South Dakota Abortion Ban Passes Committee
Could crumble Roe v. Wade
Dakota Voice
02/17/2006

The South Dakota Senate State Affairs Committee passed legislation this morning that will ban abortion in that state. HB 1215 moved out of committee with a vote 5 to 2 and will now face a final vote in full Senate sometime next week, likely by Thursday.

The South Dakota House already has overwhelmingly approved the measure that will make South Dakota the first state to ban abortion since the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that decriminalized abortion on demand in America. It is hoped that Governor Mike Rounds will sign the legislation, which will likely face a challenge in the Federal Courts.

We are proud of the state of South Dakota for taking a leadership roll in what is becoming a movement to challenge head-on the facts of Roe that we believe were wrongly decided in 1973, said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman, who was present a today s historic vote.

Five other states, Indiana, Georgia, Tennessee, Ohio, and Kentucky, have introduced similar abortion bans, which are currently working their ways through the state legislatures.

What we are seeing is the beginning of a revolt in the states that no longer wish to tolerate the shedding of innocent blood on their soil, said Newman. We are encouraged that we are seeing the beginnings of a movement that will soon put an end to abortion in America once and for all.

We will do everything in our power to network with the pro-life, pro-family organizations across the nation to make available to the state of South Dakota every resource to fight this expected litigation, said Rev. Patrick Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, who was also present at today's vote. We are literally seeing the foundations of Roe v. Wade crumble.

Link

And it will be immediately overturned because it's an illegal ban.

Eh, who cares.  When global warming is gonna kill us all, who cares about some sort of ban.  People will still have illegal abortions.

Eh, who cares.  When global warming is gonna kill us all, who cares about some sort of ban.  People will still have illegal abortions.


Conservatives don't even believe in Global Warming so that doesn't bother them. All they do is whine about abortion, but once you're born they could care less about you.

Conservatives don't even believe in Global Warming so that doesn't bother them. All they do is whine about abortion, but once you're born they could care less about you.


Exactly.  After all, Jesus will come and we'll all go to Heaven, right?  So let's screw the world up while we can  >:(

Conservatives don't even believe in Global Warming so that doesn't bother them. All they do is whine about abortion, but once you're born they could care less about you.


Thanks to global warming, it was actually snowing in Central California this past weekend.  For the first time in years.  OooooOOOOOOOoooooh.

I do, however, believe that the ban is illegal.  It's not acceptable to me for a woman to end a pregnancy in that manner, but it's her uterus.

It doesn't matter whether you agree with abortion or not, you don't have to have one. You should let people do it if it fits with their beliefs, it's not your choice to make for them. I'm one of alot of people who personally doesn't like abortion and wouldn't have one if I were a girl, but I support choice.

Looks like South Dakota is going to become the most hated State on the board. 

Conservatives don't even believe in Global Warming so that doesn't bother them. All they do is whine about abortion, but once you're born they could care less about you.


Don't say they, Say some. Cause you're born and a lot of other people are born to.  I care about you and I care about them AND I'm a conservative.

The federal courts have ruled on the matter for years now, the right to have an abortion is protected by the constitution. The Bible is not the US constitution and should not be a reference for the law.

And it will be immediately overturned because it's an illegal ban.


Wishful thinking I assume.  With Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and possibly Kennedy, you never know.  It has a long shot at being upheld, but it has a chance.  Kennedy came within in inch of joining Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas and White in 1991 to overturn Roe vs. Wade, and caved at the last minute.  Times change though, especially with Kennedy.  Example: upholding the right for states to execute convicted criminals who were 16 or 17 at the time of their crime in 1989, but on the exact same type of case, voted to not allow states those rights in 2005.

Conservatives don't even believe in Global Warming

Here is a question, a group of scientists recently came out and said the Earth is on the verge on entering another ice age.  Is the Earth heating or cooling?  I'm hearing mixed stuff from environmentalists.

the right to have an abortion is protected by the constitution

Can you point to me that part of the constitution?

The Bible is not the US constitution and should not be a reference for the law.

What kind of statement is "the Bible is not the constitution"?  Stating the obvious doesn't make a point.  And too bad it is.

Here is a question, a group of scientists recently came out and said the Earth is on the verge on entering another ice age.  Is the Earth heating or cooling?  I'm hearing mixed stuff from environmentalists.


Then you're listening to "scientists" and scientists.  If they are funded by a petroleum group or a group that also funds "Intelligent Design" they are as much a scientist as I'm a brain surgeon and fall into the "scientist" category.

While there may be small pockets were somewhere that is normally cold is hot or vice versa (witness the warmest January on record in Massachusetts while the south was having some record colds), the earth as a whole is warming.  There aren't any serious scientists that debate this.  Every time I see someone point out a scientist says the earth is cooling, they're really a "scientist" who was paid to support an agenda. 

The tundra is thawing, it hasn't done that in thousands of years.  The polar ice caps are receding to a point they've never receded to in recorded human history.  These are things that don't normally change over night, and can't be reversed quickly.  There is no credible scientist who is going to go on record and say the polar ice caps melting is a sign of a new ice age. 

This is of course all a thread hijack from the abortion topic.

Wishful thinking I assume.  With Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and possibly Kennedy, you never know.  It has a long shot at being upheld, but it has a chance.  Kennedy came within in inch of joining Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas and White in 1991 to overturn Roe vs. Wade, and caved at the last minute.  Times change though, especially with Kennedy.  Example: upholding the right for states to execute convicted criminals who were 16 or 17 at the time of their crime in 1989, but on the exact same type of case, voted to not allow states those rights in 2005.

Here is a question, a group of scientists recently came out and said the Earth is on the verge on entering another ice age.  Is the Earth heating or cooling?  I'm hearing mixed stuff from environmentalists.

Can you point to me that part of the constitution?

What kind of statement is "the Bible is not the constitution"?  Stating the obvious doesn't make a point.  And too bad it is.


People are too apathetic and pessimestic today.  They think that today we have it all figured out and we're perfect and their is no room for improvment or inovation.  That of which is wrong, we're powerless to stop so we might as well let it go on, and while we're at it, support it.  This isn't only abortion but many things, can't fix it, so make it bigger.

I agree with you 100%.  But, didn't you know, you're only allowed to have a "choice" of what other people "choose" for you, regardless of your beliefs?




^^the 2nd sentence was sarcasm, BTW ;)


My friend Dylan believes that all special education people should be shipped to an Island to live under supervision.  He got enough people behind him and money and political power would his "beliefs" be good enough for you?

There is a large group of pediophiles that believe that there is nothing wrong with pediophila. You know at one time in Canada they thought of legalizing pediophilia.  If they were to legalize pediophila in the United States, all of a sudden it wouldn't come down to beliefs.  It'd come down to, "you ain't laying a hand on that kid, I don't give a _ _ _ _ what you believe".  Kill a baby though, that's a belief.  Touch a little boy in the wrong spot, that's just plain wrong.  Hypocrit.

People are too apathetic and pessimestic today.  They think that today we have it all figured out and we're perfect and their is no room for improvment or inovation.  That of which is wrong, we're powerless to stop so we might as well let it go on, and while we're at it, support it.   This isn't only abortion but many things, can't fix it, so make it bigger.
i find that the problem with people is that they constantly generalize. every single one of them.

oh, and

There is a large group of pediophiles that believe that there is nothing wrong with pediophila. You know at one time in Canada they thought of legalizing pediophilia.  If they were to legalize pediophila in the United States, all of a sudden it wouldn't come down to beliefs.  It'd come down to, "you ain't laying a hand on that kid, I don't give a _ _ _ _ what you believe".  Kill a baby though, that's a belief.  Touch a little boy in the wrong spot, that's just plain wrong.  Hypocrit.


smooth transition into pedophilia, my man. i don't think anybody noticed.

If that's what Dylan believes, then that's HIS belief.  However, he has no right to make me follow his beliefs.....if I had a special needs child, there's no way in hell he'd be able to make me ship him/her off.  Same as pedophiles...they can't MAKE me molest a child.  That's what you can't seem to get through your thick skull.  You want everyone to follow YOUR beliefs, no questions asked.  Don't try to deny it because you've made it abundantly clear of that.  YOU don't believe in abortion so we shouldn't allow it.  YOU think homosexual "marriage" is wrong so we shouldn't allow it.  I think abortion is wrong, but it's not up to ME to make a choice for another person.  On homosexual marriage, I really don't see what the big deal is.  It's not going to make MY marriage or any other of the millions of marriages in the world less valid....divorce has done more to harm the institution of marriage much more than 2 homosexuals getting married.  Pedophilia DOES harm others so it should not be allowed.  And you call ME a hypocrit?  PUHLEEZE ::)


Harm others? You come up to me or my nephew and try and shove a pair of scissors through our skulls, you'd be harming us.

Abortion is wrong, that isn't a matter of belief or opinion. The act of abortion is wrong.  The debate is on whether the wrong should be allowed or not.

Secondly I believe in homosexual marriage. I support homosexual marriage.  What I do NOT do, is  support homosexual marriage by a book that is made for heterosexual marriage only.


You are an extreme hypocrit, when the tables are turned on you, you think you can just change the rules.  It doesn't work that way. What I'm saying is a man could come up and molest a child right in front of you. Now if it was your child you could do something about it.  However if it wasn't, you couldn't do jack squat.  Now you personally, doubt it would bother you to much. Me it'd bother a lot.  But you respect other people, pediophiles even, IF the law was they could, and you know it. Deny it all you want, you'd either be pissed that they're allowed to do so or you would support them. You'd find no middle ground, period.

i find that the problem with people is that they constantly generalize. every single one of them.

oh, and

smooth transition into pedophilia, my man. i don't think anybody noticed.


crazymom noticed, kill my baby, but don't sexually touch him/her.

Abortion is wrong, that isn't a matter of belief or opinion. The act of abortion is wrong.  The debate is on whether the wrong should be allowed or not. This partial-birth abortion thing is a particular instance, but in the case of, say, first trimester abortion, where you're talking about a fetus with the cellular complexity of a jellyfish I actually have no problem with abortion. It's hardly a foregone conclusion abortion is wrong unless you presuppose the radical fundamentalist view that all conception creates a potential human in the eyes of God and all that.

I personally think making a woman have a baby against her will is a form of molestation. How about in the case of an underage girl who's a victim of rape? Would you oppose abortion then? if so then where do you get off being holier than thou about pedophilia? Forcing an underage girl to have a baby pretty much MAKES you a pedophile.

This partial-birth abortion thing is a particular instance, but in the case of, say, first trimester abortion, where you're talking about a fetus with the cellular complexity of a jellyfish I actually have no problem with abortion. It's hardly a foregone conclusion abortion is wrong unless you presuppose the radical fundamentalist view that all conception creates a potential human in the eyes of God and all that.

I personally think making a woman have a baby against her will is a form of molestation. How about in the case of an underage girl who's a victim of rape? Would you oppose abortion then? if so then where do you get off being holier than thou about pedophilia? Forcing an underage girl to have a baby pretty much MAKES you a pedophile.



Then start speaking up your voice to provide more birth control pills, more condoms, and more opportunites for women to get their tubes tied, and more money towards research to make tube tying more safe.  Sure as hell aren't going to try and convince kids that sex isn't a fun recreational activity that you should participate in whenever the feeling arises.  Past that stage.  Women and the men who get them pregnant  don't want to be held responsible for the actions of which they are 100% guilty of, then we ought to help them to not give a sheesh, and be careless but not hurt another in the process.  I care for those having sex more often than they take in a breath of air, because of diseases and other physical/emotional stresses, but if that's what they want, fine.  I just don't agree with murdering another in the process, because you choose to get F'd everynight, but don't choose to be on birth control. 

Tia I've answered this question in your existance before.  I believe abortion like anything else has it's time and it's place. It shouldn't be used as an everyday occurance like it is now.  When they say "rare" they ought to mean it, although they most certainly do not.

Saying ANYTHING is wrong is a matter of belief. I don't care if it's a belief that is common or universally accepted, it's still a matter of belief. There is no theorem available that uncategorily yields "abortion is wrong" just as there is nothing that can prove "murder is wrong" or "eating meat is wrong" or "mowing your lawn is wrong." Do I personally hold all four of those things to be equivalent within my system of values? No. But that's just my value judgment. I can argue why I believe something is or isn't wrong, but in the end, it's still only my belief.


That in itself is a belief only held by certain people, you have no validty on that as a fact whatsoever. 

No, YOU believe abortion is wrong (and I happen to agree with you).  However, there are a few million people who disagree with you and I on this.  THAT makes it a "belief", not a "fact".  A "fact" is something that can be proven....abortion being "wrong" can't. Exactly, again, it's "it's okay when YOU say it's okay".
I've changed the rules?  Name once....you can't.  YOU'RE the one who cries that people are picking on you or insulting you then turn around and do the exact same thing to them.  You complain about people generalizing, when you're just as guilty.  You whine when people assume things about you, then assume things about others (and in almost every case where I'm concerned, you've been DEAD WRONG)  When things aren't going your way, you resort to low blows.  If that isn't "changing the rules", then I don't know what is. 

The fact that you even insinuate that I wouldn't care if a child was molested shows your ignorance.  I WOULD and HAVE "done something about it", even if it WASN'T my child.  You know damned good and well that I've been molested in the past and I've made it crystal clear that I think pedophiles are the lowest scum on the face of the planet.  As far as finding middle ground on pedophilia, you're absolutely right, I WOULDN'T find middle ground....they can all burn in hell as far as I'm concerned.  Even if it was made legal, there's no way in hell I'd ever support them.  You, however, claim to "care about everyone" so I guess YOU'D care about them as well.  YOU are the one who can't "find middle ground" on anything.....it's YOUR way or the highway ::)


I could find a few million people who disagree with us on rape and pediphila as well.  Neither one of those can be proven as wrong.  In fact very few things can be proven as wrong. 1 and 1 make three, that can be proven wrong.  The rest is subjective by your definition. 

I wanted to play fair, but that isn't the Rules of the board. The rules by you and others is to give in NOTHING, surrender NOTHING, have zero compromise, zero consideration, and above all else zero compassion.  Dirty, IS one of the rules on this board, and I've learned to play by your rules.

I have middle ground. Middle ground is saying to an 18 year old boy, "yes you can date your 17 year old girlfriend", then going up to a 45 year old man and saying, "no you may not have sex with that 3 year old."  That's finding middle ground. 

No can do.  The "Christians" won their battle to keep any mention of birth control or condom use out of "sex ed" classes.  At least in my part of the country.  The only thing that can be taught as prevention of pregnancy or std's is abstinence.  I know this because my oldest just had "the talk" at school and someone asked about condoms and they were told that they couldn't discuss those....abstinence was all they could recommend.


It doesn't have to be just in schools.  Why not have places where these things are availble. Which we already do.  A Young woman can go to the doctor and ask for prescription birth control pills and the doctor is obligated under law to NOT tell her parents if she doesn't want to.  Believe me, I I know this because I remember my mother chewing out one of the town doctors when she found birth control in my sisters room. He had a defense.  Therefore,  is it that hard for a teenager to take 75 cents, walk into a convienent store bathroom and purchase a condom? 

The "Christians" won their battle to keep any mention of birth control or condom use out of "sex ed" classes.  At least in my part of the country.  The only thing that can be taught as prevention of pregnancy or std's is abstinence.  I know this because my oldest just had "the talk" at school and someone asked about condoms and they were told that they couldn't discuss those....abstinence was all they could recommend.


If you're looking for the condoms on cucumbers try Massachusetts.

It's very mistaken to believe for even one second that it's just Christians that are opposed to that kind of garbage, it's cuts across almost all religious and political leanings.

Wishful thinking I assume.  With Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and possibly Kennedy, you never know.  It has a long shot at being upheld, but it has a chance.  Kennedy came within in inch of joining Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas and White in 1991 to overturn Roe vs. Wade, and caved at the last minute.  Times change though, especially with Kennedy.  Example: upholding the right for states to execute convicted criminals who were 16 or 17 at the time of their crime in 1989, but on the exact same type of case, voted to not allow states those rights in 2005.

Here is a question, a group of scientists recently came out and said the Earth is on the verge on entering another ice age.  Is the Earth heating or cooling?  I'm hearing mixed stuff from environmentalists.

Can you point to me that part of the constitution?

What kind of statement is "the Bible is not the constitution"?  Stating the obvious doesn't make a point.  And too bad it is.


It definitely makes a point, Christians have been using the Bible as an argument against abortion and evolution. They are trying to install Biblical doctrine in the law where it does not belong.

Does a dictionary work for you?

wrong (adj.) 1. not according to the moral standard: sinful, immoral <thought that war was wrong>
2. not right or proper according to a code, standard, or convention <it was wrong not to thank your host>

There are other definitions, but these two are the most relevant, especially number two. Note that both denotations imply that something can only be wrong within a context. The first one is according to a moral statement. Moral statements are value judgments. Moral statements, by definition, are cultural and personal and cannot be applied universally. The second one is according to a code, standard, or convention, meaning, again, that there must be a specific context before something can be called wrong.

Ergo, by definition, calling something wrong is a value judgment and not universally applicable.

Telling me that that is invalid makes you wrong, definition 3: not according to truth or facts: incorrect <gave a wrong date>.

Honestly, you'll find that I've just about stopped arguing my beliefs here, but don't try to argue with me on facts when accepted reference books (note that I refer to reference books, not simply references) are on my side. My only recent-ish posts to you have concerned definitions (in the last case, I believe it was "to compare," and now "wrong.") I generally try not to argue much about beliefs, etc., and certainly attempt to refrain from it on these boards now (hence I haven't posted anything about abortions in this thread and won't be doing so).


Your argument was that there is no right or wrong, just a difference in belief.  My argument was that, that itself is a belief.

It definitely makes a point, Christians have been using the Bible as an argument against abortion and evolution. They are trying to install Biblical doctrine in the law where it does not belong.


No since of morals belong in law, or they aren't their anyway.

Does a dictionary work for you?dictionaries are the diabolical lies of satan!

dictionaries are the diabolical lies of satan!


I invented dictionaries, Bobby Boucher...Webster is the DEVIL!

Also, I would be willing to bet that a majority of those who are opposed to birth control being taught are Christians.....after all, the "non-religious" folk in this country have no morals so why should they be opposed ::) (<sarcasm)


There are Jews, Muslims and other faiths.  I'm sure it is a majority, but that is almost certainly because of demographics.

If you're so upset with it, teach the boy yourself and try not to put too much trust in a government school.  They're quite poor nationwide.

They are trying to install Biblical doctrine in the law where it does not belong.

This is probably the most mistaken thing I've ever read on this messageboard.  They use their faith as a guide to oppose something.  That is quite different from putting Biblical law into the constitution.

Compare five of the ten commandments to our laws now.

Abortion is not a constitutional right neither.

But your argument is incorrect! The definition of "wrong" in the moral sense entails that it is only a belief. I do not take from you your choice to disagree, but this is disagreeing with a definition, not a belief.

Strangely enough, I agree with Harmonica's statement that:
"Your argument was that there is no right or wrong, just a difference in belief.  My argument was that, that itself is a belief."
...in that if you're taking the moral relativistic argument, then that relativism must of itself be relative; however, in coming up with that as an argument (rather than an ironic aside - I wasn't sure whether to take it as a joke), he completely undermines *every* other contention he makes in this thread: i.e. if he actually *believes* this as an argument, then every other position has to be taken as relative... and in the middle of this, he has the bare-faced audacity to call someone else a hypocrite.


There are Jews, Muslims and other faiths.  I'm sure it is a majority, but that is almost certainly because of demographics.

er... how many Jewish, Muslim or *any* other faith-based organization have come out against abortion?  I've not heard of a single one, period.  Not that I'm saying there aren't, but I personally haven't seen any but Christian organizations wanting an outright ban on abortion.  Now, I'm sure you've got evidence to back up your assertions, rather than spouting unprovable generalities, so would you mind providing something to back it up?

Abortion is unavailable anyway in much of rural America.  You cannot compel a medical facility to provide abortions, thus "red state" America has deprived women (mostly poor women) of their reproductive rights for decades.
IMO, Roe v. Wade will be overturned in the next five years.  Women will have access to abortion in states such as Massachusetts, New York, Washington, and California.  States in the Bible Belt will ban abortion before the ink is dry at the supreme court.  You can bet your bottom dollar that the number of women who will be injured or killed by "back alley" abortions will skyrocket after Roe v. Wade is thrown out.  Rest assured if Jenna Bush or Tom DeLay's daughter got in the family way, she'd be able to get an abortion lickedy-split in any state. 
Women of means who can either travel to where abortion is legal, or who can pay off a private OB/Gyn will always have access to safe and legal abortion, and they'll use it too!  As that old song goes, "the rich get richer and the poor get children, but in the mean time, in between time, ain't we got fun!"
::)

Abortion is unavailable anyway in much of rural America.  You cannot compel a medical facility to provide abortions, thus "red state" America has deprived women (mostly poor women) of their reproductive rights for decades.
IMO, Roe v. Wade will be overturned in the next five years.  Women will have access to abortion in states such as Massachusetts, New York, Washington, and California.  States in the Bible Belt will ban abortion before the ink is dry at the supreme court.  You can bet your bottom dollar that the number of women who will be injured or killed by "back alley" abortions will skyrocket after Roe v. Wade is thrown out.  Rest assured if Jenna Bush or Tom DeLay's daughter got in the family way, she'd be able to get an abortion lickedy-split in any state. 
Women of means who can either travel to where abortion is legal, or who can pay off a private OB/Gyn will always have access to safe and legal abortion, and they'll use it too!  As that old song goes, "the rich get richer and the poor get children, but in the mean time, in between time, ain't we got fun!"
::)


This country is going down the tubes. Conservative Christians are taking this country back to the 19th century. It just gets worse and worse.

er... how many Jewish, Muslim or *any* other faith-based organization have come out against abortion?  I've not heard of a single one, period.  Not that I'm saying there aren't, but I personally haven't seen any but Christian organizations wanting an outright ban on abortion.  Now, I'm sure you've got evidence to back up your assertions, rather than spouting unprovable generalities, so would you mind providing something to back it up?


You may have not heard of one, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.  Orthodox Jews are just as anti-abortion, anti-euthanasia and possibly anti-death penalty at most of the large Catholic churches in the northeast (Protestants tend to be more conservative and supportive of the death penalty.)  A google search can really yield anything you request.  I believe you knew this too.

http://www.jewsforlife.org/

Granted, Jews support abortion more than any other religious group, but the more conservative factions are just as strongly anti-abortion as any Christian you'll find.

As for Muslims, you need only look at the laws of the majority Muslim nations.  Sure Iran allows it to save the life or mental health of a mother, but it's still banned.

This country is going down the tubes. Conservative Christians are taking this country back to the 19th century. It just gets worse and worse.

Indeed, they seek to fuse 19th century values with 21st century technology.  They try to marry Jesus Christ to Ayn Rand!  Oh, and being Christian isn't about living a moral and beneficent life yourself, it's about passing judgment on other people and screaming a lot about the "end times"!
:D

So many people have said for so long "this country is going down the tubes," but now that it really is "going down the tubes" I can barely get my head around it.  I tried to tell conservatives back in 2000 that even they would end up hating George W. Bush, but they didn't believe me.  Now they're starting to see what the Bush family is REALLY all about...

You may have not heard of one, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.  Orthodox Jews are just as anti-abortion, anti-euthanasia and possibly anti-death penalty at most of the large Catholic churches in the northeast (Protestants tend to be more conservative and supportive of the death penalty.)  A google search can really yield anything you request.  I believe you knew this too.

Well, there's a first: first time I've asked for you to back up something you've said that you actually have... lucky I was sitting down already ;)

Conservative Christians are taking this country back to the 19th century.


Reminds me of a quote from, I think, Stalin.  Repeat the lie often enough.....

"You don't agree with my idea of progress, so you want to wind back the clock!"

This from the same people who want to take us back to the 1930's and the 1960's with the another new deal or great society plan.

The people who want to take us back to the 1930s are the cadre of Fascists in the Bush White House, they want turn us into a 1930s Germany.  BTW, your big lie quote is,
"If you tell a lie big enough often enough, people will come to believe it."
--Joseph Goebbels,
Third Reich Minister of Propaganda (1933-1945)

Here is a link to the whole 'big lie" quote, and a whole bunch of other Goebbels quotes that sound exactly like the Karl Rove playbook!
:o :o :o
http://en.thinkexist.com/quotes/joseph_goebbels/

South Dakota just banned abortion.

South Dakota Senate passes abortion ban; bill challenging Roe now goes to governor

South Dakota's Senate passed a bill Feb. 22 that would ban nearly all abortions, moving it one step closer to directly challenging the infamous Roe v. Wade decision.

The bill passed the state Senate 23-12, one week after it was adopted by the House of Representatives on a 47-22 vote. It now goes to the desk of Republican Gov. Mike Rounds, who is pro-life but hasn't taken a public position. His signature would be historic, marking the first time since the 1973 Roe decision that a state has passed such a wide-sweeping ban on abortion. Pro-choice groups are expected to file an immediate lawsuit.

Supporters of the bill acknowledge that it will be struck down in federal court as unconstitutional, but they hope the Supreme Court eventually will take the case and overturn Roe.

In speaking for the bill, Senate sponsor Julie Bartling, a Democrat, called the unborn child "a separate human being, not a piece of tissue."

"The unborn child demands and deserves protection under our Constitution and under our state laws, and I believe it's now time to abolish abortions in South Dakota," Bartling said.

The bill provides for an exception to save the life of the mother. An amendment that would have provided for an exception for rape and incest failed, 21-14.

State Sen. Brock L. Greenfield, a Republican who voted for the bill, said technology and science has changed the abortion debate dramatically.

"Given the technological leaps and bounds since 1973, we can conclude with 100 percent certainty that upon fertilization a completely new, genetically unique life, with its own DNA fingerprint, is created," Greenfield said. "And at approximately 21 days after fertilization, the unborn child's heart begins beating."

He then asked the Senate body: "At what point did you become a living human being worthy of protection under the law?"

In its 1973 Roe decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down abortion bans across the country, legalizing the killing of the unborn in all 50 states.

The South Dakota bill directly confronts the Roe decision, making it a felony for anyone to perform an abortion. The mother would not be charged with a crime. The language of the bill - named the Women's Health and Human Life Protection Act -- says that "life begins at the time of conception" and that scientific advances since 1973 have proven that the unborn child is indeed life. The bill says the goal is to "fully protect the rights, interests, and health of the pregnant mother, the rights, interest, and life of her unborn child, and the mother's fundamental natural intrinsic right to a relationship with her child." The bill is based on the findings of a task force that studied abortion.

Link

Maybe you should read up on birth control laws.  In most states, there are no laws that say a doctor CANNOT tell.  Some states have laws that restrict the circumstances under which a minor can get birth control from a doctor.  And, we DO have these places....they're called Planned Parenthood, which you have made it perfectly clear that you abhor.  Thanks to the "anti-abortion" advocates who stand outside these clinics and call each and every woman/girl who walks in a murderer, can you blame them for not going there for BC?


You ought to read up on your confidentiality laws. A young woman tells a doctor something confidential, he can not tell others. That's a law. 
As far as planned parenthood goes, If they weren't responsible for 4,000 murders a day, maybe they wouldn't get such a bad rap.  You  Piss on my boat and tell me it's raining.

Never said it wasn't subjective.  However, the laws in this country make pedophilia and rape illegal.  Illegal=wrong. Oh please.  You started playing dirty from the get-go and have gotten 10x "dirtier" than many of the rest of us have.  How many things have you accused me of?  Let's see....I'd support pedophiles if it was illegal, I "deserved" to be raped and molested, I'd readily get an abortion, I'm "evil" and a "murderer", I said that your friend "Ralph" deserved to die......NONE of which are true.  What have I ever "accused" you of besides being closed-minded and a hypocrite (which, might I add, you've also accused me of)? That's not middle ground.  Middle ground is accepting that the other side might have a point.....agreeing with part of someone says.....all you do is go to one extreme or the other. 


According to your anology slavery was right.  Slavery = legal = right.  Glad people with your mind set weren't the only ones changing old laws and forming new laws.

If I'm 10 times you are 1,000 times, if I'm 1,000 times, you are 10,000 times.

You would support pediophila if it were legal, you just stated you would. Legal = right.

I never said you deserved to raped or molested.  No one deserves that, and You know I mean no one.  You had absolutely no sympathy or remorse or feeling for Ralph and what happened to him whatsoever. 

I do not do one extreme or the other.  I find compromise on all issues.  You're the one that doesn't.  I say let abortions be allowed  where they're needed.  YOu say let abortions be allowed where they're needed, uneeded, wanted and unwanted.  You're the one that can be seen tipped to the left or tipped to the right. I find balance.

No it wasn't.  His argument was that right or wrong is a "belief".  I suggest you take a little more time actually reading the responses made.


That is exactly what I was saying. I get what he said 100% if not 110%. By saying that right and wrong are beliefs, which make them 100% subjective upon interpretation, you are stating that there is no right and there is no wrong. 

If you ask 3 million people a subjective question about right and wrong, according to the system he set up, there answer is subjective and subjective only. 

Is stealing wrong?  You can't say yes and you can't say no, with any factual statement according to his system.  Therefore stealing is not right and stealing is not wrong, because one person say's right and the other says wrong.

I got what he was saying. 

dictionaries are the diabolical lies of satan!


Aethiest don't make attacks? Aethiest don't stoop low? come again on that statement.

Abortion is unavailable anyway in much of rural America.  You cannot compel a medical facility to provide abortions, thus "red state" America has deprived women (mostly poor women) of their reproductive rights for decades.
IMO, Roe v. Wade will be overturned in the next five years.  Women will have access to abortion in states such as Massachusetts, New York, Washington, and California.  States in the Bible Belt will ban abortion before the ink is dry at the supreme court.  You can bet your bottom dollar that the number of women who will be injured or killed by "back alley" abortions will skyrocket after Roe v. Wade is thrown out.  Rest assured if Jenna Bush or Tom DeLay's daughter got in the family way, she'd be able to get an abortion lickedy-split in any state. 
Women of means who can either travel to where abortion is legal, or who can pay off a private OB/Gyn will always have access to safe and legal abortion, and they'll use it too!  As that old song goes, "the rich get richer and the poor get children, but in the mean time, in between time, ain't we got fun!"
::)


Sky rocket? I'll take that bet with you. Crazymom herself stated that legal=right, illegal = wrong.  She's not the only one with this view on political matters.  Abortion numbers will go down dramatically if abortion is made illegal.  Abortions of women who need them, women who are in danger of dying by giving birth will still be provided, and Im' sure other exceptions such as rape and insest will still be allowed as well.  The other 3,500 abortions that happen daily will be eliminated.  People being more responsible and less "embarassed" will sky rocket like no other as well.  Condom usage and birth control subsriptions will be at an all time high.  As far as women injured and hurt in back ally abortions, yes it will happen, the same way people are killed for drugs,  but not anywhere near what you assume.

The position of the Presbyterian Church USA (a Protestant religion in which I was raised) is that abortion is the moral choice of a woman (i.e. whether it would be more immoral to have an unwanted baby or to abort the pregnancy, depending on her circumstances).

Most everyday Catholics in this country tend to ignore the techings of the church when it comes to abortion and birth control (both of which are forbidden by the Holy See), whether or not they consider themselves religious.

This country is going down the tubes. Conservative Christians are taking this country back to the 19th century. It just gets worse and worse.


I'm really glad to hear you say that. I was in fear that it wouldn't be long before abortion rates where at an all time high, title IX had eliminated all men's sports with exception to football and basketball to an oblivion, the word God was the most unused word in the nation, you walk into coffee shop you have to know 5 different languages to talk to 4 different people, the only thing on television is perverted stuff with more profanity words than a's and the's and letting Osama Bin Ladin come over and dictate our men and women according to his agenda.

You're in fear of just the opposite, gives  me hope.

The position of the Presbyterian Church USA (a Protestant religion in which I was raised) is that abortion is the moral choice of a woman (i.e. whether it would be more immoral to have an unwanted baby or to abort the pregnancy, depending on her circumstances).

Most everyday Catholics in this country tend to ignore the techings of the church when it comes to abortion and birth control (both of which are forbidden by the Holy See), whether or not they consider themselves religious.


Good point. The "moral" choice, is stressed a lot more than you elborated however.  The lean is obvious.

My question is this: Who is f***ing in South Dakota? People actually live there?  ;D

Lame jokes aside, abortion is a compromise. In an ideal world, no one would get accidentally pregnant, get STDs, etc.

However, in the real world all of the free condoms, birth control and education aren't going to eliminate all unwanted pregnancies. Banning abortion is going to force those who get pregnant by accident carelessness to carry to term or seek an abortion in other states. There is also the cases of rape/incest and pregnancies that endanger the mother's life.

What then? Are you going to tell a 13 year old girl who has been raped "Too bad"?

While many unwanted pregnancies do result in a positive outcome (two members of my family were an 'oops') the right to choose should fall squarely on the parents of the child, not the government, courts or Christians.


I've heard most of the arguements both pro and con, but if the fetus is not of an age where it can survive on its own without living on 10 machines and inside a 'bubble' then it's not a person to me. I haven't heard any cases where a fetus less than 4 months has every survived being born that premature. So in my opinion it's not a person. But if a mother wanted a late third trimester abortion with no valid reason I would be opposed, unless there were complications that posed a danger to her life.

I realise that still leaves a lot of grey area and sounds kind of cold but that's the area where the mother's conscience comes into play.

I don't think abortion is right but I do believe it should be legal. What's "right" and what's "legal" aren't always the same thing.

Abortion is a subject that will always be highly charged no matter what the law is.


The position of the Presbyterian Church USA (a Protestant religion in which I was raised) is that abortion is the moral choice of a woman (i.e. whether it would be more immoral to have an unwanted baby or to abort the pregnancy, depending on her circumstances).



Though I'm not a Presbyterian I agree with this.

My question is this: Who is f***ing in South Dakota? People actually live there?  ;D

Lame jokes aside, abortion is a compromise. In an ideal world, no one would get accidentally pregnant, get STDs, etc.



South Dakota is one of the poorest states in the country.  It is beset with all the pathologies visited upon people in chronic economic deprivation--crime, violence, drug abuse, alcoholism, depression, sociopathy, rape, and incest!  You will notice from GWB's post that the exception for rape and incest failed in the legislature.  This is what you get when you let the good ole boys run the show:
Biblical creationism taught in school and fourteen-year-old girls bearing their own fathers'  babies!
>:(
I'm tired of this medieval rubbish! Tired, tired, tired!

That is exactly what I was saying. I get what he said 100% if not 110%. By saying that right and wrong are beliefs, which make them 100% subjective upon interpretation, you are stating that there is no right and there is no wrong. 

If you ask 3 million people a subjective question about right and wrong, according to the system he set up, there answer is subjective and subjective only. 

Is stealing wrong?  You can't say yes and you can't say no, with any factual statement according to his system.  Therefore stealing is not right and stealing is not wrong, because one person say's right and the other says wrong.

I got what he was saying. 


You're so close, but no, you're still missing a beat.

I'm saying that you can't universally say something is right or wrong. I'm not saying that you can't have value judgments. I'm just saying that you can't confuse those with a priori truths. Saying that stealing is wrong is based on a system of belief and indoctrination. Therefore, saying that is an expression of your belief. That's not the same as a truth. It is true that stealing is illegal. It is the belief of some that stealing is wrong.

So here's everything repeated yet again, hopefully in a nice comprehensible summary:
*"Wrong" is, by definition, based on belief.
*One is permitted to draw conclusions based on one beliefs; indeed, one would often be in a chaotic state if one did not.
*Basing something on belief and not on theorems, hypotheses, corollaries, and that sort does not make it a truth.

Therefore, when you are saying something is wrong, it is an opinion.

In case anyone has forgotten, this is my refutation of this statement: "Abortion is wrong, that isn't a matter of belief or opinion. The act of abortion is wrong." An attempt was made to call something "wrong" and then separate that value judgment from "belief or opinion." All I've attempted to do is show that this cannot be done.

I don't think abortion is right but I do believe it should be legal. What's "right" and what's "legal" aren't always the same thing.

Abortion is a subject that will always be highly charged no matter what the law is.



You hit the hammer on the nail.

You're so close, but no, you're still missing a beat.

I'm saying that you can't universally say something is right or wrong. I'm not saying that you can't have value judgments. I'm just saying that you can't confuse those with a priori truths. Saying that stealing is wrong is based on a system of belief and indoctrination. Therefore, saying that is an expression of your belief. That's not the same as a truth. It is true that stealing is illegal. It is the belief of some that stealing is wrong.

So here's everything repeated yet again, hopefully in a nice comprehensible summary:
*"Wrong" is, by definition, based on belief.
*One is permitted to draw conclusions based on one beliefs; indeed, one would often be in a chaotic state if one did not.
*Basing something on belief and not on theorems, hypotheses, corollaries, and that sort does not make it a truth.

Therefore, when you are saying something is wrong, it is an opinion.

In case anyone has forgotten, this is my refutation of this statement: "Abortion is wrong, that isn't a matter of belief or opinion. The act of abortion is wrong." An attempt was made to call something "wrong" and then separate that value judgment from "belief or opinion." All I've attempted to do is show that this cannot be done.


Fair enough, as long as you realize that it all is a belief, based upon what you said.

Where did I say legal=right?  That's again, your black and white view of the world.  No shades of grey with you.  Also, where did I say that I would support everything that's "legal"?  For that matter, where did I say I WOULDN'T support something that was "illegal"?  Nowhere because I wouldn't and don't.  You just assume that I would, and you're dead wrong....again.  Take "statutory rape" for instance.....an 18 year old has sex with someone who's 1 day shy of turning 18.  That day, it's illegal, the following it's legal.  Is there a difference in the maturity of the person from 1 day to the next?  Not likely.  Would I support the 18 year old either day?  Sure would. Where have I "played dirty"?  Name once, just once.  Just because you don't like what I say, that automatically makes it "dirty"?

 No, you interpreted what I said as having no remorse.  If the thread hadn't been deleted, I'd post where you said "I probably deserved what I got". That's a joke right?  Letting abortions be allowed when YOU say they should is compromise?  YOU want to make the choice for millions of women, that's not compromise.  I want to let them make THEIR OWN choice, THAT'S compromise.  Would I prefer that there was no abortion?  Of course, I've stated that time and time again.  However, that's based on MY "values".  I cannot tell someone else what they should or shouldn't believe because they have THEIR "values". No I didn't.  That's your "black and white" interpretation of what I said. HUH?  You are totally contradicting yourself again.  You said "Abortion is wrong.  That's not a belief or an opinion"  The entire concept of "right or wrong" is belief and/or opinion.  Something that is "right" to you may not be "right" to someone else, but that doesn't mean that the concepts of "right and wrong" don't exist or that they can't be backed up with "factual statements".  Heck, some people on here have even backed up what they believe is "right" with facts and you STILL see it as "wrong".  There's just no winning with you.


"Never said it wasn't subjective.  However, the laws in this country make pedophilia and rape illegal.  ----->Illegal=wrong".<------- Right here. Right here is where you said it.

I don't have a black and white view of the world.  I'm a gray man who believes that giving life and opportunity is right, taking it way and making positive that one NEVER EVER has a chance is wrong.  The life may be a good one and it may be a bad one, but they had a chance.

I said how would you feel if I were to say to you, you deserved it.

You find it compromise to tell a woman you can kill whenever for whatever reason you feel? You call that compromise?  You call that compromise?  You sound like a Chinese triad compromising with the mafia, "sure we compromise, 75% for us 25% for you." but in your case it's "100% for us, 0% for you".  

You can't turn me into you and you can't get me to support baby killing. So you're view of winning, which is to have me losing, me saying to 3.5 million babies I no longer care about the injustice that was done to them, you're right, you can't win with me.

You hit the hammer on the nail.



You lost me there. I've heard 'hit the nail on the head' but not that one before. Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

You lost me there. I've heard 'hit the nail on the head' but not that one before. Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?


Agreeing. 

y'all need to quit arguing about abortion and just agree to RoCk!

can't we all just rock?

y'all need to quit arguing about abortion and just agree to RoCk!

can't we all just rock?


but what if ya mama don't dance?

Then you're listening to "scientists" and scientists.  If they are funded by a petroleum group or a group that also funds "Intelligent Design" they are as much a scientist as I'm a brain surgeon and fall into the "scientist" category.

While there may be small pockets were somewhere that is normally cold is hot or vice versa (witness the warmest January on record in Massachusetts while the south was having some record colds), the earth as a whole is warming.  There aren't any serious scientists that debate this.  Every time I see someone point out a scientist says the earth is cooling, they're really a "scientist" who was paid to support an agenda. 

The tundra is thawing, it hasn't done that in thousands of years.  The polar ice caps are receding to a point they've never receded to in recorded human history.  These are things that don't normally change over night, and can't be reversed quickly.  There is no credible scientist who is going to go on record and say the polar ice caps melting is a sign of a new ice age. 

This is of course all a thread hijack from the abortion topic.


Well, considering it's your site, you can hijack threads as much as you want :)

You can't turn me into you and you can't get me to support baby killing. So you're view of winning, which is to have me losing, me saying to 3.5 million babies I no longer care about the injustice that was done to them, you're right, you can't win with me.

We're back to the definition of a bunch of cells as a "baby" again... once you start using that kind of emotive language, no debate is possible.

Whether you count right and wrong as relative or absolute, nobody who isn't some kind of psychopath is going to agree that killing babies is not completely wrong; however, there is a huge emotional kick in calling something the size of a marble and totally insensate a "baby".  If you have to resort to this kind of language, then face it: you've lost the argument.

We're back to the definition of a bunch of cells as a "baby" again... once you start using that kind of emotive language, no debate is possible.

Whether you count right and wrong as relative or absolute, nobody who isn't some kind of psychopath is going to agree that killing babies is not completely wrong; however, there is a huge emotional kick in calling something the size of a marble and totally insensate a "baby".  If you have to resort to this kind of language, then face it: you've lost the argument.


Hear hear Philbo, well said !

harmonica, does it ever get you down that no one in the world ever seems to agree with you on anything whatsoever?

We're back to the definition of a bunch of cells as a "baby" again... once you start using that kind of emotive language, no debate is possible.

Whether you count right and wrong as relative or absolute, nobody who isn't some kind of psychopath is going to agree that killing babies is not completely wrong; however, there is a huge emotional kick in calling something the size of a marble and totally insensate a "baby".  If you have to resort to this kind of language, then face it: you've lost the argument.




I haven't lost anything.  That is why I'm against abortion because I beleive it is a baby.  You're for abortion because you dont' beleive it is a baby.  Why would I be against abortion if I didn't look at it as a person? Why would you be for abotion if you did look at is a person?  Although I know many in your uncompromising position that do view it as a baby but support abortion anyway.

Illegal=wrong doesn't necessarily mean legal=right.  Only in your black and white world.  In your world, there is ONLY good/bad, right/wrong, black/white....only polar opposites.  In a truly grey world, there are shades in between.  Something doesn't have to be 100% right OR wrong. I'm not arguing with you when "life" begins.  And I think I'm done explaining what "shades of grey" are because you're never going to get it.Think what you want.  You always do.  I don't know how many times you have to be proven WRONG to accept that your "view" of what was said is not always "right".Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?  YOUR compromise is 100% for YOU and 0% for everyone else.  YOUR compromise is "it's can only occur when Harmonica says it is okay".  That's NOT compromise.NOONE can win with you unless they agree that you're 100% right.  Not just me.  People give you FACTS and you STILL say they're wrong.  I don't know how many times I have to say that I WISH people did not see abortion as a method of birth control and didn't have them as often for you to get it.  MOST of the people on here who are pro-CHOICE have said the exact same thing, but in your eyes, we're all cheering when someone has one.  If you'd just accept that that's not the case, heck, even if you'd respect that others have differeing views on ANYTHING, I would view that as "winning".  Noone's saying that you have to compromise your morals or values, but if you'd accept that not everyone agrees with you 100%, THAT would be "winning".


Once again you're being completely utterly extremely unfair.  It's ok to say illegal = wrong but not ok to say legal = right.  That's a double entandra.  Saying within the exact same thing that one way it's ok but in another it's not.  Anything that fits your agenda on the pendelem is obvious.

Oh you know better than to think I see the entire world as black and white.  I know right from wrong and I know circumstance and motive as well.  You know that.  There is a time and a place for abortion and I've stated that numerous amounts of times.  A woman getting an abortion for the third time because she doesn't like the feel of condoms is not a time and a place and you know it, nor is a irresponsible teenager who's afraid of embarassment and responsibility. 

I get it just fine, you're the one that doesn't get it. You don't get that I wanna see justice and reason behind every murder, every single one and I won't rest until it happens. I'm not talkign just about abortion here either, I'm talking about all murders.  A baby is killed because his/her mother plain didn't want them around, that's not justified.  A baby is killed because his/her mother was going to be killed in the process of giving birth, that's justified, there is reason behind it.

They're not Facts. You honestly think because some asshole like John Roberts writes a book and talks on the radio saying a there is no "life" until birth that I have to buy that and think that he's right.  Other scientist have recorded heart beats at 3 and a half weeks, but I suppose you ignore that or put it off as "B.S" that you don't want to believe and force yourself to think that it's a lie.

90% of all topics I ever get into, I fully without catch accept and take in others views.  There are a few issues which we've touched on inwhich because of the complete lack of morality and respect from the other side I do not respect.  Abortion, the elimination to obilivion of men's olympic collegiate sports, and the bashing of my savior Jesus Christ.

harmonica, does it ever get you down that no one in the world ever seems to agree with you on anything whatsoever?


Who lives in a little world here?  I have about 7 to 10 people on a message board that don't agree with me.  7-10 people who beleive that respect means to give in and fold.  7 to 10 people on a message board isn't the entire world.  I know 700 to 1000 people in the world around me everyday plus many more that I've never met that do agree with me on a lot of things, so ever what.

So ever what! Really hit the hammer on the nail with that one.

Let's see, what rhymes with retarded?  Can't think of anything....that wouldn't be an insult to me would it? :o

So, now definitions are "beliefs"?  You really DO live in your own little world, don't you?  He started out saying something was his belief and you told him he had no "factual evidence" to back it up so he gave it to you and you STILL argue with him about it.  Unbelievable ::)

You know nothing about me so don't presume that I think I'm "hot to trot" (whatever THAT means in your little world).  I know alot more about right and wrong than you'll EVER know.  I may not be a "Christian" in your eyes, but that doesn't make me a bad person deserving of your spite.  I hope you DON'T learn about the right and wrong that I have.....I wouldn't wish that on anyone.  YOU, on the other hand, obviously would, which doesn't make you a very "good" Christian much less a good person.


Once again you insult me but don't espect me to insult you back. You play with fire, you get burned.   Hot to Trot means that you think you can state your mind and sneak around in clever ways without having to pay for it.  Which you do.   What do you know about right and wrong that I don't know?  I don't want to give you spite, don't want to see you suffer.   I just hope one day you get to meet at 31.5 million babies that have been killed and one by one tell them that they're not important and never deserved a chance.  Take your time, you'll have plenty of it.  

So ever what! Really hit the hammer on the nail with that one.


Oh I forgot the disapprecation for history on this board, my mistake.

Although I know many in your uncompromising position.
Sorry who's the one with the no compromise position here ?? Oh yes that would be you.

Sorry who's the one with the no compromise position here ?? Oh yes that would be you.
harmonica, in an uncompromising position? haven't you heard? he's hot to trot. :)

harmonica, in an uncompromising position? haven't you heard? he's hot to trot. :)
Careful you might get struck down by a wrathful thunderbolt for your blasphemy !

Careful you might get struck down by a wrathful thunderbolt for your blasphemy !
oo! kinky.

Let's see, what rhymes with retarded?  Can't think of anything....that wouldn't be an insult to me would it? :o

Open-hearted?
(probably slightly more likely than "dear departed" ;))

Open-hearted?
(probably slightly more likely than "dear departed" ;))
You think ?

Why is it unfair?  Because you don't agree with it?  Even YOU admit that abortion is not always "wrong" so to say that legal=right is not unfair.   No, the way I see you is that if YOU say it's okay, it's "white", if you say it's not okay, it's "black".  Everyone who sees things YOUR way is "good"....those who oppose you are "evil". Why is it justified?  Why is the mother's life more important than the baby?  I'm just trying to make you see that maybe, just maybe, there is more to life than "Harmonica's beliefs". Did you actually READ windbreaker's post?  It had NOTHING to do with when life begins.  He was simply pointing out the definition of right and wrong and you basically told him he was wrong.  Others have given facts on different subjects and you refuse to see them.  THAT'S why you "don't get it". You think you do, but in reality, you do not.  For one, you cannot seem to accept that someone would be against abortion, but still allow others to follow THEIR OWN morals and make a choice.  If ANYONE disagrees with you on ANY subject, they are "immoral".  If they aren't "Christians", they are "immoral".  If they make a point you can't refute, they are "playing dirty".  If that's "accepting other's views", then I am GLAD you don't think I accept other's views. Calling someone dense and calling someone retarded are two TOTALLY different things.  I speak my mind.  You don't like it.  How am I trying to NOT pay for it? 

What do I know about right or wrong that you don't?  Have you ever been raped?  Molested?  Used?  Abused?  Grown up watching others be used/abused?  Dealt with alcoholic families?  Dealt with drug abuse?  Dealt with a dying parent that you cannot do anything to help?  If your answer to any ONE of these is "No" then you're not even CLOSE to knowing what I do.

You don't want me to suffer?  "I believe there is a God and someday you'll know a lot more about right and wrong than you ever wanted to. I might be wrong, hope not. "  That's proof enough you want me to know about wrongs.




That proves that I see the world in grey the same way you claim to doesn't it? If even "I" say that it has it's time and place, which I've said numerous amounts of times, that means that always and never don't make it into the equation.  Always and never are black and white words. It has it's times and it's places are gray words.

Everyone who sees things my way, sees things my way.  Everyone who sees things not my way, sees thing not my way. No more no less.

I've seen plenty of facts on plenty of subjects.  I see them just fine, I don't have to agree with them and the reason why I don't have to agree with them is because I have another reliable source of information of a quote from a doctor or a magazine or something else that says just the opposite of the source they used.  You may want to think that the source you or they provide is better than the one and more right than the one I have, go ahead, think that.  I don't.

People disagree with me on many subjects.  I think Dan Marino and Joe Montana are the greatest NFL quarterbacks of all time, someone else said John Elway and Brett Favre.  I don't think I"m right or they're evil.  However, based on what I've learned about the outside world certain things in life are immoral, abortion being one of them.  The act of abortion is immoral the support of it is immoral.  Therefore I owe you nothing nor anyone else for calling abortion immoral, because the killing of someone else, I've been taught is immoral.

You can make all the points you want to make, and I won't call you anything.  You do against me what you ask to not be done against you, I will say you play dirty. Simple as that, as you call me dense, put everything in your favor that is not in your favor, and make references that are clearly not true like saying EVERY single thing, when it's only 1 thing at the particular moment.

YOu don't accept others views.  You keep telling if I did, then I'd do this and this would make me pro choice, which I'm not, I'm pro life...you can't accept that.  Take a good look at it, if I were to do what you've suggested, you can't tell me I could remain pro life.

I could ask you a lot of the same questions?  What was the last thing you said to your sister before she died?  If it wasn't "I hate you" then you don't know jack squat about guilt and regret and living the past decade never having a day go by where you aren't trying to make up for what you said. 

I dont' want you to suffer, I just want you to know that other people have, one by one, all 31 million of them.

Heard on the news today there is a single clinic in the entire state of South Dakota (Saudi-Kota) that provides abortion.  They didn't say where it is, prolly Sioux City or Pierre.  No matter where it is, in a poor state the size of SD, that means there are a heck of a lot of women who may need the services of said clinic who cannot get there.  You've got your du  jour abortion prohibition and your de facto abortion prohibition.  Most counties in SD already have the latter, and that's what I was saying about most counties in "red state" America!
::)

Heard on the news today there is a single clinic in the entire state of South Dakota (Saudi-Kota) that provides abortion.  They didn't say where it is, prolly Sioux City or Pierre.  No matter where it is, in a poor state the size of SD, that means there are a heck of a lot of women who may need the services of said clinic who cannot get there.  You've got your du  jour abortion prohibition and your de facto abortion prohibition.  Most counties in SD already have the latter, and that's what I was saying about most counties in "red state" America!
::)


It's like Mississippi.  Mississippi had something like eight abortion clinics in the state back in the early 1990's and now Mississippi only has one.  The state legislature about ran them all out.

South Dakota is a little better, they have almost no abortion doctors.  That one abortion clinic has to fly abortion doctors in from Minnesota.  If I was in the South Dakota general assembly, I'd get a bill passed banning out-of-state doctors from doing abortions within South Dakota's borders.  That would almost certainly be upheld by the courts and would pretty much be the final nail in the coffin of abortions done in South Dakota.

I have said this before and I will say it again, whether abortion is legal or not, they will still be preformed.  Would you rather have some desprate girl get one in a clinic with sanitized conditions by a doctor or in some back alley by who knows what or even worse, a coat hanger?



Cat

I have said this before and I will say it again, whether abortion is legal or not, they will still be preformed.


Yes, but I wager they're preformed less.

I think most anti-abortion fanatics don't get that people don't just say "I'm going to have an abortion" like "I'm going to go to the store today and buy me a box of doughnuts." For 99.9% of the people who have an abortion, it is a torturous and difficult decision that's not affected by convenience, and would you rather have it performed in a sanitary setting or, in the words of somebody else on this board, in a back alley with a coat hanger and some bactine?

Republicans always think they're being victimized. They are a culture of self-victimization and self-pity, even though they say Dems are a culture of pity.

Yes, but I wager they're preformed less.
and i wager a lot more women will be killed or wounded by unsafe procedures.

and i wager a lot more women will be killed or wounded by unsafe procedures.


Maybe, maybe not.  I'll call it Darwin at work.

Maybe, maybe not.  I'll call it Darwin at work.
no maybe about it. rest assured, you right-wingers are about to kill and maim a lot of women.

"darwin at work." typical conservative -- falling over themselves over the sanctity of a multi-celled blob, but when it comes to the lives of actual adults -- meh, whatever. it amazes me y'all are able to sleep at night. it's a shame darwin always get hijacked for some neonazi "let the inferiors die" crap like this.

no maybe about it. rest assured, you right-wingers are about to kill and maim a lot of women.

How are the right-wingers killing the women when the women are the ones who want to get a black market abortion?  I'm for a woman having the right to choose even if I think she's insane, but your statement above was just weird.

How are the right-wingers killing the women when the women are the ones who want to get a black market abortion?  I'm for a woman having the right to choose even if I think she's insane, but your statement above was just weird.

They're the ones single-handedly making it so that black-market abortion is the only option. It's really quite obvious. What's the confusion here?

They're the ones single-handedly making it so that black-market abortion is the only option. It's really quite obvious. What's the confusion here?


The women are involved too.  What happened to birth control?  What about the women who are getting back alley abortions now?

Isn't it their choice?

Yes, like the Jews, the lib'ruls, and the hominihexuals.

The women are involved too.  What happened to birth control?  What about the women who are getting back alley abortions now?

Isn't it their choice?
The south Dakota law doesn't even include an exemption for rape or incest. I think that says a lot about this new ugly uberconservatism and its concern for "choice." Every once in a while a rightist will couch this in mollifying rhetoric but deep down the motive behind this is imposing a fundamentalist religious belief on people regardless of the consequences to them. it's sad what you guys are doing to this country, truly sad.

The women are involved too.  What happened to birth control?  What about the women who are getting back alley abortions now?

Isn't it their choice?

Not always.  As Tia and I have pointed out, the SD law DOES NOT make an exception for rape and incest.  The good ole boys who are against allowing abortion even in the cases of rape, incest, or detriment to the health of the mother* will outlaw the shipping and sale of contraception.  That is going to be the next step.  I guarantee the clowns who are writing the unconstitutional SD law are also in support of rightwing pharmacists refusing to dispense contraceptives.
What about the women getting back alley abortions now?  This is happening because desperate women (usually very young and very poor) cannot get reproductive healthcare on demand thanks to the good ole boys in their counties.
By your reference to "Darwin at work" (a complete misuse, misnomer, and misunderstanding of Charles Darwin), you show me you do not care about the health and well-being of women and children.  What you and the legislative good ole boys are after is the control over and subjugation of women.  When you tell me women who have "back alley" abortions deserve to get injured and die, you show your true colors in hateful rhetoric, sir.

*as one SD legislator explained the only allowance for abortion is to save the LIFE of the mother, "not her psyche  or her leg (sic.)," he declared.  Thus the good ole boys don't care if the next Andrea Yates-type is carrying a fetus mad