The Red Scare continues.

[Cyber Cop]

God I love christians.

Lawmakers pass ban on abortion in South Dakota

PIERRE, S.D. -- 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 likely would 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 abortion opponents and supporters of abortion rights say the U.S. Supreme Court is more likely to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that affirmed the constitutional right to abortion now that conservatives John Roberts and Samuel Alito are on the bench.

Lawmakers said growing support among South Dakotans for restrictions on abortion added momentum to the bill.

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.

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.

Under the measure, doctors could get up to 5 years in prison if they perform abortions. The House passed the bill, 50-18, on Friday, and the Senate approved it, 23-12, earlier this week. If signed, it would become a state law on July 1.

Money for the anticipated legal fight already is pouring in. Lawmakers were told during the debate that an anonymous donor has pledged $1 million to defend the ban.

Kate Looby, director of Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls, S.D., said women who cannot afford to travel to an out-of-state clinic might be forced to seek 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," she said.

Similar proposals outlawing abortion are in the works in Missouri, Indiana, Kentucky, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Georgia and Tennessee.

[MassLiberal]

yeah, well the goal is to have this brought in front of the supreme court, where they could possibly lift restrictions on banning abortions at the state level. Nothing like a court made up of men telling women how to control their bodies.

[Cyber Cop]

I think I'll be writing a check to planned parenthood this week.

[MassLiberal]

It's crazy how they wasted no time. Once Alito was confirmed, they went for the jugular.

[Lurch]

This is going to get ugly. The Republicans could loose a lot of votes over this as only their far right base support attacking Roe v. Wade.

[irul&ublo]

How did George McGovern ever get elected there?

[BigDaddy]

If they legalized abortion for incest and rape, the population would probably never recover...

[Tippster]

I read that out loud just now to a co-worker. They said "where is that, Iraq?"

Sometimes I just want to cry.

[MassLiberal]

If they legalized abortion for incest and rape, the population would probably never recover...

Wow, great line.

[beaterdit]

I've been hearing about this on the radio. Truly scary.

[BigDaddy]

BUSH IS A SHRUB!

[Greydon Clark]

Ya’ll are a bunch of baby killers who hate Jesus and America.

[Magnoe]

I agree. Heaven forbid we have a society that protects the unborn.

[MassLiberal]

You don't like abortion? don't have one.

[Lurch]

I agree. Heaven forbid we have a society that protects the unborn.

And a society where Rape victims are forced to carry the resulting children full term and where rapist have visitation rights.

[BigDaddy]

Amen, Lurch...

What do you say to that GC & M?...

[Magnoe]

And a society where Rape victims are forced to carry the resulting children full term and where rapist have visitation rights.

That is one of the hardest issues for me. You bring up one of the best arguments for it. I guess when it comes down to it, though, I would have to say two wrongs don't make a right. If I truly believe that it is a life we're dealing with, then it has to be protected according to our constitution. I believe it's a life at conception. Therefore it has to be protected. It is incredibly difficult and I don't have the answer for the alternative. It sucks that the mother would have to carry in that situation. My wife is in public health and we discuss this often. We have both come to the same conclusion.

The fact that a rapist has the same rights as the mother has to be the first issue addressed. That is atrocious if reported correctly.

[BigDaddy]

That is atrocious if reported correctly.

Well,.. there may be a way to legally insure this doesn't happen. We need to voice our opinions where they really count. Glad we can discuss like this!

[Below Zero]

MassLiberal says it best!

[Lurch]

That is one of the hardest issues for me. You bring up one of the best arguments for it. I guess when it comes down to it, though, I would have to say two wrongs don't make a right. If I truly believe that it is a life we're dealing with, then it has to be protected according to our constitution. I believe it's a life at conception. Therefore it has to be protected. It is incredibly difficult and I don't have the answer for the alternative. It sucks that the mother would have to carry in that situation. My wife is in public health and we discuss this often. We have both come to the same conclusion.

The fact that a rapist has the same rights as the mother has to be the first issue addressed. That is atrocious if reported correctly.

Has your wife in public health told you what women where doing before abortion was legal? I hate the idea of abortions but for them to be illegal and teenage girls having black market abortions is worse in my mind.

[yesIsaidyes]

I personally think SD should go for it. They are saying the strategy is that by the time the case reaches the SC, Bush will have appointed another justice (hold on, Stevens, hold on!) - meaning the anti-Roe movement will have a majority. (Scalia, Thomas, Roberts(?), Scalito, Steven's replacement).

The way I see it, there are two results and both are good for liberals. First one is that the lose. This is a real possibility since not alot has happened since Roe and this law is pretty nasty - life of the mother is protected but not health and that will be a big issue. They could lose but only narrowly, having the court send it back for some tinkering only...as they have done before. This would tie the issue up for years to come and slowly chip away more at abortion rights (this is probably the best result for the anti-choice folks).

Or they could win. For this to happen, the court would pretty much have to say the right to privacy as articulated in Roe is gone or is a matter for the states (many states have a RTP explicitly in their constitutions). Is this bad for liberals? In the short term, maybe, because the red states will head pre-1960's in their abortion policy pretty quick and blue states will have to pick up the tab for more social safety net costs. But SD only has one abortion clinic right now and no permanent docs working it so what's the difference? Many other red states are similar.

In the long run, I think its a plus for the liberals and the country because this forces the abortion issue out of the courts and back into politics. No matter what Bush and the Christian Coalition say, more than 80% of Americans favor some kind of legalized abortion. This means that slowly each state will become pro-choice on some level. There will be holdouts, SD, Miss., but they will be few and their populaces will be served by other states. The best side effect of all of this is that abortion will no longer be a rallying cry for the far right - it will be a dead issue. While liberal causes will still have to compete for air space with the War on Terror (recently renamed The Long War), at least it will be one less issue for "single issue" conservative voters to head to the poll for. After all, European countries have not constitutionalized the right to an abortion but they all allow them (except for Ireland but people can leave Ireland for abortions after a pivotal case before the European Court of Human Rights).

The real interesting question is whether, after the SCOTUS overturns Roe, SD could outlaw South Dakotans from crossing the border to get abortions in other states. I think they couldn't based on a constitutional right to free movement but who knows.

[Canuk]

God I love christians.

I hate comments like these...you can't paint an entire religion, race, or sex, with the same brush simply because some radical elements of said religion hold views that differ from yours. It's no different than saying you hate Muslims because of what happens in Iraq. It's a simple minded, head in the sand, way to live, and it puts you on the same level as those you are speaking out against.

You can probably tell I'm a Christian. Do I agree with abortion? No, however I accept the fact that we have free will, and the right to choose. I might not necessarily agree with someone who chooses to abort a pregnancy, but they do have the right to make their choice.

[Schmear]

No matter what Bush and the Christian Coalition say, more than 80% of Americans favor some kind of legalized abortion.

What's the source of that statistic?

[weibo]

Geez you guys haven't you seen Dirty Dancing, if someone has to get a backroom abortion things can go bad.

[yesIsaidyes]

What's the source of that statistic?

Here
I think the operative point is that its SOME sort of abortion - meaning even the SD life of the mother only type of thing...the more important point is that with that many in support, you can assume based on statistics that around 45-50% favor the kind of system we have now.