New SD banning abortion..

[MzDiz]

This scares me. Who decides if the mother's life is in danger, and when is that decided? I was told that it would be a serious risk to my health to have another child. I was very ill the last time I was pregnant, but not until late in the second trimester. If there were a law in place like this in my state, would I be expected to wait until I was six months pregnant to abort? What a horrible nightmare that would be.

 

[beckmrk04]

I wonder how many of those lawmakers and their proponents have adopted American children?

Thank you!!! I say this all the time!!! You want people to give their babies up for adoption, THEN ADOPT THEM!!! So many children spend their whole lives in the system.

Another thing that really infuriates me about this whole mess is that if a woman is forced to carry her rapists' child, then he COULD legally gain access to that child and PARENTAL RIGHTS! So, not only will she have to be raped, and MAYBE he will spend time in jail, although that rarely happens, but then, he can say, "Hey, I want to see my kid. Let me pick him/her up every other weekend."

 

[beckmrk04]

At least women always have the choice of putting the baby up for adoption. I personally would never no matter what the circumstance would have an abortion, but I wouldn't look down on other people for having the abortion either. I would much rather put the innocent child up for adoption in the case I was raped if i didn't want the child myself.

Having worked in a sexual assault crisis center, I know it's very easy to say, I would do this.... I would do that... But it's a lot harder when you are in that situation. I am pro-choice. And no, under normal circumstances, I would not choose to have an abortion. However, I cannot imagine being pregnant with my rapists' baby- imagining if it would look like him, reliving my ordeal every time I felt a kick. Personally, I don't think I could do it. So, I understand where you are coming from when you say they can put the baby up for adoption, but I just don't think a lot of women would feel strong enough to go through with it, myself included. And you are much stronger than me if you could.

 

[vivilasvegas]

I didn't even know that the state government could make these decisions. I thought it was a federal law?

 

[beckmrk04]

I didn't even know that the state government could make these decisions. I thought it was a federal law?

Roe V. Wade is the Federal Law. SD made the law so that the Supreme Court will have to go over Roe V. Wade again (to see if the SD law is unconstitutional), and republicans are hoping with the new Supreme Court Justices that have been appointed, they will overturn Roe v. Wade and abortion can be banned everywhere.

 

[vivilasvegas]

Roe V. Wade is the Federal Law. SD made the law so that the Supreme Court will have to go over Roe V. Wade again (to see if the SD law is unconstitutional), and republicans are hoping with the new Supreme Court Justices that have been appointed, they will overturn Roe v. Wade and abortion can be banned everywhere.

thanks!

 

[LisaNJ25]

Honestly, it's none of my business whether anyone else chooses to have a child or not. Don't know why other people think it's their business.

I don't care whether someone chooses to have an abortion because of rape or incest, or just because they can't afford it, or don't think they would make good parents.

I don't care whether someone chooses to keep a baby whether they're young, old, wealthy or poor.

It is their choice; not my place to pass judgment.

I agree with you 100%

 

[VickiVM]

Who is going to help the children born from an incestuous encounter who have medical issues to deal with - not to mention the emotional issues. Is SD going to step up to aid these children if the need arises?

 

[goofygirl]

I think everybody should start finding out RIGHT NOW who their state reps and senators are, and find out where they stand on this issue. Its obviously an important thing to know.


What happened in SD leaves me appalled. Every poll I have ever seen taken on this topic has shown that that the majority of the people want CHOICE.
(Source:http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm)

It just shows how out of touch politicians (mainly the Republicans) are.

 

[LukenDC]

Women's groups in N. Dakota start to offer free buses to pick up the women and offer them reduced rate clinics. Conservatives in S. Dakota get upset and S. Dakota then passes a law outlawing a woman to cross state lines for the purpose of an abortion. This is where things have the potential to get very ugly indeed.

I think that the hypothetical situation above is very plausible. Many of the social conservatives believe that their service to god comes before the Constitution and civil rights. Religious fundamentalism---be it Christian, Muslim, Jewish, etc.,---is a severe threat to democracy and civil liberties. And they have the audacity to call liberals America haters.

 

[beckmrk04]

I think that the hypothetical situation above is very plausible. Many of the social conservatives believe that their service to god comes before the Constitution and civil rights. Religious fundamentalism---be it Christian, Muslim, Jewish, etc.,---is a severe threat to democracy and civil liberties. And they have the audacity to call liberals America haters.

It is not only plausible, but has already happened. I live in IL, but very close to the MO state line (many people we know work in MO). MO has made it illegal for anyone to transport a minor to IL for an abortion, and MO has a parental notification law- fat lot of good it does when girls are raped by their FATHERS.

vivlasvegas: anytime!!

goofygirl: I could not agree more!!! I basically harass Sen. Obama and Sen. Durbin, and Gov. Blagoiviech (soooo can't spell that right now). I call, e-mail, and write letters. I almost always get a response, even if it takes a while. Luckily, I'm in a pretty liberal state. But it's very important to let them know how you feel!! And OT- I found my dog on petfinder.org too!!

Also want to add- you can sign up with the National Organization for Women (NOW) for updates, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America for updates, and they both have links to tell you how to contact your reps, and will even do the e-mail for you, you can send theirs or add your own, and they'll send it to whoever your rep is.

 

[MrsKreamer]

Roe V. Wade is the Federal Law. SD made the law so that the Supreme Court will have to go over Roe V. Wade again (to see if the SD law is unconstitutional), and republicans are hoping with the new Supreme Court Justices that have been appointed, they will overturn Roe v. Wade and abortion can be banned everywhere.

Actually if Roe v Wade is overturned it just means the States can decide whether or not they want to allow abortions.

 

[beckmrk04]

Actually if Roe v Wade is overturned it just means the States can decide whether or not they want to allow abortions.

Right- that's why I said "can" be banned, although, "could" would have been a better word. It will be a sticky issue and interesting to see how it all plays out.

 

[MrsKreamer]

Oh I am sorry, it's just sometimes people don't know that.

 

[Laura]

At least women always have the choice of putting the baby up for adoption. I personally would never no matter what the circumstance would have an abortion, but I wouldn't look down on other people for having the abortion either. I would much rather put the innocent child up for adoption in the case I was raped if i didn't want the child myself.

Sure, when the mom's white and the father is white too, infertile couples are just champing at the bit to adopt their baby. If the baby is black or can't "pass" for white, not so much. I worked briefly at an adoption agency. There was a nice long list of parents waiting for white babies, but we were turning away black birth mothers.

We had a white birth mother who lied about her rapist's race. She said he was white, but her rapist was black (sorry, I just can't refer to a rapist as a birth father). She chose a white couple to adopt her baby. A few days after she gave birth, she signed away her parental rights and the new parents took the baby boy home. They took him to a pediatrician, who said this baby wasn't white. I took the first call from the almost-adoptive father after the doctor's exam, who kept skirting around the issue and wouldn't say what was wrong with his baby. At first I thought there was some medical problem, like a heart condition. He kept saying "the baby looks fine to me". After about 5-10 minutes I realized he possibly meant the baby's race was what was "wrong", and I asked him if the doctor said the baby wasn't fully Caucasian. He seemed relieved to say "yes". Long story short, we managed to find new parents for the baby boy on short notice. I think they must have been the last on the list willing to take a biracial baby, because right after that we began to turn away black birth mothers.

 

[bicker]

Right- that's why I said "can" be banned, although, "could" would have been a better word.

And many folks will probably come to realize, too late, that "banned" doesn't mean "prevented" -- it only means "criminalized." Women will have abortions, whether the law allows them to or not, as has always been the case, for thousands of years. The only control society has over the practice is with regard to how safe or dangerous it is.

 

[pixiemomma]

I wonder how many of those lawmakers and their proponents have adopted American children?

Me too. My guess is very few.

 

[cardaway]

You can't have 50 states with 50 different abortion laws. It would be a nightmare. That's why I think this really should be a federal decision, not a state issue.

Agreed.

 

[bicker]

The biggest problem occurs when a state tries to impose its laws on things that occur in other states, where such things are legal. Such laws are utterly reprehensible, and disply the kind of craven arrogance that is the source of much of the conflict in our society.

 

[punkin]

I think this case (and there will be a law suit immediately after this bill is signed) will get to the Supreme Court rather quickly as such things go. The lower court HAVE to declare it unconstitutional because it is squarely against Roe v. Wade. So there will not be too much long protracted litigation. It will be decided on a Motion to Dismiss or on Summary Judgment. I think it is possible that this could get in front of the Supreme Court in less than 5 years.

Justice Stevens is old and (IMO) Alito would love a chance to overturn Roe. Interesting times ahead.