South Dakota bans most abortions

It's also my understanding that the bill doesn't make an exception to rape and incest either, which is fucking ludicrous.

I'll be glad when this gets brought up in the Supreme Court. However, I am concerned that since Bush has nominated a few conservative judges, things may not go so well for the rights to a medical treatment for half the population.

I don't know what kinds of info abortion clinics in the surrounding states require before hand, but I imagine that many women may be forced to change their addresses.

I'm just glad that this happened to a sparsely populated state filled with farms, so that way not many women will be affected by this.

Originally Posted by Zio

Well, my first question is. Who regulates things like aboration or things related to children? The state or federal?

Federal. It was already decided on a national level that a woman should have the right to an abortion in a case called Roe vs. Wade, back in 1973 I believe.

South Dakota's conservative voters and government are doing this because they hope that abortion will be made illegal on a national level. Which is just what this country needs. Babies being born to mothers that aren't ready, resulting in increased levels of poverty and everything else that follows from that, such as increased levels of crime. -__-

Originally Posted by Enter User Name

Just another case of the Religious Right screwing up what the country was founded on. At this rate, soon this country will be more restrictive than the middle east.

Yeah, the United States is a democracy, not a theocracy like Iran.

If this ever gets passed in the United States, I cannot see the law lasting a long time.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Zio

They aren't forcing thier beliefs on anyone by expressing them and saying hey, we think aboration is bad and we want to prove it and have a vote on it.

I think we're missing the point here. It's not about freedom of speech, it's about passing laws that majorly affect people, in this case women who aren't ready for a child.

With that being said, I couldn't disagree with you more.

The religious right has been expressing their disapproval of abortion since Roe vs. Wade. That's all fine and good, but in South Dakota, they've crossed the line by going beyond expressing their views and passing a law that forces their beliefs on the public body.

Yes, I said it. It forces the belief of the religious right that one "sin" doesn't make another "sin" right onto women who aren't ready- emotionally, financially, whatever, to have a child.

Quote:

You call that forcing? If thier forcing thier beliefs on you, then you are techincally forcing your morals and beliefs by saying FUCK YOU, I'm right, your wrong and your a fucktard.

I follow what you're saying here, and in the context of free speech and debate, that makes sense. However, when it comes to the current situation, it doesn't work like that.

See, right now in every other state in the US, Canada and probably most of Europe, people who believe in pro-life have the choice not to get an abortion. And those that need an abortion also have have the choice to get an abortion. Everyone has a choice and almost everybody's happy, except the pro-lifers that complain about the people that get abortions.

But in South Dakota, there is no longer the freedom of choice to have an abortion. The pro-lifers, the people who wouldn't have gotten an abortion in the first place, are happy because they've made it so everybody else in the state can't get an abortion. The people that need an abortion, such as victims of rape, incest and poverty, are screwed unless they can get an abortion in a surrounding state.

Basically, the law that a woman has the right to a medical procedure worked fine because it gave women the right to choose. But now in South Dakota, those that would have chose to have an abortion can't.

If you can't see that that's forcing one's belief on the entire public body, then I'm not sure what is.

There's nowhere I can't reach.