desertvixen (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
desertvixen) wrote2006-02-10 07:28 pm
desertvixen) wrote2006-02-10 07:28 pm
We're Never Moving To South Dakota....
Thanks to ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
riverheart for the link to the longer article.
http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2006/02/10/news/latest_news/d375a5f99c8cba1786257111004d7606.txt
Abortion ban easily clears House
02/10/2006 08:06:06 AM
PIERRE, S.D. (AP) -- One brave legislator who voted against freight-train legislation that would ban nearly all abortions in South Dakota said what others were undoubtedly thinking: Vote no and risk political wrath at the polls.
Rep. Burt Elliott, a Democrat from Aberdeen, uttered the remark Thursday during tense debate of the legislation, which passed the House 47-22, unscathed by several attempts to temper the measure.
"How you vote on this is going to be used in campaign fodder against you," Elliott remarked, drawing a rebuke from Rep. Larry Rhoden, a Union Center Republican rancher who leads the House GOP.
*
"I'm offended that anybody on this floor would accuse us of being political on this issue," Rhoden said. "We're debating this based on our own personal beliefs."
Elliott, a teacher, said he opposes abortion but could not vote for HB1215 because the House refused to provide an exemption for victims of rape and incest.
"I don't believe in abortion by choice," he said, voice choking. "I don't believe in abortion as a method of birth control. But I sure as H.E. double hockey sticks believe in something for victims of rape."
By rebuffing amendments Thursday that would have carved out an exception from the abortion ban for rape victims, the Legislature will victimize those women twice, Elliott said.
Abortion, even in cases of rape, is wrong, countered Rep. Keri Weems, R-Sioux Falls, who describes herself as a stay-at-home mother.
"Taking the child's life doesn't take away the rape," she said. "We can't take away the life of the child because the father has committed a horrible crime."
There is one loophole in the bill, which is designed solely as a test case that supporters hope will cause the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion: Doctors cannot be prosecuted for doing lifesaving abortions on women who otherwise would die.
The penalty for doing illegal abortions, however, would be a maximum of five years in prison.
Filled with abortion foes, the Legislature is likely to pass the bill. The measure next faces a hearing in the state Senate on a date yet to be set.
Rep. Roger Hunt, R-Brandon, did not apologize for offering the measure. He has long wanted to ban abortions.
The bill is the result of new information gathered last year by an abortion task force, he said. The group concluded that life begins at conception, and abortion is harmful to women, he said.
Science and medicine have taken great leaps in the last three decades, and the Supreme Court may decide the time finally has come to fully review and then reverse its 1973 ruling, said Hunt, a lawyer.
"We now know about DNA. We now know about the fact that that child has a DNA, a set of genes that is separate from the mother's. It is not just some tissue in the mother. It basically has it's own identity," Hunt said.
Abortion claims 800 lives each year in South Dakota, said Rep. Elizabeth Kraus, R-Rapid City, a former medical technologist. HB1215 can be the legal vehicle that stops abortion, she said in support of the measure.
"The state cannot continue to protect the abortion practice, for the right and duty to preserve life cannot coexist with the right to destroy it," Kraus said.
Opponents said the bill would cost taxpayers a bundle in legal fees, pointing out that the state has lost several times in court on bills that went overboard with abortion restrictions.
"I voted for all of those bills back in the 1990s, and we did go to court and we did lose and we spent hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars," said Rep. Pat Haley, D-Huron, who is a writer.
Rep. R. Shawn Tornow, a Republican lawyer from Sioux Falls, scoffed at the claim that the state would be stuck with high legal fees. The attorney general has people on staff who would handle the case, Tornow said.
"It's not too much to ask our attorney general to do his job and to stand up and defend our law."
Hunt said a private benefactor has promised to donate $1 million to help finance the effort.
If the bill also is passed by the Senate and signed by Gov. Mike Rounds, it is likely opponents would quickly get a court order to stop it from becoming law on July 1, Hunt said. But he said that would be the beginning of the legal effort that could result in the Supreme Court accepting the case.
Legislatures in several states are considering similar measures, Hunt added.
Another lawyer, Rep. Sean O'Brien, R-Brookings, said he could not support HB1215 because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that states may restrict access to abortions when necessary to preserve the health or save the lives of women.
"This bill is unconstitutional unless we put in that amendment," O'Brien said of a failed attempt to add an exclusion for serious health problems.
Acknowledging the issue tugs at hearts and consciences, Rhoden compared the quest to end abortion to the fight over slavery more than a century ago.
"At one time, slavery was constitutional -- until somebody stood up and challenged that," he said.
I am at a loss for words, but I'm scared.
DV
riverheart for the link to the longer article.http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2006/02/10/news/latest_news/d375a5f99c8cba1786257111004d7606.txt
Abortion ban easily clears House
02/10/2006 08:06:06 AM
PIERRE, S.D. (AP) -- One brave legislator who voted against freight-train legislation that would ban nearly all abortions in South Dakota said what others were undoubtedly thinking: Vote no and risk political wrath at the polls.
Rep. Burt Elliott, a Democrat from Aberdeen, uttered the remark Thursday during tense debate of the legislation, which passed the House 47-22, unscathed by several attempts to temper the measure.
"How you vote on this is going to be used in campaign fodder against you," Elliott remarked, drawing a rebuke from Rep. Larry Rhoden, a Union Center Republican rancher who leads the House GOP.
*
"I'm offended that anybody on this floor would accuse us of being political on this issue," Rhoden said. "We're debating this based on our own personal beliefs."
Elliott, a teacher, said he opposes abortion but could not vote for HB1215 because the House refused to provide an exemption for victims of rape and incest.
"I don't believe in abortion by choice," he said, voice choking. "I don't believe in abortion as a method of birth control. But I sure as H.E. double hockey sticks believe in something for victims of rape."
By rebuffing amendments Thursday that would have carved out an exception from the abortion ban for rape victims, the Legislature will victimize those women twice, Elliott said.
Abortion, even in cases of rape, is wrong, countered Rep. Keri Weems, R-Sioux Falls, who describes herself as a stay-at-home mother.
"Taking the child's life doesn't take away the rape," she said. "We can't take away the life of the child because the father has committed a horrible crime."
There is one loophole in the bill, which is designed solely as a test case that supporters hope will cause the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion: Doctors cannot be prosecuted for doing lifesaving abortions on women who otherwise would die.
The penalty for doing illegal abortions, however, would be a maximum of five years in prison.
Filled with abortion foes, the Legislature is likely to pass the bill. The measure next faces a hearing in the state Senate on a date yet to be set.
Rep. Roger Hunt, R-Brandon, did not apologize for offering the measure. He has long wanted to ban abortions.
The bill is the result of new information gathered last year by an abortion task force, he said. The group concluded that life begins at conception, and abortion is harmful to women, he said.
Science and medicine have taken great leaps in the last three decades, and the Supreme Court may decide the time finally has come to fully review and then reverse its 1973 ruling, said Hunt, a lawyer.
"We now know about DNA. We now know about the fact that that child has a DNA, a set of genes that is separate from the mother's. It is not just some tissue in the mother. It basically has it's own identity," Hunt said.
Abortion claims 800 lives each year in South Dakota, said Rep. Elizabeth Kraus, R-Rapid City, a former medical technologist. HB1215 can be the legal vehicle that stops abortion, she said in support of the measure.
"The state cannot continue to protect the abortion practice, for the right and duty to preserve life cannot coexist with the right to destroy it," Kraus said.
Opponents said the bill would cost taxpayers a bundle in legal fees, pointing out that the state has lost several times in court on bills that went overboard with abortion restrictions.
"I voted for all of those bills back in the 1990s, and we did go to court and we did lose and we spent hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars," said Rep. Pat Haley, D-Huron, who is a writer.
Rep. R. Shawn Tornow, a Republican lawyer from Sioux Falls, scoffed at the claim that the state would be stuck with high legal fees. The attorney general has people on staff who would handle the case, Tornow said.
"It's not too much to ask our attorney general to do his job and to stand up and defend our law."
Hunt said a private benefactor has promised to donate $1 million to help finance the effort.
If the bill also is passed by the Senate and signed by Gov. Mike Rounds, it is likely opponents would quickly get a court order to stop it from becoming law on July 1, Hunt said. But he said that would be the beginning of the legal effort that could result in the Supreme Court accepting the case.
Legislatures in several states are considering similar measures, Hunt added.
Another lawyer, Rep. Sean O'Brien, R-Brookings, said he could not support HB1215 because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that states may restrict access to abortions when necessary to preserve the health or save the lives of women.
"This bill is unconstitutional unless we put in that amendment," O'Brien said of a failed attempt to add an exclusion for serious health problems.
Acknowledging the issue tugs at hearts and consciences, Rhoden compared the quest to end abortion to the fight over slavery more than a century ago.
"At one time, slavery was constitutional -- until somebody stood up and challenged that," he said.
I am at a loss for words, but I'm scared.
DV
Cover me...
Women should not be forced into gestation.
I am also tired of men trying to tell women what is good for us and good for our health.
Women just need to make contacts, and they will remain safe
Just thought I would try to shed a little but of hope on a bleak article.
no subject
no subject
I admit I don't know enough about this as I should. I do know that even with out legal restrictions on abortion, in smaller states it can be almost impossible to get one because the only abortion providers are located in one city. Iowa was like that when I lived there, and that was ten years ago.