Every sperm is sacred
Feb. 17th, 2006 09:43 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ebonlock*sigh*
S. Dakota House Bans Abortion to Instigate Court Fight:
Lawmakers in South Dakota overwhelmingly approved legislation Thursday that would prohibit almost all abortions in the state. House Bill 1215 passed 47-22, after representatives voted against inserting amendments that would exempt women impregnated as the result of rape or incest. The bill, which now goes to the state Senate, makes an exception if the women’s life is in danger.
Citing controversial conclusions by the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion, the bill states that scientific studies and scientific advances show that life begins at conception, and “each human being is totally unique immediately at fertilization.”
Power to the Blastocyst Americans!
The bill further says that in order “to fully protect the rights, interests, and health of the pregnant mother, the rights, interest, and life of her unborn child, and the mother's fundamental natural intrinsic right to a relationship with her child, abortions in South Dakota should be prohibited.”
Did I miss that Amendment to the Constitution?
"What the public doesn't realize is that the building blocks are already in place to re-criminalize abortion if Roe is overturned," Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights in New York, told the LA Times.
Representative Roger Hunt (R-Brandon), the chief sponsor of the South Dakota bill, said the timing is right for the "Women's Health and Human Life Protection Act," in the wake of the new Supreme Court appointments: conservatives John Roberts and Samuel Alito.
Or perhaps more accurately: "The Women Don't Have the Moral and Intellectual Capacity to Decide for Themselves What's Best for Their Health and Blastocyst Protection Act".
Hunt, who has also sponsored legislation banning same-sex marriages, was one of a strong majority of abortion opponents on the 17-member governor-appointed abortion task force. After the group issued a final report to lawmakers last month, the four pro-choice advocates on the committee – including South Dakota State Director for Planned Parenthood Kate Looby – charged that majority members changed its content and tone without their knowledge or approval.
Why I'm shocked, shocked to find fundamentalists trying to influence, if not hijack such reports. And color me stunned that the anti-choice folks also come down firmly on the side of homophobia...
Looby and the other three dissidents on the abortion task force proposed a package of legislation to promote sex education and access to contraception, but lawmakers are one step ahead of thwarting those efforts. Also passed last week in South Dakota was HB 1194, which prohibits distribution of contraceptives to students on public school property, unless it is done by the parent of the student receiving the contraception. After the overwhelming 51-17 vote, that legislation, too, now moves to the state senate.
South Dakota lawmakers are also considering a joint resolution proposing a constitutional amendment that would preclude "any right relating to abortion." If passed, the issue would go before voters in the next general election.
Meanwhile, a ban similar to that passed by the South Dakota House last week was introduced in Kentucky and has 36 co-sponsors; Indiana also saw the introduction of comparable legislation that would prohibit all abortions unless a women’s life is in danger.
And Pandagon posts a great piece entitled "Terribly Tired of the Abortion Debate" that I really recommend you all take a look at:
That is why I’m tired of this debate that isn’t really a debate. It isn’t a debate because a great deal of those involved aren’t in any position to be arguing it. Men, for example men like Tony Abbott, should not be making, shaping or commenting on policy surrounding abortion. They simply don’t have the qualifications, namely the possession of a uterus. That would eliminate 50% of the people that could participate in this debate that isn’t a debate. And, on the same point you may like to contradict me, you may like to say, ‘but, DQ, you’re a man, why are you weighing in on this debate that isn’t a debate?’ Which raises some serious soul-searching in this blogger and leads him to posit the following caveat - an argument in favor of choice is not an argument in favor of abortion. There is no such thing as a pro-abortion lobbyist. There is no group of evil, hairy-necked sub-humans simply getting pregnant in order to kill unborn babies. Abortion is a tough choice that must be made by an individual. It is an act that can be right or wrong for different people at different times and for different reasons. Simply supporting an individuals right to self determination is not a position on an individual’s actions (therefore not really weighing into the debate that isn‘t a debate), however telling women they are unfit to make that decision is a terrible judgement.
S. Dakota House Bans Abortion to Instigate Court Fight:
Lawmakers in South Dakota overwhelmingly approved legislation Thursday that would prohibit almost all abortions in the state. House Bill 1215 passed 47-22, after representatives voted against inserting amendments that would exempt women impregnated as the result of rape or incest. The bill, which now goes to the state Senate, makes an exception if the women’s life is in danger.
Citing controversial conclusions by the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion, the bill states that scientific studies and scientific advances show that life begins at conception, and “each human being is totally unique immediately at fertilization.”
Power to the Blastocyst Americans!
The bill further says that in order “to fully protect the rights, interests, and health of the pregnant mother, the rights, interest, and life of her unborn child, and the mother's fundamental natural intrinsic right to a relationship with her child, abortions in South Dakota should be prohibited.”
Did I miss that Amendment to the Constitution?
"What the public doesn't realize is that the building blocks are already in place to re-criminalize abortion if Roe is overturned," Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights in New York, told the LA Times.
Representative Roger Hunt (R-Brandon), the chief sponsor of the South Dakota bill, said the timing is right for the "Women's Health and Human Life Protection Act," in the wake of the new Supreme Court appointments: conservatives John Roberts and Samuel Alito.
Or perhaps more accurately: "The Women Don't Have the Moral and Intellectual Capacity to Decide for Themselves What's Best for Their Health and Blastocyst Protection Act".
Hunt, who has also sponsored legislation banning same-sex marriages, was one of a strong majority of abortion opponents on the 17-member governor-appointed abortion task force. After the group issued a final report to lawmakers last month, the four pro-choice advocates on the committee – including South Dakota State Director for Planned Parenthood Kate Looby – charged that majority members changed its content and tone without their knowledge or approval.
Why I'm shocked, shocked to find fundamentalists trying to influence, if not hijack such reports. And color me stunned that the anti-choice folks also come down firmly on the side of homophobia...
Looby and the other three dissidents on the abortion task force proposed a package of legislation to promote sex education and access to contraception, but lawmakers are one step ahead of thwarting those efforts. Also passed last week in South Dakota was HB 1194, which prohibits distribution of contraceptives to students on public school property, unless it is done by the parent of the student receiving the contraception. After the overwhelming 51-17 vote, that legislation, too, now moves to the state senate.
South Dakota lawmakers are also considering a joint resolution proposing a constitutional amendment that would preclude "any right relating to abortion." If passed, the issue would go before voters in the next general election.
Meanwhile, a ban similar to that passed by the South Dakota House last week was introduced in Kentucky and has 36 co-sponsors; Indiana also saw the introduction of comparable legislation that would prohibit all abortions unless a women’s life is in danger.
And Pandagon posts a great piece entitled "Terribly Tired of the Abortion Debate" that I really recommend you all take a look at:
That is why I’m tired of this debate that isn’t really a debate. It isn’t a debate because a great deal of those involved aren’t in any position to be arguing it. Men, for example men like Tony Abbott, should not be making, shaping or commenting on policy surrounding abortion. They simply don’t have the qualifications, namely the possession of a uterus. That would eliminate 50% of the people that could participate in this debate that isn’t a debate. And, on the same point you may like to contradict me, you may like to say, ‘but, DQ, you’re a man, why are you weighing in on this debate that isn’t a debate?’ Which raises some serious soul-searching in this blogger and leads him to posit the following caveat - an argument in favor of choice is not an argument in favor of abortion. There is no such thing as a pro-abortion lobbyist. There is no group of evil, hairy-necked sub-humans simply getting pregnant in order to kill unborn babies. Abortion is a tough choice that must be made by an individual. It is an act that can be right or wrong for different people at different times and for different reasons. Simply supporting an individuals right to self determination is not a position on an individual’s actions (therefore not really weighing into the debate that isn‘t a debate), however telling women they are unfit to make that decision is a terrible judgement.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-02-17 09:32 pm (UTC)And T and D will be joining us for dinner tomorrow night, I'm delighted to report. ^_^