Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

S.D. Governor Signs Abortion Ban Into Law-Docs Face Up To 5 Yrs In Jail

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 01:56 PM
Original message
S.D. Governor Signs Abortion Ban Into Law-Docs Face Up To 5 Yrs In Jail
S.D. Governor Signs Abortion Ban Into Law By CHET BROKAW, Associated Press Writer
19 minutes ago



PIERRE, S.D. - Gov. Mike Rounds on Monday signed legislation banning almost all abortions in South Dakota.

The Legislature passed the ban late last month, focusing nationwide interest on the state as the governor decided what to do about the measure.

The law, designed to raise a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, is scheduled to take effect July 1.

Under the law, doctors in South Dakota will face up to five years in prison for performing an abortion except when the procedure is necessary to save the mother's life.

Rounds issued a technical veto of a similar measure two years ago because it would have wiped out all existing restrictions on abortion while the bill was tied up for years in a court challenge.

South Dakota Planned Parenthood said it planned a quick court challenge.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060306/ap_on_re_us/sd_abortion_south_dakota
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. How many people are they going to lose because of this?
Damn bastard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. Oh, great - a "Rapist's Rights" law
Thanks, South Dakota! NOT.

:grr: :grr: :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
3. Oh man, I almost pegged the penalty exactly. I thought they would tack
on a 5-10 year penalty for performing one. Amazing, so in their heads, all life is equal, but some are less equal than others? Is that what I'm hearing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
4. Does anyone think that this wasn't well-planned
with the installment of Roberts and Alito on SCOTUS?
It has taken 30 years for the players to fall into place, but they believe strongly that they have.
It's not going to take long to figure out which rights women have left.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. WHY ONLY FIVE YEARS?
What kind of logic is that? State legislatures obviously are slaves to religious zealots who equate abortion with murder. Five years for murder? Is that a wink-wink to the electorate? Yes we are whores to the hateful "christians" in this state but read between the lines. The "light" sentence for murder means you can't hate us that much.

A real "christian conservative" would insist on the death penalty in their lunatic life loving world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. EXACTLY what I'm saying! Where's the outrage?! Why no death penalty?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllegroRondo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. I'm waiting for someone on trial for murder
to claim that he was really performing a very late abortion and should only get 5 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. If I ever am asked again
to raise my right hand and swear to tell the truth I am going to refuse to citing the President, Vice President and Attorney General of the United States. I can be a lunatic too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllegroRondo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
7. When necessary to save the mother's life?
in whose opinion?

If your doctor says its necessary, does that mean it is?
Or does the court have the ability to come in afterwards and decide it wasn't?

Could an unscrupulous doctor take a couple extra bucks under the table to make him say its necessary?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. A videotape will be submitted to Bill Frist.
He will watch, and then determine if an abortion is necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zookeeper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. Rep. Bill Napoli said on "The News Hour" on Friday...
that it would be permissible if the "girl" was a virgin, a devout Christian and was "horribly, brutally...really BRUTALLY..raped and sodomized," so badly that it would totally mess up her life and mind.

So, yeah...with that degree of qualification, who would decide what defines "life threatening?" And does the woman have to fit a certain profile to be worthy of mercy from the South Dakota government?

(Also, you know the people with money will always be able to find someone to claim that it is necessary!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
8. only one purpose for this. to try to overturn roe.
they think they have the scotus now and here they come.

we told them. we told them all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
10. Only Five Years for "Murder"?
I guess then the fetus is not considered a human being after all... can you say hypocrisy? I knew you could...

These abortion foes are idiots, and their agenda is not based on anything but their desire to control others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
13. We. Told. You. So.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
15. BIG NEWS: We should be kicking and recommending this thread
:kick:

Already recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
16. this is so ridiculous
I saw the congressman's interview who introduced this bill (can't recall his name) and he looked like a bigot if I've ever seen one. He said they know it will be overturned and that's the plan to keep going until it reaches the Supreme Court.

:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. If that's true, they are taking a HUGE risk...R v W is already in shreds
One strong legal challenge can blow the whole house down
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
18. Oh. A white male decided this. How appropriate.
Edited on Mon Mar-06-06 03:00 PM by tjwash
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-06-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
19. South Dakota right to life webpage
you can tell them what you think.

http://www.sdrl.org/


Director - Senator Brock Greenfield

http://legis.state.sd.us/email/index.aspx?FuseAction=MemberID&MemberID=295

Primary Sponsor
Bill Title
HB 1184 provide that health care providers and institutions need not participate in certain health care services.
HB 1194 prohibit the distribution of contraceptives to public school students.
HB 1198 define the applicable standard of care in regard to screening of risk factors for all abortions except in the case of a medical emergency.
HB 1202 revise certain provisions related to sexually transmitted diseases.
HB 1216 define the applicable standard of care in regard to screening of risk factors for all abortions except in the case of a medical emergency, to provide civil remedies, and to exempt medical emergencies from the requirements of this Act.
 Add to my Journal Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC