SOUTH DAKOTA BANS ABORTION

[margot]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060223/ts_nm/...HBhBHNlYwM5NjQ-

Note the "Proposed amendments to the law to create exceptions to specifically protect the health of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest, were voted down."

HOW COULD THAT HAPPEN.

[uniform_motion]

This is awful.

[Mithrandir]

This is indeed, extremely distressing.

[amy]

yesterday I saw a picture of a pro-choice protest and one sign they were waving had a coat hanger taped to it, and then "NO CHOICE."

;_;

[darkon]

In other news, capitalists in South Dakota prepare to perform abortions and sell drugs to aid in preventing fertilization.

[TeleportSandwich]

Welcome to Amerikkka

[mst3kjunkie]

In other slightly related news, South Dakota has only one Planned Parenthood that can perform abotions.

[darkon]

In other slightly related news, South Dakota has only one Planned Parenthood that can perform abotions.

And they got people from Minnesota to perform the abortions. According to the article.

[Gundampilotspaz]

This is indeed awful... for the twenty people who live in South Dakota.

[amy]

And they got people from Minnesota to perform the abortions. According to the article.

You see how amazing Minnesota is

[Satan]

Yet more proof that South Dakota is an uninhabitable hellhole

[David]

South Dakota is an uninhabitable hellhole

It almost makes you wonder if they do it on purpose.

And why.

[uniform_motion]

This is indeed awful... for the twenty people who live in South Dakota.

I understand this is a joke, but it is a meaningless one.

An injustice in one part of America effects the rest.

To say that more states won't follow SD is irrational.

[James_xeno]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060223/ts_nm/...HBhBHNlYwM5NjQ-

Note the "Proposed amendments to the law to create exceptions to specifically protect the health of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest, were voted down."

HOW COULD THAT HAPPEN.

Not that I agree with this bill or anything but the AP/Yahoo "forgot" to tell this part of the story.

The measure, which passed the state Senate 23 to 12, makes it a felony for doctors to perform any abortion, except to save the life of a pregnant woman.

link

Health = / = life in the abortion debate remember.

That said. This is nothing more then a game of politics (I hope) right here... and a really REALLY bad one at that! They even so much as said that they want legal challenges out of this, that's why they went so far...

I, like most others, are all for more restrictions but not something like this or in this way. Most of the pro-life and anti-abortion people I know and see on other boards/sites aren't too happy about this either.

[Lanz]

I don't like the idea of abortions but I'm enough of a realist to understand in our world their currently a necessary evil.

although the idea of striking down the option to abort to protect the mother's health is, IMO, hypocritical, especially in the cases of it costing the mother's life.

[Poophy]

I understand this is a joke, but it is a meaningless one.

An injustice in one part of America effects the rest.

To say that more states won't follow SD is irrational.

State legislatures in Ohio, Indiana, Georgia, Tennessee and Kentucky also have introduced similar measures this year, but South Dakota's legislative calendar means its law is likely to be enacted first.

… :glare:

[darkon]

On NPR this morning they were mentioning how whenever similar mesaures look to be passed public opinion indicates it is relatively in favor of abortion, at least in the case of dying mother, rape, or incest.

[Poophy]

I don’t get it, when did we develop the need to force our will on each other. Why do people find it necessary to say that just because they don’t wont to do something that no one can do it, I have hear that kind logic before, that is the logic of a 6 year old. Whining when there friends wont to do something that they don’t want to do, so they try to force the group into doing what only they wont to do.

There isn’t any thing really wrong with abortion, because there isn’t really any victim. If someone was murdered you could say that the victims were the person that was murdered and the people that cared about that person. In the case of aborting there are none. The fetus can hardly be considered a victim because abortions are currently performed before it can develop a sense of self-awarness. And the family obviously isn’t a victim, because they are the ones making the decision to about the child.

[darkon]

But think about the fetus in nine months. It IS a person because it will be.

That same logic can be used to describe eggs, and I like to eat eggs.

[uniform_motion]

"An embyro has no rights. Rights do not pertain to a potential, only to an actual being. A child cannot acquire rights until it is born. The living take precedence over the not-yet living (or the unborn)"

"One method of destroying a concept is by diluting its meaning. Observe that by ascribing rights to the unborn, i.e., the nonliving, the anti-abortionists obliterate the rights of the living: the right of young people to set the course of their own lives."

"A man who takes it upon himself to prescribe how others should dispose of their own lives - and who seeks to condemn them by law, i.e., by force, to the drudgery of an unchosen, lifelong servitude (which, more often than not, is beyond their economic means or capacity) - such a man has no right to pose as a defender of rights. A man with so little concern or respect for the rights of the individual, cannot and will not be a champion of freedom or of capitalism. (For a full discussion of the issue of birth control, see my article "Of Living Death.")"

- Ayn Rand

(NOTE: I never TRULY agree with her, I just think she was crazy intelligent.)

But think about the fetus in nine months. It IS a person because it will be.

That same logic can be used to describe eggs, and I like to eat eggs.

That's not the "logic" a majority of the Science community accepts, sir.

(It may soon be human life but it is not yet a person.) <- Generally

At least that's what I've seen and read by most Science reports...

Then that's where the Ayn Rand quotes get really detailed.

However, I probably fall more on your side probably... eh...

.

[Ceraziefish]

I don’t get it, when did we develop the need to force our will on each other. Why do people find it necessary to say that just because they don’t wont to do something that no one can do it, I have hear that kind logic before, that is the logic of a 6 year old. Whining when there friends wont to do something that they don’t want to do, so they try to force the group into doing what only they wont to do.

There isn’t any thing really wrong with abortion, because there isn’t really any victim. If someone was murdered you could say that the victims were the person that was murdered and the people that cared about that person. In the case of aborting there are none. The fetus can hardly be considered a victim because abortions are currently performed before it can develop a sense of self-awarness. And the family obviously isn’t a victim, because they are the ones making the decision to about the child.

Yes, politicians are very immature.

Look at war. When two kids in a playground fight, we punish them, and we stop bullying wherever we see it.. When the U.S. fucks around with smaller third world countries, and then later starts wars with them, this is normal politics?

[uniform_motion]

Yes, politicians are very immature.

Look at war. When two kids in a playground fight, we punish them, and we stop bullying wherever we see it.. When the U.S. fucks around with smaller third world countries, and then later starts wars with them, this is normal politics?

Have you ever heard of the Terror Management Theory...?

It's really quite interesting and the studies behind blew me away...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory

It sounds obvious and confusing on there, but there was this movie...

Oh yeah, the "Flight from Death: Quest for Immortality" and it rocked.

It’s a documentary about a bunch of college professors testing that theory.

It basically shows how Bush got a majority to follow him. (The World’s Nanny)

[James_xeno]

I don’t get it, when did we develop the need to force our will on each other. Why do people find it necessary to say that just because they don’t wont to do something that no one can do it, I have hear that kind logic before, that is the logic of a 6 year old. Whining when there friends wont to do something that they don’t want to do, so they try to force the group into doing what only they wont to do.

I agree with you to a point, about the nature of humans. But to use that in this case would be missing the whole point, by failing to understan or comprehend the view/argument of the other side. Not good logic for this debate.

There isn’t any thing really wrong with abortion, because there isn’t really any victim. If someone was murdered you could say that the victims were the person that was murdered and the people that cared about that person.

*See last line ^*

In the case of aborting there are none. The fetus can hardly be considered a victim because abortions are currently performed before it can develop a sense of self-awarness. And the family obviously isn’t a victim, because they are the ones making the decision to about the child.

That's one point of view, but you have to remember that it is only that.. A personal view. In reality, the issue of "self-awarness" or whether it ought to even be taken into account is still a topic of great debate. It also depends greatly on the age of the unborn child (or fetus).

It's not clear-cut like you make it out to be.

[uniform_motion]

If Christians were actually Christians "Thou Shalt Not Kill" would reign supreme over ANY war.

[darkon]

I believe the correct wording in most versions of the bible is "Thou Shalt Not Murder", which changes the idea.

King James reads "thou shalt not kill" which is more or less the official Bible of English speaking peoples.