Welcome to Gaia! ::

It has already been signed into law. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4780522.stm

It is a sneaky a** way that these congressmen are trying to get directly at Roe v. Wade. They WANT it to go to the supreme court now that Sandra Day (swing judge) is gone and we have two men sitting who have decidly disgusting histories when it comes to believing women should have the right to their own reproductive function.

AND what is far scarier about that abortion law is that it ONLY allows for abortion if it is an EMMINENT THREAT to the mother's life. Meaning you practically have to be wheeled into an emergency room hemmoraghing or in seizures from a BP of 204/112.

Meaning no abortions for Severe Hyperemisis Gravidarium (vomiting more than 400 times a day and having to be put on a main line IV for the duration of your pregnancy...well s**t you can SURVIVE THAT! Danger is not "emminent"). Say you got pregnant last time and it was the most horrific experience ever, blood clotting disorder, HELLP, AND Pre-ecclampsia that weakend your heart made you horrifically ill, had you on blood thinners for months and ended in a scary emergency C-section with horrific bleading and a severely premature infant? AND now even through copious amounts of birth control you get pregnant AND there is fantastic chance of having all that s**t happen again? WELL s**t WOMAN! You SURVIVED didn't you? Your child is FINE NOW...if you are vigilant and your doctor is the model physician you'll be OKAY...well not okay, maybe you'll survive, maybe...BUT the BABY! The baby will survive...well maybe. But still... NOT EMMINENT ENOUGH!

No abortions for severe birth defects either Anacephaly...baby has no skull cap and severely deformed facial features and won't live through birth? No! Baby has a serious brittle bone disease and the violent act of child birth will crush the child painfully, in fact it has already broken its legs and arms multiple times in utero already? NO! Hell no woman, you are a vessel, you carry that ******** baby.

You know, not to mention that it won't let a woman who is a victim of rape or incest abort either. Because rape and incest OKAY in South Dakota!

I'll just end with what I wrote the day it was passed in my LJ

"Congratulations South Dakota you have proven that you need to have all your intelligent citizens harvested and set adrift in the atlantic ocean as your own island nation of jackassery."

Yeah the general idea is to punish women for being dirty harlots and to make the resultant children INTO punishments.

The general idea is to force women in high risk pregnancies to carry children even at a risk to their health.

The general idea is not to SAVE the unborn children, because if South Dakota wanted to do that they'd rain down birth control from the heavens (much like they do in WA actually, the Take charge program is for any male of female making less than 40k a year and will cover EVERYTHING including male or female sterilization for FREE, and you can renew it every year), If they wanted to SAVE children in general they'd amend their ******** up Safe Haven laws that allow the state to prosecute any woman or man who leaves a baby at a "safe haven" (WTF is the point of THAT?)

The general idea of this law is that women are property and only as good as their reproductive function allows.

The general idea of this is that myself and any other woman is a SLAVE to her natural biology and a male patriarchy.

I'm SICKENED that my daughters have to live in a country where Religious fundementalist nutbars are eroding their rights to their bodies and their BASIC HUMAN FUNCTIONS. SICKENED that generations of boys are being raised by these people who have no TRUE regard for human life. If they had true regard they would value the life, the sanity, and the safety of 14 year old girls who are RAPED BY THEIR ******** FATHERS and then become pregnant OVER the life of the GLOB OF CELLS she is carrying in her uterus.

Oh but she asked for it right? She came on to her father right?

Incest and Rape = Okay in South Dakota. s**t they might as well just stop prosecuting for it and legislate that daughters being the property of their fathers are at the mercy of their father's sexual will. They're pretty much saying that with this DISGUSTING legislation anyway.

I just can't believe this is happening. This is the 21st century! We went through the turn of the last century fighting for our freedom, we went through the sexual liberation of the 60s and 70s so that it was ok to admit that we could BE sexual too and that it wasn't just for the man's pleasure or baby making. After over a century of fighting tooth and nail, HOW THE HELL DOES THIS HAPPEN?!

I don't understand how people can look at a law like that so apathetically and say something like "oh well, the punishment for the doctors is a little harsh..." Do people not understand what a woman's reproductive freedom symbolizes? Do people not understand that we spend over a century fighting for this right and it's just being taken away? Do people not understand how freakin' close this is to saying "employers have the right to request that all applicants indicate their race on their resumes"? This is quite literally going back a full century! If not more!

This business and the gay rights issue makes me want to have nothing to do with the US. I am ashamed of my passport.

Obviously women know nothing about their own bodies and cannot be trusted to choose the "right" decision, so the government (male-dominated, all religious idiots who were probably the guys out working late while their wives had to deal with the kids, and who probably stayed outside of the birthing room during childbirths.) will have to do it for them!

Obviously a woman should not be able to make decisions about reproduction, sex, or anything else. These should all be controlled by the MAN (government).

Next they'll be saying that rape is OK because a woman has no right to decide when a p***s is inside of her either. Women just exist to breed and to be a convienient hole (her reproductive organs=woman) to ******** class="smilies smilies_rolleyes"> rolleyes

In my opinion, they are just challanging Roe, so it's more political than anything. I haven't heard anything about that law since it happened...

I may be mistaken, but I believe that there was only one or two abortion clinics in SD to begin with, so it's not a huge loss.

Anyway, those were my thoughts at the time, apart from being very angry razz