If the law stands abortion clinics will spring up outside of the borders of the US.
Will points of exits from the US be fitted with quick tests to control if a woman is pregnant when leaving the US? Later to be checked when she returns from Outside? And if she somehow loses the pregnancy...criminal procedures....
Even if the above is just a slightly nightmarish rant. ...Im so glad i dont live in the US....
/Greup
Posted by at March 6, 2006 12:34 PMI am a raging leftist Democrat, a white 57 yo male, active in many ways. With so many important fights out there , I'm tired of fighting abortion wars for women who can't wrap it up for themselves. Tired. So I'm glad the fight has come front and center, and I'm glad it's ugly and in their face. I support abortion rights, and will fight any fight served up front and center, but I REALLY want to fight some other fight.
Posted by Richard W. Crews at March 6, 2006 12:36 PMI'm guessing rape will go up like crazy, as well teen suicide numbers. Women should abandon the state altogether, it's a deathtrap now.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 6, 2006 12:38 PMSo, Richard, you're saying that it's women's fault abortion is still being fought today? 'Cos that's what it sounds like you're saying.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 6, 2006 12:41 PMiamcoyote, funny how it's mostly males that set and oversee the laws pertaining to any women's right to make her own decisions about her body...yet some males complain they are sick and tired of fighting that fight for women (inferring woman should fight that fight for themselves), yet it is men that take that right away....funny that....double standard....
Posted by emal at March 6, 2006 12:55 PMSCOTUS will let a federal appellate court take the fall for outlawing or partially undoing the SD law, by refusing review of the appeal decision. They don't want to face a full-on Roe challenge until one more Repub. robot is on the court.
Unless current SCOTUS precedents, a circuit court of appeal has it easy: SD clearly went over the line. More interesting is the selective punishment against the MD and no punishment for the patient for exactly the same act. The medical community will fight the SD law to the death.
Posted by JimPortlandOR at March 6, 2006 12:55 PMSo, Richard, you're saying that it's women's fault abortion is still being fought today? 'Cos that's what it sounds like you're saying.
That's kinda what I inferred as well. Unfortunately, it seems that most of the people fighting in the government to restrict abortions are, well, white men.
Posted by ann at March 6, 2006 12:55 PMSCOTUS will let a federal appellate court take the fall for outlawing or partially undoing the SD law, by refusing review of the appeal decision. They don't want to face a full-on Roe challenge until one more Repub. robot is on the court.
Under current SCOTUS precedents, a circuit court of appeal has it easy: SD clearly went over the line. More interesting is the selective punishment against the MD and no punishment for the patient for exactly the same act. The medical community will fight the SD law to the death.
Posted by JimPortlandOR at March 6, 2006 12:56 PMI'm sorry for the double comment above.
Posted by JimPortlandOR at March 6, 2006 12:57 PMHere's an interesting article from today's NYTimes:
Scant Drop Seen in Abortion Rate if Parents Are Told
Supporters of the laws say they promote better decision-making and reduce teenage abortions; opponents say they chip away at abortion rights and endanger young lives by exposing them to potentially violent reaction from some parents.
But some workers and doctors at abortion clinics said that the laws had little connection with the real lives of most teenagers, and that they more often saw parents pressing their daughters to have abortions than trying to stop them. And many teenagers say they never considered hiding their pregnancies or abortion plans from their mothers.
If McCain is in favor of the SD law because of states' rights, is he in favor of medical marijuana laws and right to die laws for the same reason?
Posted by sagesource at March 6, 2006 01:04 PMRichard & Iamcoyote: Respectfully, I am fed up with the abortion issue SOLELY because it is settled law. I'm Richard's age, fought this fight and will continue to fight for women's right to choose, but I highly resent REfighting it when there are so many things that need our attention. I'd like to say that if S. Dakota wants its women to wear Burkkas and the women are agreeing to wearing the Burkkas then that's their choice, (sorry for that last sentence but..) but no, being an American isn't that simple. I will fight this fight again and again but it will not overtake my efforts on the rest of today's problems that BushCo has dropped on us. My perspective lense is larger today.
Posted by mainsailset at March 6, 2006 01:08 PMTest
Posted by CG at March 6, 2006 01:20 PMI saw this total a$$hole on the News Hour last week talking about the South Dakota law. I don't know if he was a legislator or what--I think he was. He was asked about cases of rape. He said, well, there could be cases of rape where the mother's life is at stake so she could get an abortion. For example, if a young girl, like 13, was brutally raped (then he went on to describe this in some detail, how she was beaten and sodomized--just hypothetically) and she was a religious girl and a virgin (yes, he really did say that) then this could affect her so badly that it could endanger her life. Huh? Sounds like endangering her mental health to me--something the religious right wants to outlaw as a reason for abortion. Or would her life be in danger because she might commit suicide? I don't get what he was saying but he actually said a religious girl (who decides how religious is religious enough?) who was a virgin (who will know if she really was?) and who will decide if being raped was really traumatic enough for her? Geez I wanted to strangle him. These people are scary. If you're against abortion except if the mother's life is at stake, don't sit there and admit that women who are raped should have the choice and then put these ridiculous conditions on it.
Posted by CG at March 6, 2006 01:26 PMRichard here. Yeah, I probably am saying it's women's fault. They are half the electorate, so it's obvious they are not united. I think of it as a Right, not a law by legislation, but I am an optimist. So it is about legislators, if not legislation.
How many women voters give abortion rights enough priority? I don't want single-issue voters on anything - but the anti-choice side has a lot of fired up single-issue voters.
How many liberal churches mention that abortion is NOT a Biblical subject? Where is the PTA/Girl Scout/YWCA education and awareness programs? Programs about voting/rights/awareness/responsibilty/current events - NOT programs supporting abortion. Programs supporting an awareness of the modern world and what participation is needed. Programs about how life works - or doesn't.
The way I see it, the right to choose is being defended very weakly, and without the population ferver or knowledge behind it. Men and old women fighting for young people's future.
How many 23 -30 year old women voters do you know? I work volunteer phone lines, and the Dem women voters are 60 years old!
Women need to step up and get other women to step up. I'll fight with them. Since this fight weakens efforts towards other fights, I hesitate to fight FOR their cause, when they aren't there.
The way I see it, the right to choose is being defended very weakly, and without the population ferver or knowledge behind it. Men and old women fighting for young people's future.
The apathy you see comes from a group of young women who have grown up knowing that the right to an abortion existed. These are the same young women who wouldn't dare define themselves as feminists, even though they believe women should have the same rights as men. Many, many reasons for this. Feminism has been reviled and denigrated. Women who identify as feminists are disdained as lesbians or men haters. Feminism is stigmatized. Abortion rights are equally stigmatized because these same young women believe that they are too smart to end up with an unwanted pregnancy, but even if they did, they could get an abortion. They have absolutely no understanding of what this country was like pre-Roe. They are complacent. Let them lose the right, see a few friends suffer from illegal and unsafe abortions and you will see a resurgence.
It's the same reason you see little anti-war movement, there's no draft so no one sees how if effects them, but as soon as it does, you can be sure there will be fighting.
It's all cyclical, just like the slowing of the environmental movement after Clinton/Gore went into office. Everyone became complacent and believed that their rights and beliefs were being protected.
Posted by ann at March 6, 2006 10:41 PMWell, all those PRO-LIFE married men in SD better hope that their mistresses don't get pregnant.
Posted by Judith at March 6, 2006 11:52 PMRichard, mainsailset, you know, you're right. I'm sick of fighting for the troops to get body armor, I don't see enough troops fighting for it, so they must not care. Same for African Americans - why should I fight for equal rights when I don't see a whole bunch of them fighting for it. Same for veteran's rights, and the poor, and children's rights! Why the hell aren't they standing up for themselves?? Since I don't see dems standing up, why fight for them? Voting rights? Less than half the people vote in the US, for god's sake. I'm just sick of fighting, so I think I'll just go turn on the tv and wait for the walls to come crashing down. As long as it doesn't affect me, why bother? Sheesh.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 7, 2006 05:33 AMI am sick at heart that we are refighting EVERY progressive advance made by this country in the last seventy years, including (and most especially) abortion rights. I lose energy every day---they are winning.
In other Western capitalist democracies, support for human progress (political, medical, scientific, artistic, moral, environmental) is an irreversible consensus, it isn't still "up for discussion". But not in shitbrain "conservative" BushAmerica, the Land That We Love.
Whatever are they seeking to "return" to? Their true motivation is hatred of people who won't follow moral "rules"---with a natural desire to control them, show them who's "in charge". To force their will upon others.
The perverted desire to oppress and dominate the free will of others, that's "conservatism". They get intense feelings of self worth, and deep satisfaction from, the exercise of authoritarianism over others. To force others to conform to their views of social organization. Ultimately, they are mentally ill in varying degrees.
Finally, while JiminOR is correct that the federal appeals court will be the one handling this SD abomination, their decision will be dependent upon and influenced by what the Supreme Court does with the Federal Partial Birth Abortion ban, a case the Court will hear this Fall, I think.
Posted by euzoius at March 7, 2006 06:17 AMWell, I think we all know what the SCOTUS is going to do. Stem cell research and abortion rights will become wedge issues in November.
Posted by Judith at March 7, 2006 07:06 AMIamcoyote: thanks for making my point for me. There are a so many desperate issues out there that need effort and attention, we've already had an election that the Rep's crystallized down to simply gay marriage and abortion where those were the standards where you were judged moral or not. No, my point was that I will fight again for the right to choose, but I will not let abortion issues suck all the air out of the room and stand by while America itself is aborted.
Posted by mainsailset at March 7, 2006 07:15 AMSo you're tired Richard, well too damn bad. I bet your mother got tired too, carrying you around for nine months. The reason why you, and every other man out there should fight for a women's right to choose, is because you owe us one. All of you, every single one of you. Not one of you are here today without a woman sacrificing herself, her body, her time, her energy, her youth, sometimes her health-but always her taking a gamble with her own life to bring you into the world. Every woman who gives birth faces fear and you need to respect that. And no one, NO ONE has the right to force her to face death, face fear, face pain, forcing her to forge a lifetime connection with a man she may not want and a child she maybe unable to love.
Posted by firefly at March 7, 2006 10:56 AMJesus Firefly, don't you think you are taking what Rich Owens said out of context?
Posted by Fingerstick at March 7, 2006 11:47 AMFirefly, well said.
I also agree with Iamcoyte and Euzoius. Yeah, I am tired of fighting an issue that I thought was settled law. Why do we have to rehash the whole abortion issue? The answer is simple. When the US Supreme Court in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, legalized abortion, these people saw that marker as the beginning of an endless war against women's rights, and they have vowed to never stop until women no longer have that right. Yeah, I'm tired, but what is the alternative? Let them win?
I think Ann's post is right on.
This same battle was fought nearly a century ago by nurse Margaret Saenger whose mother was killed by 17 pregnancies, and Mary Ware Daring whose third child nearly killed her and sent her husband into adultery. The religious fundies they fought even opposed pain killers for labor pains. Imagine caesarians without anesthesia! Women need to talk graphically about the countless horrors like marriage-ruining smelly bladder and bowel tears that require adult diapers! 30-50% of all U.S. moms suffer such incontinence--why do you think so many Repugs cheat and divorce? Moreover, fundies ignore their own coffee, alcohol, tobacco, mercury, radiation, and age-induced miscarriages that, by their own standards, deserve last rites and funeral masses. To drive that hypocrisy home, we should go through their garbage and stage public funerals for the tampons of know-it-all "prolifers." I called one such Catholic biddy and asked about funerals for her "sanitary napkin babies." She exploded and hung up. What's good for the petri dish is good for the tampon. Randall Terry needs to be harrassed about his adultery and his new broodmare's coffee abortions. I suggested years ago to an embryo stem cell research advocate that "prolifers" would rescue petri dishes instead of real people from burning buildings. Saddam should have surrounded Bagdad with fertility clinic petri dishes to avert the Shock and Awe! Dems should introduce "gotcha laws"--like criminalizing fathers, pols, and priests whose imposed childbirths maim or murder mothers. Imagine politicians, pedophile priests, and the wife-dumping adulterer Randall Terry doing life for every woman killed in childbirth??? Imagine adulterous Repug Congressman Don Sherwood doing 5 years because his wife wears Depends diapers because childbirth wrecked her bladder! Viagra should be banned for single men. Married users should have their names published, in case their wives aren't getting any, but the mistresses are. Viagra prescriptions should come with waiting periods and pamphlets with ugly pictures of breast and face cancers caused by pregnancy. Pro-choicers should hire cheater decoys to catch adulterous Repugs on camera. Dems should ban non-procreative ejaculations by anti-choice men and coffee-drinking by their ugly broodmares. Vagina cop Judy Brown of American Life League should be harrassed about her funding by pedophiles, marching orders by Nazi genocider Pope Paul VI who funded the slaughter of 500,000 non-Catholic "sinner" Serb Christians in 1942, and her slut daughter. Dems should ban pain killers for Repug childbirths because that's how "God punished Eve." Women should go on a global birth strike to avoid childbirth bladder and bowel injuries, related cancers, and to thwart pedophile priests. Send "prolifers" to jail for the next woman murdered by childbirth!
Posted by Heil Mary at March 10, 2006 04:40 PM