FINALLY!!! Rapists can Procreate in S. Dakota

February 24th, 2006 5:57 pm
S. Dakota lawmakers OK ban on most abortion

Law, expected to take effect in July, intended to spark Roe v. Wade fight

Associated Press

PIERRE, S.D. - The Legislature on Friday approved a ban on nearly all abortions in South Dakota, setting up a direct legal assault on Roe v. Wade.

Republican Gov. Mike Rounds said he was inclined to sign the bill, which would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless it was necessary to save the woman’s life. The measure would make no exception in cases of rape or incest.

Many opponents and supporters of abortion rights believe the U.S. Supreme Court is more likely to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion now that Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito are on the bench.

Planned Parenthood, which operates the only abortion clinic in South Dakota, has pledged to sue over the measure, which would become law July 1. The clinic performs about 800 abortions a year.

The Planned Parenthood Federation of America has said the ban is the most sweeping restriction on abortion passed by any state in more than a decade.

The House passed the bill 50-18 on Friday. The Senate approved the measure 23-12 earlier this week.

Penalties for doctors
Under the measure, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion.

The governor said he believes it would be better to eliminate abortion in a series of steps, but some abortion opponents want a court challenge that could wipe out abortion in one fell swoop.

“I’ve indicated I’m pro-life and I do believe abortion is wrong, and that we should do everything we can to save lives,” Rounds said. “If this bill accomplishes that, then I am inclined to sign the bill into law.”

During debate on the measure, lawmakers were told that an anonymous donor has pledged to give the state $1 million to defend the abortion ban in court. The Legislature is setting up a special account to accept donations for the legal fight.

“I can tell you first-hand we’ve had people stopping in our office trying to drop off checks to promote the defense of this legislation already,” Rounds said.

Opponents seek exceptions for rape, incest
Opponents of the bill argued that abortion should at least be allowed in cases involving rape, incest and a threat to a women’s health.

If a woman who is raped becomes pregnant, the rapist would have the same rights to the child as the mother, said Krista Heeren-Graber, executive director of the South Dakota Network Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault.

“The idea the rapist could be in the child’s life ... makes the woman very, very fearful. Sometimes they need to have choice,” Heeren-Graber said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11546410/

Originally posted by PVS
February 24th, 2006 5:57 pm
S. Dakota lawmakers OK ban on most abortion

Law, expected to take effect in July, intended to spark Roe v. Wade fight

Associated Press

PIERRE, S.D. - The Legislature on Friday approved a ban on nearly all abortions in South Dakota, setting up a direct legal assault on Roe v. Wade.

Republican Gov. Mike Rounds said he was inclined to sign the bill, which would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless it was necessary to save the woman’s life. The measure would make no exception in cases of rape or incest.

Many opponents and supporters of abortion rights believe the U.S. Supreme Court is more likely to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion now that Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito are on the bench.

Planned Parenthood, which operates the only abortion clinic in South Dakota, has pledged to sue over the measure, which would become law July 1. The clinic performs about 800 abortions a year.

The Planned Parenthood Federation of America has said the ban is the most sweeping restriction on abortion passed by any state in more than a decade.

The House passed the bill 50-18 on Friday. The Senate approved the measure 23-12 earlier this week.

Penalties for doctors
Under the measure, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion.

The governor said he believes it would be better to eliminate abortion in a series of steps, but some abortion opponents want a court challenge that could wipe out abortion in one fell swoop.

“I’ve indicated I’m pro-life and I do believe abortion is wrong, and that we should do everything we can to save lives,” Rounds said. “If this bill accomplishes that, then I am inclined to sign the bill into law.”

During debate on the measure, lawmakers were told that an anonymous donor has pledged to give the state $1 million to defend the abortion ban in court. The Legislature is setting up a special account to accept donations for the legal fight.

“I can tell you first-hand we’ve had people stopping in our office trying to drop off checks to promote the defense of this legislation already,” Rounds said.

Opponents seek exceptions for rape, incest
Opponents of the bill argued that abortion should at least be allowed in cases involving rape, incest and a threat to a women’s health.

If a woman who is raped becomes pregnant, the rapist would have the same rights to the child as the mother, said Krista Heeren-Graber, executive director of the South Dakota Network Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault.

“The idea the rapist could be in the child’s life ... makes the woman very, very fearful. Sometimes they need to have choice,” Heeren-Graber said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11546410/

This scares me. I don't agree with it, even if I am against abortion. A rape victim being forced to have a baby, and the rapist would be able to apply for custody of that child, wouldn't he?

Sickening.

Originally posted by PVS
If a woman who is raped becomes pregnant, the rapist would have the same rights to the child as the mother, said Krista Heeren-Graber, executive director of the South Dakota Network Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault.

😕

erm..... My brain hurts... It hurts really hard when it reads stupid...

its gods way apparently

sure eliminates all the pressure and awkwardness of courtship, doesnt it?
well, fine. maybe all the rapists and insestual freaks will move to south dakota. might just be a blessing in disguise.

Amercia is totally ****ed up. Can't the President step in and do something about this? I would have thought he would have the power to do that.

Originally posted by Makedde
Amercia is totally ****ed up. Can't the President step in and do something about this? I would have thought he would have the power to do that.

as if this isnt exactly what he wants?

Originally posted by PVS
its gods way apparently

sure eliminates all the pressure and awkwardness of courtship, doesnt it?
well, fine. maybe all the rapists and insestual freaks will move to south dakota. might just be a blessing in disguise.

That's hilarious. Probably not for the mothers, but it is quite funny.

Reminds me of a Doug Stanhope quote, 'The separation between Church and State is the perineum, and the episiotomy didn't hold.'

Well now dads have rights as well!

then again at least its better then the ambiguous "well I'm all for people having the choice to abort babies, But I'm against killing..." arguments... Shut up and choose a side...

Originally posted by PVS
February 24th, 2006 5:57 pm
S. Dakota lawmakers OK ban on most abortion

Law, expected to take effect in July, intended to spark Roe v. Wade fight

Associated Press

PIERRE, S.D. - The Legislature on Friday approved a ban on nearly all abortions in South Dakota, setting up a direct legal assault on Roe v. Wade.

Republican Gov. Mike Rounds said he was inclined to sign the bill, which would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless it was necessary to save the woman’s life. The measure would make no exception in cases of rape or incest.

Many opponents and supporters of abortion rights believe the U.S. Supreme Court is more likely to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion now that Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito are on the bench.

Planned Parenthood, which operates the only abortion clinic in South Dakota, has pledged to sue over the measure, which would become law July 1. The clinic performs about 800 abortions a year.

The Planned Parenthood Federation of America has said the ban is the most sweeping restriction on abortion passed by any state in more than a decade.

The House passed the bill 50-18 on Friday. The Senate approved the measure 23-12 earlier this week.

Penalties for doctors
Under the measure, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion.

The governor said he believes it would be better to eliminate abortion in a series of steps, but some abortion opponents want a court challenge that could wipe out abortion in one fell swoop.

“I’ve indicated I’m pro-life and I do believe abortion is wrong, and that we should do everything we can to save lives,” Rounds said. “If this bill accomplishes that, then I am inclined to sign the bill into law.”

During debate on the measure, lawmakers were told that an anonymous donor has pledged to give the state $1 million to defend the abortion ban in court. The Legislature is setting up a special account to accept donations for the legal fight.

“I can tell you first-hand we’ve had people stopping in our office trying to drop off checks to promote the defense of this legislation already,” Rounds said.

Opponents seek exceptions for rape, incest
Opponents of the bill argued that abortion should at least be allowed in cases involving rape, incest and a threat to a women’s health.

If a woman who is raped becomes pregnant, the rapist would have the same rights to the child as the mother, said Krista Heeren-Graber, executive director of the South Dakota Network Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault.

“The idea the rapist could be in the child’s life ... makes the woman very, very fearful. Sometimes they need to have choice,” Heeren-Graber said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11546410/

I already posted this in the abortion thread.

Oh, well.

🙂 👆 (except for the rapists right to see the kid, WTF?!?... that part won't stay.)

Originally posted by sithsaber408
I already posted this in the abortion thread.

Oh, well.

🙂 👆

well its not a general abortion debate is it? no
but would you like a cookie anyway?

Originally posted by PVS
well its not a general abortion debate is it? no
but would you like a cookie anyway?

"meesa like cookies" 😄

A victim of rape should be allowed to preform an abortion in the early stage of the embryo. It was violently forced upon her and not to become a desired human being.
Sorry for the 'but it's a life' orientated among you here, but this world is crowded enough already by intended offspring of which to many only amplify the curse humankind brings to this planet. The last thing we need is more humans brought to this world through selfish crimes, just to be raised by desperate and abandoned mothers as they are demanded to take care of a child in a society that does nothing for these involuntary mothers.
They must have the right to escape this burden, especially when they have been the victim of a serious crime already.

Originally posted by Pandemoniac
A victim of rape should be allowed to preform an abortion in the early stage of the embryo. It was violently forced upon her and not to become a desired human being.
Sorry for the 'but it's a life' orientated among you here, but this world is crowded enough already by intended offspring of which to many only amplify the curse humankind brings to this planet. The last thing we need is more humans brought to this world through selfish crimes, just to be raised by desperate and abandoned mothers as they are demanded to take care of a child in a society that does nothing for these involuntary mothers.
They must have the right to escape this burden, especially when they have been the victim of a serious crime already.

I agree somewhat, and anyway, that won't stand.

Not even most Christians I know would vote for that part of it.

It will be amended.

As for over-population,.......

Abortion has already claimed 1/3rd of my generation (18-25), so I don't think we need any more help. 🙁

Originally posted by Makedde
This scares me. I don't agree with it, even if I am against abortion. A rape victim being forced to have a baby, and the rapist would be able to apply for custody of that child, wouldn't he?

Sickening.

Yeah this is a pretty troubling bill. Allowing a rapist to have rights for the child? WTF! Incest, rape and medical complications definitely need to be an exception to this bill.

Originally posted by Pandemoniac
A victim of rape should be allowed to preform an abortion in the early stage of the embryo. It was violently forced upon her and not to become a desired human being.
Sorry for the 'but it's a life' orientated among you here, but this world is crowded enough already by intended offspring of which to many only amplify the curse humankind brings to this planet. The last thing we need is more humans brought to this world through selfish crimes, just to be raised by desperate and abandoned mothers as they are demanded to take care of a child in a society that does nothing for these involuntary mothers.
They must have the right to escape this burden, especially when they have been the victim of a serious crime already.

Yup. Totally agree. Kudos to you. Gee I have so much to offer to this discussion. I'll think of something that hasn't been said, hopefully. 😉

please, lets keep general pro-life/anti-abortion points out of this thread, unless in the context of rape victims being forced to keep their bastard seed.

i just dont want to see a thread merge, since this issue alone is pretty damn heavy imho

Originally posted by meep-meep
Yeah this is a pretty troubling bill. Allowing a rapist to have rights for the child? WTF! Incest, rape and medical complications definitely need to be an exception to this bill.

I wonder that when the rapist goes to prison, can he demand to see his child? Would the woman be forced to bring the child to the prison to see him? Would the rapist be able to force the woman to keep the child, and have a say in his/her upbringing?

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Not even most Christians I know would vote for that part of it.

So you will believe Genesis but you won't follow one of gods cardinal rules??

Thou shall not kill....

I think hes quite blunt on the subject 😉.... If your going to make amendments to his top ten, Why not to half of this book??

Originally posted by Makedde
Would the rapist be able to force the woman to keep the child, and have a say in his/her upbringing?

if the rapist has the rights of any father, then yes, i believe he would have a say, and the power to prevent her from putting the kid up for adoption.