S.D. Mulls Ban On Nearly All Abortions
Bill Would Allow Exceptions For Rape, Incest; Anti-Abortion Activists Hope Law Will Challenge Roe V. Wade
-
(AP / CBS)
-
Interactive Abortion Debate It's one of the most hotly debated political and social issues in America. Review a history of that debate since the historic Roe v. Wade decision.
People who oppose abortion hope the measure becomes the vehicle for a legal challenge to the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, which legalized abortion broadly across the United States except in the last months of pregnancy.
A South Dakota bill passed last year contained an exception only to save the life of a woman. A petition campaign forced that bill onto the ballot and voters rejected it in November by a margin of 56 percent to 44 percent.
Opponents of the legislation have said the issue was settled in the November election and lawmakers should not have revived it.
This year's bill would allow rape victims to get abortions if they report the rapes to police within 50 days. Doctors would have to confirm the report with police and would have to take blood from aborted fetuses and give that information to police for DNA testing.
In the case of incest, a doctor would have to get the woman's consent to report the crime along with the identity of the alleged perpetrator before an abortion could be performed. Blood samples from fetuses would have to be provided to police in incest cases, too.
Abortions could be done only until the 17th week of pregnancy in cases of incest and rape.
One of the 25 sponsors, Republican state Rep. Gordon Howie, said the rape and incest provisions are strict to ensure that women do not say they have been victims in order to obtain abortions.
The bill carries a tougher maximum penalty for illegal abortions than last year's bill — 10 years in prison instead of five.
It would allow abortions to save women's lives and in cases in which their health would be seriously jeopardized by a continued pregnancy. However, a doctor could perform an abortion only if a doctor from another practice concurs that a woman's health is in jeopardy.
In Utah, a state House committee voted 6-2 on Tuesday to ban abortion, setting the stage for a costly legal battle if the bill clears the Legislature and is signed into law. The committee sent the measure to the full House.
Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff said the bill likely is unconstitutional and if it becomes law could be costly to defend against any legal challenges.
In the November election, abortion-rights supporters prevailed in defeating two other state ballot measures — parental-notification requirements in Oregon and California.
In several other states, including Oklahoma and Texas, conservatives are pushing new bills that would outlaw abortion in the event Roe vs. Wade is overturned.
The federal election in November eased abortion-rights groups' concerns about the prospect of the Supreme Court overturning the Roe decision. The newly Democratic-controlled Senate could ensure that any vacancy on the Supreme Court over the next two years would be filled by a supporter of abortion rights.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."





- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 8
- next
See all 143 CommentsI have issues with those laws for exatcly those reasons. It might be a baby at the age of viabilty, but it's not a baby at 6 weeks.
"IF NOT, well, let's just put it out of it's misery and out of Mommy's mind, would you mind throwing this "specimen" away Nurse Ratchet?"
And you can stow that ***, too. Did you miss the previous post when I mentioned my handicapped son? I would never never never impose my will on another woman.
They don't fear what it's doing to "the child." Because it's not a child yet.
And yes, I most certainly can refute what you say. The only thing following me around is my handicapped son.
Oh, I totally agree that people should know what they are for or against. Just like you shouldn't be allowed to peddle dribble as facts.
Nobody thinks abortion is wonderful. Women don%u2019t want an abortion like they want ice cream. They want one like an animal wants to gnaw it%u2019s leg off to escape a trap.
Oh, like you have? You've been allowed to "sit through" procedures and "see the child moving"? What a load of steaming poo.
Posted by legendary240 at 04:52 PM : Feb 01, 2007
Sarge calls me that to identify with me mostly as a fellow vet. Also because some people, esp religious people, can't grasp the idea of a non-organization, so he puts it in terms they'll understand. It's not meant as a statement of membership in anything other then friendship.
Posted by legendary240 at 04:49 PM : Feb 01, 2007
They are not atheists. Can't be. They can call themselves anything they like, but if they are organized into a group then, by definition, they are not atheists. there is no docterine of atiests. No shared set of beliefs. As I said before "we're" not even a we. There is no us.
Posted by legendary240 at 04:41 PM : Feb 01, 2007
Your "mission" is a crock of shi*t. (drumming my fingers....waiting to get struck by lightening...waiting....waiting....waiting....fu*ck it think I'll grab a beer while waiting for god to get around to kicking my as*s......).
Believe in the fairy tale if you choose to, that's your right. it's not your right to make me or my life or my country conform to your beliefs. That's what separation of church and state is all about.
Posted by legendary240 at 04:41 PM : Feb 01, 2007
Jesus Christ was a wise man, but a deluded one. he could not by the son of god because there is no god. Never was. If your god works for you and helps you get through the night, fine. A good bottle of fine wine can do the same thing for me and I don't have to tithe it. However your right to your belief ends where my right to think otherwise begins. You do not have a right to foist your religious beliefs on this country or it's laws. Thank god. ;-)
Posted by legendary240 at 04:36 PM : Feb 01, 2007
Crock of sh*it. If they are "organized" they are not atheists. That's an oxymoron, like Bush and intelligence in the same sentence. Just doesn't make sense.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 8
- next
See all 143 Comments