This blog printed on 100% recycled electrons.
- An initiated measure will take the pressure off the South Dakota Legislature to waste time on the futile pursuit of abortion legislation. Our legislators can thus concentrate on the real bread and butter issues of education, health care, economic development, and tax reform, issues where practical legislation can make a real difference in the daily lives of every single South Dakotan.
- A retread abortion ban will drive voter turnout among liberal (in the classical sense of the word: supporting liberty) voters. The HUH crowd is dwindling and desperate: they know they got beat hard last time and are desperate not to be swept aside off their precious soapboxes. Momentum is on the side of the Campaign for Healthy Families and others who recognize South Dakota wants common sense and practical cooperation, not the shrill moralizing of the HUH-sters. Another ballot measure will motivate South Dakotans who have had enough to turn out in big numbers at the polls next November to put a stake through the ban and the radical right's effort to use South Dakota for its theocratic machinations. (And those voters just might lean Dem, helping put together a Dem majority in Pierre!)
RIP Quincy Jones
-
Probably one of the greatest music producers EVER! I have to tell you, I
have been beside myself, I get it, he was old, but everything you listened
to deca...
15 hours ago
Why do you think this will be defeated as easily as the last one? The last one had no exceptions basically, and the mantra of the Vote No crowd at that time was just that, no ecxeptions. Many people said they would have voted for it had it contained exceptions. Well, this time there are exceptions. And if "health of the mother" is included with that wording, the bill won't be worth much anyway because any reason could be construed as "health" and a suitable reason for abortion on demand just like we have now.
ReplyDeleteI think you just might be surprised at what the results would be.
I don't like the gov't inserting itself in private affairs either, but it started all this when it inserted itself with Roe v Wade. And if you believe that a baby before birth is actually a living being, which I do, then how can you support abortion on demand?
"this time there are exceptions"
ReplyDelete--really?! Nonnie, do you have the scoop?! If you've seen the text, send me a copy! Post now, break the story!
Abortion on demand vs every woman's sex life subject to thorough government investigation and permanent classification of women as second-class citizens -- is that the choice you want to put before the voters?
Any form of another anti-abortion bill, even with carefully-worded exceptions, will likely fail. The majority of people didn't simply vote against restricting ALL abortions, they voted against government intervention and personal choice. I still feel "education" not "legislation" will continue to reduce the number of legal abortions performed each year in South Dakota. The legislature can refine an abortion bill a thousand times, but it won't pass and it has very little to do with abortion. In this state it is a freedom to choose issue, and maybe a little Big Brother concern, like you referred to in your response. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, so if you loosen the law with exceptions, you'll gain some voters and lose other hard-line voters who adamantly oppose abortion for any reason. The result? A similar split at the polls. Why waste that money on advertising when we could spend more educating the public so they can make informed decisions.
ReplyDeleteThe government should keep their nose out other people's personal decisions. The reason the government got involved in Roe v Wade is because abortion was illegal at one time. I don't know if it can even be said that the actual government was involved. I think it went before the Supreme Court. I'm not sure about that it happened an awful long time ago. Yes, I am in favor of abortion on demand. I grew up in the forties and fifties and overheard horror stories about what the women that wanted abortions went through. Until delivery the there is no baby. The fetus is basically a parasite feeding off the woman.
ReplyDeleteFoxgrandma, I have seen ultrasounds of my grandson before he was born. He was NOT a parasite feeding off his mother. That is one of the most disgusting statements I have read regarding abortion.
ReplyDeleteLast I checked the Supreme Court is part of the govt, and yes, they inserted themselves in the abortion issue with Roe v Wade.
If you can prove to me that a pre-born baby who can move, suck, feel pain, hear, etc is not a living human, I'll continue to believe that abortion is wrong. I'll concede to the exceptions of rape, incest, life of the mother, but you will not convince me that it is not destroying an actual human life.
And I do not believe it will be so easily defeated either if brought up again as a ballot issue. I remember the comments from the last time, and most had to do with no exceptions, especially spouted loud and long by PP.
So Cory,
ReplyDeleteYou're running abortion threads again? How can you do that when you haven't finished defining and defending your moral position yet.
https://www2.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=15329279&postID=5204520591414256817
Nonnie I have seen ultra sounds of all four of my grandchildren and of other people's fetuses. To me they look nothing like a baby. Pictures that I have seen of fetuses look nothing like a baby until quite late in the pregnancy. At the stage that most abortions are performed it isn't a human being. It still isn't anybody's business why or when a woman would choose to have an abortion. Until you have walked a mile in their shoes, don't judge. I don't consider it a life until it can live outside the mother and takes it's first breath. I have heard of scientific studies that say the fetus doesn't feel pain until quit late in the pregnancy. Fine if you want to raise a cluster of cells be my guest. At the stage that most abortions are performed that is what the fetus is.
ReplyDelete