You F*cking hypocrits. South Dakota

[Trite~Elegy]

Trite's mad. mad

Usually she doesn't get very made at one page document, but this
THIS, hypocracy and irony just crosses all barriers.

Quote:

Yet Lynn Ogren, who helps her husband run a sheep and cattle ranch, choked up with emotion as she explained her support for the ban.

"I value every child's life, whether it's from a rape or not," she told her friends. "Who's fighting for these kids?"

Whose fighting for the already living breathing women, citizens of the united states who don't want to have your idelogy stuck up their a**?!

Quote:

"We're David, they're Goliath," contended Leslee Unruh, head of the campaign group supporting the ban. Parked outside her VoteYesForLife.com office in Sioux Falls were cars with a blunt bumper sticker: "The Killing Stops Here."

~~~

Unruh, who had an abortion years ago that she now regrets, says momentum is turning as more voters hear her side's core message: Abortion hurts women. In the event of defeat, she vows to keep fighting.

"Sometimes it's not about votes — it's about the truth," she said.

mad
Don't pull the "my abortion is the only morral one and now I've regreted it" to save yourself.

What truth? excuse me, but your oppinion isn't TRUTH.

[Calixti]

That ******** ban hasn't been overturned yet?!??!

WHAT. THE. ******** far are these people's heads up their asses that they can FAIL to see how much harm this is doing? Oh my god, I just lost all faith in my country.

That settles it. When I'm out of college, I'm ditching the US and going back to England. evil  

[KoopaTroopa18]

wait... I thought abortion was already banned in SD. Now i'm confused.

Anyway, people anti-choicers don't like to see both sides of the issue. They find one person who likes it or regrets it and completely puts it only on that person not even considering that there MIGHT BE OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE A BRAIN AND HAVE GOTTEN AN ABORTIAN AND NOT REGRETTED IT!!! scream scream scream  

[SterileNeedles]

That's scary. You guys were right when you said it was possible that they could take our rights away. I'm with you Katie-Kat. Maybe I'll move to Japan...I've always wanted to go there. Or somewhere in Europe. Maybe I can donate something to Planned Parenthood or NARAL. This is just stupid. xP I want to help these people. D: I pray to God it doesn't get passed.

Now that I think about, people may regret getting their other surguries and medical procedures. Like people that get plastic surgury might regret it and hate the way they look. Should we ban that too? confused  

[nobhdy]

Ah. So they are setting up an illegal law to create a test case for the Supreme Court to overthrow Roe vs Wade. They've attempted to do this before, it never works.

Every time something challenged Roe vs Wade, it has already prevailed. It is a very, very strong precedent, and many other cases cited it. I don't think it will ever be overturned. I have absolute faith in the Supreme Court, and I know that they will not overturn something that is very, very solid in the books.

Its solid law, they just can't overturn it on a whim. Plus, the Supreme Court does not vote some way because of their moral beliefs.

It won't happen.
------------------
My second problem is this:

"Oh! Something isn't going my way, so I'm going to leave the country."

Congratulations, you have forsaken all the women who you've been so adamantly defending this entire time. You should be proud...  

[Trite~Elegy]

I don't know if it's that 'set in rock'. Nobhdy.
quite a few people, including organizations like NARAL, (another ancronymn I''m forgetting) and planned parent hood, fear that if the conservatives republicans can appoint one more anti choicer justice to the supreme court - that Roe V wade could be over turned gonk  

[YellowRoses610]

Nobhdy I dont agrea with you on gettinf on her case about leaving the country. I don’t think it is just one thing that is setting her off. The way the U.S is getting is frankly kind of scary. I my self am thinking of going to Canada but that would not be for a wile because I am nearly sixteen and plan to go Canada or Mexico.

You can still fight in Mexico you can still campaign.  

[Lord Setar]

I read that article. One pro-ban person said "we're David, they're Goliath." Makes me think of Neth's US religion distribution sig. As in: Christians - 70% "Help, help, we're being oppressed!"  

[nobhdy]

Trite~Elegy

I don't know if it's that 'set in rock'. Nobhdy.
quite a few people, including organizations like NARAL, (another ancronymn I''m forgetting) and planned parent hood, fear that if the conservatives republicans can appoint one more anti choicer justice to the supreme court - that Roe V wade could be over turned gonk

I strongly feel that that fear is unfounded. Being well-versed in constitutional law, I really don't think that it can be, regardless of people's personal beliefs. That is not grounds for overturning a supreme court precedent. Come on, can you imagine the majority opinion that they would write?

Chief Justice Roberts: "I am overturning Roe v Wade not on account of legal standards or even stare decisis, but rather strictly on the grounds that I believe it is wrong"

Goddamn. I wish people would stop saying that. They decide cases based on law, not on belief. Its the supreme court, for God's sake.  

[Trite~Elegy]

nobhdy

Trite~Elegy

I don't know if it's that 'set in rock'. Nobhdy.
quite a few people, including organizations like NARAL, (another ancronymn I''m forgetting) and planned parent hood, fear that if the conservatives republicans can appoint one more anti choicer justice to the supreme court - that Roe V wade could be over turned gonk

I strongly feel that that fear is unfounded. Being well-versed in constitutional law, I really don't think that it can be, regardless of people's personal beliefs. That is not grounds for overturning a supreme court precedent. Come on, can you imagine the majority opinion that they would write?

Chief Justice Roberts: "I am overturning Roe v Wade not on account of legal standards or even stare decisis, but rather strictly on the grounds that I believe it is wrong"

Goddamn. I wish people would stop saying that. They decide cases based on law, not on belief. Its the supreme court, for God's sake.

True, but is it not an opinnion that murder is wrong?

It had to be otherwise it would not be illegal.
plus most laws were made on oppinions and beliefs.
so what's stopping the justices from saying "We believe the fetus to have personhood and therefore abortion is murder"  

[PhaedraMcSpiffy]

They probably can't overturn Roe v. Wade.

What they can do, and what they are doing is eroding the right to abortion in each state. Sometimes it's a state ban, like in South Dakota, or sometimes it's something subtle and seemingly reasonable. Like parental notification or other specific restrictions. Sometimes it's not an attack on the legality of abortion, it's an attack on the availability of abortion.

Roe v. Wade was a huge triumph. But one side effect of Roe v. Wade is that it's pissed off and mobilized the anti-choice side. Only this time they're smarter, sneakier and more powerful.  

[nobhdy]

PhaedraMcSpiffy

They probably can't overturn Roe v. Wade.

What they can do, and what they are doing is eroding the right to abortion in each state. Sometimes it's a state ban, like in South Dakota, or sometimes it's something subtle and seemingly reasonable. Like parental notification or other specific restrictions. Sometimes it's not an attack on the legality of abortion, it's an attack on the availability of abortion.

Roe v. Wade was a huge triumph. But one side effect of Roe v. Wade is that it's pissed off and mobilized the anti-choice side. Only this time they're smarter, sneakier and more powerful.

I disagree. They display a fundamental lack of understanding of the federal appeals system. Ergo, they are not smarter.

And...

Parental notification isn't an attempt to block abortion. It is simply an extension of the already existing law that states minors must have parental consent to have any sort of medical procedure.

I'll admit some lawmakers are using it as a tool to block abortion, but most are just pointing out the obvious extension of an already existing law. If you have a problem with it, you must change the parental consent law.

Why don't we change that law?  

[PhaedraMcSpiffy]

nobhdy

PhaedraMcSpiffy

They probably can't overturn Roe v. Wade.

What they can do, and what they are doing is eroding the right to abortion in each state. Sometimes it's a state ban, like in South Dakota, or sometimes it's something subtle and seemingly reasonable. Like parental notification or other specific restrictions. Sometimes it's not an attack on the legality of abortion, it's an attack on the availability of abortion.

Roe v. Wade was a huge triumph. But one side effect of Roe v. Wade is that it's pissed off and mobilized the anti-choice side. Only this time they're smarter, sneakier and more powerful.

I disagree. They display a fundamental lack of understanding of the federal appeals system. Ergo, they are not smarter.

And...

Parental notification isn't an attempt to block abortion. It is simply an extension of the already existing law that states minors must have parental consent to have any sort of medical procedure.

I'll admit some lawmakers are using it as a tool to block abortion, but most are just pointing out the obvious extension of an already existing law. If you have a problem with it, you must change the parental consent law.

Why don't we change that law?

Smarter than they were before, not smarter than us.

And a teen can get medical attention without telling their parents. Why suddenly enforce laws on this specific area of healthcare?

They say that notification isn't an attempt to block abortion, or even the same thing as parental consent. I call bullshit on that! Don't you think that if this girl could trust her parents enough to tell them, she would? All it's going to do is help parents lock up their pregnant daughters and force them to give birth.  

[nobhdy]

Alot of our vehemently pro-choice state congressmen around here support the parental consent laws as a logical extension of current laws, but are working to re-write the existing parental consent laws. They are very logical people.

They are, needless to say, encountering some problems from the pro-life congressmen who actually do want to deny minors abortions.

So, there's a bit of both, as you can see. That's what I based my statement on.  

[Asexual-Slut~Enya]

Right now, as it stands, they are not bringing the matter before the Supreme Court anyway.

Quote:

The Legislature passed the law overwhelmingly in February, expecting it to be challenged in court and perhaps lead to a U.S. Supreme Court reversal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion. Instead of suing, opponents swiftly collected signatures to force a referendum; the law will be scrapped if voters reject it.

A great majority of voters in South Dakota oppose the law as it stands (47% oppose, as compared to 39% who support). A referendum is more efficient and less costly than suing.