PDA

View Full Version : POL: Roe vs Wade Part 2?


duckman
02-24-2006, 06:58 PM
hxxp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060224/ap_on_re_us/abortion_south_dakota_8;_ylt=Ary7ISAx2MGNjtu7LppdDaOB_YEA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

S.D. House Approves Abortion Ban Bill <!-- END HEADLINE -->
<!-- BEGIN STORY BODY -->By CHET BROKAW, Associated Press Writer

South Dakota lawmakers approved a ban on nearly all abortions Friday, setting up a deliberate frontal assault on Roe v. Wade at a time when some activists see the U.S. Supreme Court as more willing than ever to overturn the 33-year-old decision.

Republican Gov. Mike Rounds said he was inclined to sign the bill, which would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless it was necessary to save the woman's life. The measure would make no exception in cases of rape or incest.

Many opponents and supporters of abortion rights believe the U.S. Supreme Court is more likely to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion now that conservatives John Roberts and Samuel Alito are on the bench. Lawmakers said growing support among South Dakotans for abortion restrictions added momentum to the bill.

"I think the stars are aligned," said House Speaker Matthew Michels, a Republican. "Simply put, now is the time."

Planned Parenthood, which operates the only abortion clinic in South Dakota, has pledged to sue over the measure. About 800 abortions a year are performed in South Dakota.

Some opponents of the bill said abortion should at least be allowed in cases of rape or incest, or where the woman's health is threatened.

If a rape victim becomes pregnant and bears a child, the rapist could have the same parental rights as the mother, said Krista Heeren-Graber, executive director of the South Dakota Network Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault.

"The idea the rapist could be in the child's life ... makes the woman very, very fearful. Sometimes they need to have choice," Heeren-Graber said.

Under the measure, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion. The House passed the bill 50-18 on Friday, and the Senate approved it 23-12 earlier this week. If signed, it would become law July 1.

Money for the anticipated legal fight is already pouring in. Lawmakers were told during the debate that an anonymous donor has pledged $1 million to defend the ban, and the Legislature is setting up a special account to accept donations.

"We've had people stopping in our office trying to drop off checks to promote the defense of this legislation already," Rounds said.

Leslee Unruh, president of the Alpha Center, a Sioux Falls pregnancy counseling agency that tries to steer women away from abortion, said most of the abortions performed in South Dakota do not stem from rape or even failed contraception, but are simply "conveniences."

Unruh said she believes most South Dakota women want the state to ban abortion, and many who have had abortions "wish someone would have stopped them."

The governor said he believes it would be better to eliminate abortion in steps rather than all at once. Rounds indicated he does not share the view that Alito and Roberts will usher in sudden, dramatic changes in how the court views abortion. He said it could be a drawn-out legal battle, and noted that it is not even assured that the high court will hear the case.

The bill "may satisfy a lot of individuals out there who would like to see if there is one slim chance the court may entertain three years from now a direct assault on Roe v. Wade," Rounds said.

He added, however: "I've indicated I'm pro-life and I do believe abortion is wrong and that we should do everything we can to save lives. If this bill accomplishes that, then I am inclined to sign the bill into law."

Rounds said his staff will review the bill for technical defects. He noted that he vetoed a similar measure two years ago because it would have wiped out all existing restrictions on abortion while the bill was challenged in court.

Some advocates said an abortion ban would hurt poor women the most by forcing them to travel long distances to other states where the procedure is legal.

"It's a sad state of affairs that we have only one choice right now" in South Dakoa, said Charon Asetoyer of the Native American Women's Health Care Education Resource Center. "But if you have to go out of state, the cost of making that trip will be prohibitive."

Kate Looby, Planned Parenthood director in Sioux Falls, said women who cannot afford to travel to a clinic might be forced to turn to unsafe methods of abortion.

"We've seen it in the past in this country, we've seen it all over the world and there's no reason to believe it would not happen in South Dakota," Looby said.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive rights organization in New York and Washington, similar abortion proposals are in the works in seven other states: Missouri, Indiana, Kentucky, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Georgia and Tennessee.

duckman
02-24-2006, 07:02 PM
This is just a bad law in my humble opinion. Personally, I'm pro-life, but I think that women should have a right to choose (if that makes any sense).

Buccaneer
02-24-2006, 07:06 PM
Choose to do what? [ducks]

duckman
02-24-2006, 07:08 PM
Choose to do what? [ducks]
I guess I opened myself up to that one. :D

st.cronin
02-24-2006, 07:12 PM
Well, if it does get to the scotus, it'll probably be slapped back down hard. Would be interesting to see the justices opinions, though.

I don't imagine it will get that far.

Buccaneer
02-24-2006, 07:16 PM
Well, if it does get to the scotus, it'll probably be slapped back down hard. Would be interesting to see the justices opinions, though.

I don't imagine it will get that far.
Because it's a matter that's best left to the States, as defined by the 10th Amendment?

st.cronin
02-24-2006, 07:20 PM
Because it's a matter that's best left to the States, as defined by the 10th Amendment?

I'll leave that to the lawyers. I just don't think scotus is interested in facing this issue, particularly in such a broad way.

cartman
02-24-2006, 07:28 PM
Unless the law that South Dakota passed is fundamentally different than any of the existing state laws on abortion, then there isn't a case for the Supreme Court to review. There are many states that still have a prohibition on abortion in their state's legal statutes, but the decision on Roe v. Wade supersedes them. Just because this was a recently passed law doesn't give it any special status, only if it differs fundamentally from the other laws will it be reviewable.

Jesse_Ewiak
02-24-2006, 08:06 PM
Yeah, this won't even get to the SC. The 4 concievably pro-life judges know it's a bad law and the 5 "pro-choice" judges obviously would be against it. Will get slapped down in Circuit Court and probably won't even be granted cert.

The Rights MO as far as I can see is to chip away at abortions rights bit by bit so you still have a "choice," but it's regulated so much in most states that it's basically banned. That way, you can tell the Fundies all the great pro-life legislation you've passed, but can still rail against the evil activist judges.

Oddly funny about this law being passed in SD that there is only one clinic in the state and it's staffed by out of state doctors.

Drake
02-24-2006, 09:32 PM
As a

1. Man who
2. Has 3 kids and
3. Has had a vasectomy for going on 8 years,

the whole abortion issue has ceased to interest me. :)

ISiddiqui
02-24-2006, 11:14 PM
Yeah, this won't even get to the SC. The 4 concievably pro-life judges know it's a bad law and the 5 "pro-choice" judges obviously would be against it. Will get slapped down in Circuit Court and probably won't even be granted cert.Totally agree. No way the SCOTUS takes this up... unless the Circuit Court gets really crazy.

sterlingice
02-25-2006, 12:28 AM
As a

1. Man who
2. Has 3 kids and
3. Has had a vasectomy for going on 8 years,

the whole abortion issue has ceased to interest me. :)Yeah, since we don't have any rights in this regards anyways, #1 kindof makes about half of us (much higher % on the board) not care so much.

SI

Glengoyne
02-25-2006, 01:32 AM
I'll come out and agree that, in my opinion, this case isn't going to put a dent into Roe v. Wade.

I'm actually hoping that the Governor does his job and vetoes the bill.

Time will tell.

Grammaticus
02-25-2006, 02:44 AM
Oddly funny about this law being passed in SD that there is only one clinic in the state and it's staffed by out of state doctors.
Why is that oddly funny? I would find it oddly funny if it happened in California, where abortions are badges of honor and capitol punishment for brutal murder is an embarassment. The fact SD only has one clinic and no in state doctors willing to perform abortions tells you something about the midset of the constituents in the state. They don't like abortions. So it makes perfect sense they try to pass laws that stop the act. Whether one believes in the same thing or not, I'm not sure how it is "oddly funny", more like "just what one would expect", for better or worse.

Jesse_Ewiak
02-25-2006, 03:18 AM
Actually, I hate to bring sillly things like statistics into a debate, buuuuuuuuuuuut....

http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2005/50StateAbortion0805SortedbyState.htm
11 South Dakota Bush 49% 47% South Dakota Opinion on Abortion Tracked

Not exactly a huge majority to ban abortion. In fact, I'm betting most of that 49% that's pro-life wants exceptions for health of the mother, rape, incest, which pretty much all people do, aside from a small ten or so percent block of the population that's off the rails anyway.

Honolulu_Blue
02-25-2006, 07:30 AM
in California, where abortions are badges of honor
Do you actually believe that statement to be true?

cougarfreak
02-25-2006, 08:51 AM
You know what I was thinking this past month as I did my taxes? My wife is 7 months pregnant, I wondered what the govt. would do if I claimed my "unborn" child as a dependent on my taxes.

Grammaticus
02-25-2006, 10:33 AM
Actually, I hate to bring sillly things like statistics into a debate, buuuuuuuuuuuut....

http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2005/50StateAbortion0805SortedbyState.htm
11 South Dakota Bush 49% 47% South Dakota Opinion on Abortion Tracked

Not exactly a huge majority to ban abortion. In fact, I'm betting most of that 49% that's pro-life wants exceptions for health of the mother, rape, incest, which pretty much all people do, aside from a small ten or so percent block of the population that's off the rails anyway.
Well, one thing about polls is you can get them to support most things. I'm not familiar with this polling group, so they may or may not be very good. But, their weighted average is supposedly 38%, putting SD at 48%. This shows that SD is 10 points over the average. The highest pro life state on that poll was Utah at 61%. SD showed a trend over 2 months from 43% to 47% pro life, meeting the pro choice at 47%. That would say they are rapidly trending towards pro life. Also such a large change over 2 months makes the poll look weak. Also, pro life people are far less likely to participate in polls like this.

But, polls aside the reality of the situation is there is only one clinic and no doctors willing to perform abortions. That tells you how the state's population feels a lot more than a poll.

Grammaticus
02-25-2006, 10:36 AM
Do you actually believe that statement to be true?
Not literally, but California is a place percieved to be the most liberal in the U.S. Go to San Francisco and you will find lots of people who consider doing anything that offends someone else a badge of courage, individualism and freedom. I have heard activist in CA say they thought an abortion was a badge of courage, for the record.

MrBigglesworth
02-25-2006, 12:53 PM
Not literally, but California is a place percieved to be the most liberal in the U.S. Go to San Francisco and you will find lots of people who consider doing anything that offends someone else a badge of courage, individualism and freedom. I have heard activist in CA say they thought an abortion was a badge of courage, for the record.
Badges of courage and badges of honor are two very different things. In South Dakota, where abortions are so stigma'd and attacked that they can't get in-state doctors to perform them, I would think it would be very courageous to get one.

MrBigglesworth
02-25-2006, 12:57 PM
SD showed a trend over 2 months from 43% to 47% pro life, meeting the pro choice at 47%. That would say they are rapidly trending towards pro life. Also such a large change over 2 months makes the poll look weak.
On my monitor, SD shows up as 47%-49% anti-choice, and going from 48%-47% pro-choice, which is all well within the 4.1% margin of error. So that actually shows the strength of the poll.

Also, pro life people are far less likely to participate in polls like this.
I don't know where you got this.

clintl
02-25-2006, 01:13 PM
Not literally, but California is a place percieved to be the most liberal in the U.S. Go to San Francisco and you will find lots of people who consider doing anything that offends someone else a badge of courage, individualism and freedom. I have heard activist in CA say they thought an abortion was a badge of courage, for the record.

On abortion, California is solidly pro-choice, to the point where most serious statewide candidates who are pro-life will often try to conceal it as much as possible, rather than run on the issue, and it's liberal on most social issues. But there are some issues, like crime and tax policy, where California is definitely not a liberal state, and where it has repeatedly demonstrated that fact at the polls.

San Francisco, by the way, is not really representative of the state as a whole. It's much more complicated than that, with the coastal regions (except Orange and San Diego counties) being mostly liberal, and the Central Valley (except Sacramento and its suburbs to the west) and rural areas being mostly conservative. San Francisco is extremely liberal even compared to the other coastal liberal communities.

Oh, and your comment on capital punishment in California is ridiculous, and shows how little you really know about the state. I'm opposed to it myself, but there has always been a solid majority in favor of it in California.

Grammaticus
02-25-2006, 03:58 PM
Badges of courage and badges of honor are two very different things. In South Dakota, where abortions are so stigma'd and attacked that they can't get in-state doctors to perform them, I would think it would be very courageous to get one.
To be courageous is honorable in most peoples opinion. Either way it is mincing words and this post from Biggles shows that people do feel it is courageous or honorable or whatever. Supports my point.

Grammaticus
02-25-2006, 04:03 PM
On abortion, California is solidly pro-choice, to the point where most serious statewide candidates who are pro-life will often try to conceal it as much as possible, rather than run on the issue, and it's liberal on most social issues. But there are some issues, like crime and tax policy, where California is definitely not a liberal state, and where it has repeatedly demonstrated that fact at the polls.

San Francisco, by the way, is not really representative of the state as a whole. It's much more complicated than that, with the coastal regions (except Orange and San Diego counties) being mostly liberal, and the Central Valley (except Sacramento and its suburbs to the west) and rural areas being mostly conservative. San Francisco is extremely liberal even compared to the other coastal liberal communities.

Oh, and your comment on capital punishment in California is ridiculous, and shows how little you really know about the state. I'm opposed to it myself, but there has always been a solid majority in favor of it in California.

I'm not placing a judgement on whether California is good or bad, just saying in middle america the perception is that California is very liberal. To some people that is a good thing, others think it not so good. I think this comes from the loudest voices of extremism often come out of that state. Perception becomes reality in peoples minds, whether it is really true or not. Personally I enjoy spending time in California, even San Fran.

The fact there is now a death penalty in California probably supports that most are okay with it. But again, most of the loudest voices against capitol punishment come out of California too. Again perception becomes reality.

Grammaticus
02-25-2006, 04:06 PM
On my monitor, SD shows up as 47%-49% anti-choice, and going from 48%-47% pro-choice, which is all well within the 4.1% margin of error. So that actually shows the strength of the poll.


I don't know where you got this.

That is funny, my screen did not show anything under a heading of anti choice. Maybe we are just looking at different pages, who knows.

MrBigglesworth
02-25-2006, 04:09 PM
To be courageous is honorable in most peoples opinion. Either way it is mincing words and this post from Biggles shows that people do feel it is courageous or honorable or whatever. Supports my point.
When you change the meaning of words, you can say pretty much anything supports your point.

I've never in my life heard anyone say that getting an abortion is honorable, much as I have never heard anyone say that getting a haircut is honorable, but Grammaticus maybe you hang out more in California than I do, where you must of attended an awards ceremony for abortions or something.

MrBigglesworth
02-25-2006, 04:11 PM
That is funny, my screen did not show anything under a heading of anti choice. Maybe we are just looking at different pages, who knows.
But now your screen does say 47%? Or are you standing by your interpretation of it as 43%? If not, are you now willing to take back your assertion that the poll must be flawed?