legislature that the intent of the law was to challenge the Constitutionality of Roe. (I tend to lump Roe in with Kelo in terms of being Constitutional).
It will be interesting to see what the Supreme Court does with it. Should make for some interesting discussion.
-Jack
Yeah it's always "interesting" to hear a bunch of men debate women's rights.
Hopefully, Mochi, the issue will be framed in Constitutional rights.
-Jack
Here is an interesting take:
WYFF4.com - News - Father's Rights? Men Want Right To Turn Down Fatherhood
If a woman has the right to terminate the life of her child (choice) because she does not want to be involved in it, does the father of that child have the same right or the right to excuse himself from caring from that child? Equal rights, right?
-Jack
Post a Comment
<< Home