Right-Wing ‘Compassion’: Rape, Incest Victims Can Have Abortions If They’re Religious Virgins
Right-Wing ‘Compassion’: Rape, Incest Victims Can Have Abortions If They’re Religious Virgins
The media continues to report that the South Dakota abortion ban contains “no exception for cases of rape or incest.”
But reporters evidently missed the comments of South Dakota State Rep. Roger Hunt (R), the main sponsor of the legislation, who said he carved “a little gray area” into the bill to allow for abortions in cases of rape or incest. TIME reports:
In other words, a woman presenting herself to an emergency room immediately after a rape, Hunt says, would be able to use emergency contraception; the trick is that she has to do within the first few days after the assault, before any test can determine whether she was pregnant in the first place. The lawmakers concluded that it’s OK for a rape victim to have an abortion, so long as she doesn’t know for certain that she’s doing it.
Additionally, as Digby pointed out, State Rep. Bill Napoli (R) said on PBS Newshour that exceptions can be made for rape or incest under the provision that protects the mother’s life. Napoli outlined one such scenario:
A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life.
Therefore, according to lawmakers in South Dakota, you can have an abortion after rape or incest…but only if you are a virgin, religious, brutally sodomized, and not entirely sure whether the rapist or family member actually impregnated you.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Oh, the “perfect” Christian.
Kind of makes you think that when an evangelical “prays” for you, what they really are doing is informing God of your sins.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:27 amPlease. Republicans (at least the leadership) don’t actually believe this crap, they just use those who are ignorant enough to believe this crap.
And, ignorant though they are, the serious anti-abortion crowd is starting to figure it out.
This is the wedge, people. Use it.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:27 am.
Grand Moff
This is designed to test Roe, nothing more nothing less.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:28 amI saw this when it originally aired on PBS. I understand where they guy is coming from on not wanting abortion, but he went into some crazy detail. It’s almost as if he were projecting his sick sexual fantasies. I mean did he really need to metion sodomy, or go into such specific details. Couldn’t he have just said raped, I kind of assume the other things when rape is metioned.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:32 amSouth Dakota
Who the hell Lives in South Dakota?
Numb Nuts
March 7th, 2006 at 11:34 amI have to ask…
Given this quote from Bill Napoli (R)
and Senator Rick Santorum (R) and his well known penchant for “man-on-dog” action…
What is it with these people and their strange sexual fantasies? If I was asked for an example I might have said something along the lines of “She was raped and…” but they bring all of these extraneous perversions in…
What is wrong with these people? Is it just me who isn’t out their publically discussing “man-on-dog” or “brutal sodomy” or…?
Z.
The Republican Party – We’re not perverted, we just like to discuss perverted sex.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:34 amCheneyKilledNatalieHalloway – Thanks for your comment… It’s more than just this one sicko though… Santorum is another example… Do these people really need to tell US about THEIR fantasies?
Z.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:36 am[Comment deleted by editor]
March 7th, 2006 at 11:37 amThe Sodomized Virgin Exception. What a crock of shit. And notice that the rule is no abortion unless the LIFE of the woman is at risk — not the HEALTH. So apparently a woman has to get to the brink of death before a doctor can legally make a medical decision with his/her patient. Open up the abortion wards folks.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:38 amWhat makes these guys qualified to pass down these laws anyhow? What do they really know? They’re just chauvinistic, bigoted, roght-wing nuts. I wonder how many affairs these nuts have had.
http://www.lcoliberal.blogspot.com
Progressive commentary on the issues that really matter
http://www.sunstateactivist.org
March 7th, 2006 at 11:39 amDoesn’t Santorum have an embalmed fetus on his mantle at his house, or something along those lines? That guy needs some help.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:39 amthe full skinny on this TP post is done on slate.com. It’s here
March 7th, 2006 at 11:39 amBeing a republican I see no sense in abortion we need a larger population to pay taxes and fight in our armies across the world, only makes sense
March 7th, 2006 at 11:41 amIt’s interesting how graphic and detailed Bill Napoli’s (R) description is. What does Napoli know about being “brutally raped, savaged [ ] brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it.” What a strange and twisted human being.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:41 amSick fantasies aside, these people are just plain heartless. There was a case in Louisiana a number of years ago where a woman was having trouble getting an abortion even though the doctors’ agreed that carrying a child had a 40% chance of killing her. The arguement was “that she might survive”. What about cases were the woman is likely to live but the pregnancy could permanently impair her health?
March 7th, 2006 at 11:45 amAs long as the reasons for or against stay some one’s subjective, hypothetical opinions there is no reason to be aginst or for the low.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:47 amwe need to breed the populations ,who cares if they have hoofs instead of feet they make better soldier and could earn extra tax money from being in a freaks circus, Even an unborn baby has the rights to pay taxes and kill foreigners that oppose this countries wishes of world supremacy dominance
March 7th, 2006 at 11:49 amHave to echo the general gist of wondering why these lawmakers spew such perverse scenarios….
March 7th, 2006 at 11:51 amOften the concept a person rails against the most is something unresolved in their own psyche.
Radical right wing religous beliefs have at their core FEAR. They are afraid of a day of reckoning, afraid of going to the hell they have been force fed by the organizers of their fear based faith.
The Boosh administration has used this segment of the population in its own fear based initiatives, they are paralyzed and victim of their self created fears as well. Psychiatrists could have a lot of fun peeling away Dubayai’s psychic onion.
Lets hope they get the chance. Now that would be good, wholesome entertainment!!
The American Taliban is alive and well in Kansas in S Dakota because poiticians with expediant horizons pander to them for obvious reasons .While america is burning spiritually thks to the boy king and his acolytes the politicians fiddle with false issues : gay marriages , gay adoptions , abortions , any hot button ,just to extort money from any religious freak for their next election .
March 7th, 2006 at 11:52 amOnly if the demos , find some unified balls and message we may find redemption and uplifting of the american spirit .
even condoms should be abolished we need more infantry soldiers, i aggree with the catholics on this one …we have to outbreed the Chinese
March 7th, 2006 at 11:52 am#3 and all
This is a Roveian smokescreen! Nothing More!
The abortion bomb must be diffused by dems.
It is THE major emotional issue the rethugs/neo-cons are counting on. (That and gay marriage, gun rights, etc.)
I personally know otherwise hardcore union people who vote republican solely over this issue. Abortion is the great divider.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:53 amOnly if you believe in our god can you get an abortion if you were raped and only if you believe in our god can you support the death penalty. ‘Cause absolution is a wonderful thing. Listn to us not the Bible. After all its old…it was written almost 2000 years ago. It’s just a bunch of papers.
The GOP movers and shakers.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:57 amOff topic, but important: American troops dead in Iraq now 2302.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:04 pmSo according to Hunt, if the woman wasn’t a virgin, she must bear the child no matter what, even if she was raped (and ravaged, and sodomized…..).
But the slut must have asked for it, I mean she wasn’t a virgin anyway, once the penis breaks the hymen it’s open season on her, right?
I think it’s implied that the woman he is talking about is “white” also.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:06 pmEdit, Napoli is the one with the sodomy fetish, not Hunt.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:07 pmIs it really 2006 ? good think we are fighting the religious extremists in Middle East
March 7th, 2006 at 12:08 pmGreat point diet. I wonder why god ‘let’ them get pregnant? Mr.Rounds, you are a narrow minded,self centered ‘hiding under christian, fake. Even my sunday school teacher would slap your face.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:11 pmObviously, conservatives equate “virtue” with “intellectual property.”
In both cases, you have to demonstrate that you have taken aggressive and ongoing measures to protect your copyright/hymen. Otherwise, no protection is implied at-law.
“Virginity” is tough to prove. But smart gals can raise the “sympathy index” by encouraging their rapists to be MORE brutal and sadistic. In fact, I recommend using Rep. Napoli’s exact formulation: “Please, Mr. Rapist, don’t just fuck me — make this as bad as you can possibly make it.”
Obviously, a pocket tape recorder is essential. However, if there is no recording of the attack request and the victim is in a coma, a “Living Rape Will” can be useful. Essentially, a “Living Rape Will” is a notarized document that states “My signature on this document attests that I am a virgin. I am religious. And I have encouraged my rapist to make this as bad as he can possibly make it.”
Photos of your intact hymen (with time/date stamps) and testimonials from guys you’ve refused to bed “because you are saving it for marriage” may also be useful here.
Just trying to help.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:14 pmcheck this out : Wingnut petri-dish
March 7th, 2006 at 12:16 pmhttp://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/06.html#a7413
read the links, and listen to mp3
The lawmakers concluded that it’s OK for a rape victim to have an abortion, so long as she doesn’t know for certain that she’s doing it.
That’s deeply hypocrite and plainly sick. So much talk about when independant life of the fetus begins, and when it becomes a baby, and then they say “doesn’t mater at all, if you don’t know for sure”. Same logic of attacking Iraq. Doesn’t matter if there were WMD, we do first a surgical intervention, and later, maybe, we care about it.
Oh, and btw, the 1938 “Man of the Year” and Time front cover, was Adolph Hitler.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:18 pmKnew this would send the left into a tizzy. I think that’s why they passed it – just to unleash left-wing hatred towards those who value life. You are taking the bait nicely too.
it will never stand in Court, but it will help the GOP expose the rabid left for the vicious babykillers they are.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:18 pmal franken just commented on the s.dakota abortion ban :
March 7th, 2006 at 12:20 pm“THANKS A LOT, NADER VOTERS, THANKS A LOT.”
yep…for this and so much more…
#30 Do you value life? And say, you are for or against the USA bombing innocent civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan?
March 7th, 2006 at 12:21 pmGods sake us republicans must keep the poor down in society, we just fly our kids abroad for an abortion cause we have money, good job its illegal for doctors to perform abortions and not the patients for having an abortion though, jesus can you not see it we need more infantry from poorer societies and they pay taxes too,
March 7th, 2006 at 12:22 pmPunchy,
Excellent Slate article… Thanks.
Skeptic,
My thoughts have always been that the hypothetical cases that should give the “right to lifers” pause for thought are the ones like that…
“Given a situation where a pregnant woman who is a productive member of society has a 100% chance of dying in childbirth if she doesn’t have an abortion, and the child has a 75% chance of dying during the same childbirth, should the woman be allowed an abortion? You have a 75% chance of killing two people if you let the pregnancy go to term, or the option of “killing one person now”. If the woman is allowed to abort this child then the problem can be corrected and she could proceed to have healthy children with no risk to either her or the children.”
Of course it’s a hypothetical worst case scenario… But those make the best test cases. If they believe in the right to life of the child why not that of the mother and the future unborn children? If they believe in the greater good they would allow an abortion in that case, and from there it’s a slippery slope to “medical necessity”.
Z.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:22 pmOh, and btw: Napoli thinks it’s OK to rape and impregnate non-Christians, and Moqtada al-Sadr thinks it’s ok to capture British women as sexual slaves.
Same filth, different “faith.”
March 7th, 2006 at 12:24 pm.
My god, Napoli, is this some sort of sick fantasy of yours? Awful lot of detail isn’t it? Disgusting.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:27 pmMO, you are going to see some backlash when 13 year olds get pregnant under any conditions and are forced to carry the baby to term.
I would expect to see a lot more teenage pregnancies than before the law and if they decide to keep the baby a lot of families with male teenagers will be making child support payments for 18 years.
Wonder if there will be an increased number of prosecutions for statutory rape or incest since it is very easy to determine who the father is and there will be a baby courtesy of the new law.
Wonder if there will be a black market in babies. By that I mean since women will be forced to carry a baby to term, and their intention is not to keep the baby, will they then look for the best money deal with the new baby? Don’t forget, they don’t have to have the baby in SD.
Wonder if women in SD will start carrying around child support contracts, so if they have sex and are not married they will have an insurance policy for the unborn child.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:28 pmWell, let’s see. If hypothetically talking, someone decided to rape those people who are against abortion and has actually kids, and beat the crap out of them, that legislation means that they wouldn’t be allowed to medical treatment, because they were searching being raped, by not being virgin?
March 7th, 2006 at 12:32 pm#30 babykillers HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH, ignorant! just like the post. it will be a cold day in hell if anyone thinks that someone is gonna tell me what to do with my body. and especially from a tired azzzz man. not all men are under this category. just those who think they are going to tell a woman what she can and can not do. well then maybe women should pass a law saying mandatory snippings for men who believe in banning abortions. then the women wouldn’t have to worry. fair? this is how absurd this is. freedom? where is it?
March 7th, 2006 at 12:36 pmafraid to guess what’s next–will women be forced to take pregnancy tests before travelling out of state?
March 7th, 2006 at 12:37 pmTwo words: American Taliban.
This has got to be the most outrageous thing I have ever heard. These old white men have determined that if you are a sodomized religious virgin then it is OK to have an abortion but not otherwise? Give me a break.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:43 pmI wonder if South Dakotan women, will be outraged enough, to reject reproductive slavery, through Government mandated pregnancies, and vote those theocrats out in November.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:44 pmTom, your such a button pressor, you silly guy you.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:44 pmI also think white girls raped by nigras should be an exception. It only makes sense.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:46 pmafraid to guess what’s next–will women be forced to take pregnancy tests before travelling out of state?
Comment by gopher — March 7, 2006 @ 12:37 pm
Yes! How else can the ban be enforced? You will have to register with the government if you are pregnant before you leave the state. Make sure that you come back pregnant or else you better have that baby.
Goddamn Gestapo. F’ing Nazi Germany was not this invasive of your privacy!
March 7th, 2006 at 12:47 pmJust wait till the daughters of evangelicals start pumping out biracial babies. This law will go away with a quickness.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:47 pmwe need to breed the populations ,who cares if they have hoofs from being inbred instead of feet they make better marines and could earn extra tax money from being in a freaks circus, Even an unborn baby has the rights to pay taxes and kill foreigners that oppose this countries wishes of world supremacy dominance
why do you think the Pope dont beleive in condoms
March 7th, 2006 at 12:48 pmConservatives don’t value “life.” They value “control.”
Oh, and did I mention they hate women?
March 7th, 2006 at 12:50 pmonce you get to the top of the ladder and care about money more than anything else in the world we need the poor to make our money worth value, why do you think we keep the poor down all the time , being rich we fly our daughters out the country for abortions , we need these poor drugged up inbred future generations for marines to protect our country and keep the dollar worth sumthin
March 7th, 2006 at 12:51 pmSo let’s see, the last two legislations of the republicans are:
1) Cut federal help to disabled children.
2) Make abortion illegal.
Wow, a very compasionate 1-2 punch to well being of kids.
March 7th, 2006 at 12:53 pmIn other words: the malformed and already addicted to crack nonborn son of a raped junkie has the right to born, but then has the right to go hell. Isn’t true christianity this?
March 7th, 2006 at 12:57 pm#34
Hypothetical cases are a little iffy for arguement purposes. A perfect hypothetical case doesn’t occur in reality. However I like to argue with real instances. There have been 13 year olds who have gotten pregnant. Sometimes rape, sometimes childish folly. In these cases there are a real chance of health problems. Not life threatening neccesarily but still serious. Should you force someone to risk their life for a pregnancy? Would you force someone to be a marrow donor? A kidney donor? If not how does this compare.
Oh by the way, morning after pills aren’t abortion they are contraceptives much like most normal birth control pills and work in the same fashion.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:00 pmthese folks are NOT christian. they don’t even know what it means. they call themselves godly hoping to be forgiven for their nazi ideology. i thought you only repent once? not over and over and over, especially for the same thing. PLEASE.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:04 pmHeres a good article.
“I have done several abortions on women who have regularly picketed my clinics, including a 16 year old schoolgirl who came back to picket the day after her abortion, about three years ago.”
http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html
March 7th, 2006 at 1:04 pmWell, it is definitely possible that the hypothetical religious right chick is already so psychologically messed up that neither a rape, nor an abortion, nor a pregnancy would make her any nuttier.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:05 pmwhere are the woman? they ought to be outraged. back-alley abortios and dumpster babies will be on the rise and out-of-control. now i’m waiting on the concentration camps to start popping up. i know you reichwingers aren’t finished.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:07 pmNext time, let those woman pregnant by moral concerns. Drug discounters do it with the selling of condoms and morning after pills. What’s the problem? Let those hypocrites deal with the product of their hypocrisy.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:07 pm#30 Actually, dems can use this as a ‘party joiner’. See, dems are all together on this issue and this is just showing the mixed messages that repubs are sending. They are disfunctional and are a splintered party. I’m personally glad that this wacky state has decided to act on emotion and not common sense and logic. They have screwed the pooch on this one and they will see what women really want.
Some repubs want exceptions for rape, but no incest; some want incest but no rape; some want rape and incest; some want neither and could care less about a woman’s state of mind or ability to cope with actually birthing their own sister. Some are pro-choice and some repubs only want exceptions only if the mother may/will die; some could give a hoot who dies, as long as it isn’t a fetus.
They sure spend a lot of time on women. Maybe they should actually care about those of us that are here and stop treating us like incubators.
I don’t know how many times we have to go through this and keep repeating history. Abortions will never go away and republicans will never be able to own us any longer. Get over it and start earning your paychecks. This is a moot issue. There will always be good doctors who care about women’s rights and there will always be a car to drive to the smarter states that have better things, like national security, to think about.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:09 pm#30 – all the right buzzwords for the bumbling (reichtwingnutz) constituency:
“Knew this would send the left into a tizzy. unleash left-wing hatred … it will help the GOP expose the rabid left for the vicious babykillers they are.
Comment by Tour De Farce — March 7, 2006 @ 12:18 pm”
Except you forgot to use the required words Communist, socialist, Hillary, Clinton, & murderers. You will have to see your case supervisor and your RNC wages WILL be docked accordingly.
Yea, they put it up as a test cause they think with the 2 new puppets installed by Feurher dumbya, Roe will be overturned. Clue reichtwingnutz – it’s still 5 to 4 in our favor. You need another liberal to die to make it your favor. & yea, it’s gonna be voted unconstitutional.
I was sorry to see that the S. Dakota Democrats voted for it as well. Guess the lord has blinders on in S. Dakota.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:09 pmits either a draught to get marines or inbred not wanted children from low societies as marines to protect our great nation
come on republicans help
March 7th, 2006 at 1:11 pmwhy do you think the pope dont want us to use condoms, so we have a greater army and more unwanted low life to make up for the canonfodder we need so desperately, we dont want our high society kids in the army except for the rank of generals
tells ya the mentality or lack thereof of southdakota people.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:11 pmKindness The S. Dakota Democrats voted for this? I can not believe anyone in their right mind would vote for this. They are all sick. I wrote a nasty letter to the S. Dakota Governor on this. It is totally disgusting. What is happening to this country?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:16 pm#56 Exactly. There will always be abortions, but now some will kill (yes kill you stupid zealots) young girls, just like before. They don’t care about women or fetuses, they just a cause that will distract them from their own self-condemned hell of closet homosexuality and the bad behaviors they think will pale in comparison to KILLING BABIES.
Obvious and pitiful. The one’s who will pay? Those will be 14-23 year old females and doctors who care deeply about their patients over a flawed and ignorant system. I will pay and you will pay in the lives of our sisters, girls, aunts… I suppose that is the proper payoff for the zealots though, a few dead females is worth their feeling of moral superiority. Which, by the way, won’t make them feel any better at all.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:17 pmwell done
March 7th, 2006 at 1:19 pm#60, you must be hitlers child, cuz jesus stands for nothing you spew out your mouth. hypocrites. army, those are the ones that are suffering the most casualties fighting your nazi/zionist war for oil. you know fighting for this great nation, please.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:20 pmYa know, when Supreme Court Justice John Roberts can become pregnant, is when it’s ok for men to make laws banning abortion. Until then, it is none of their damn business what a woman choses to do with her body. I have never had an abortion and don’t know that I could ever go though it, but for those women who have to make that difficult decision, it’s no one’s business but their own. This is a personal private matter that should be up to the woman and her doctor. We are responsible for our actions, and no one else is. God is the ultimate judge, and he will judge us each individually. Not the right-wingers!
March 7th, 2006 at 1:22 pmI don’t mind people not “approving” of abortion and in the US they have the right to speak their mind. What I don’t like, is the fact that they will never step up on the other side of the story. I would love to see some research on how many of these right wing conservatives are adopting children currently? Once abortion is illegal and many of these children are given up, I am sure Santorum and Napoli will be there to adopt three or four children from these rape victims….don’t you think?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:22 pmIf these ignorant baffoons like to hold up pictures of aborted fetuses, I’m going to hold up pictures of dead girls who have had to use abortionists or self abortions because they have no hope and no future as far as they can see. Do these repubs not understand why this law is in place? Too much weed in college and can’t remember? DEAD GIRLS, I remember. The local abortionist, who also happened to be an alterations expert.
These morons like to talk about fetuses being the most vulnerable members of society. Hey dumbass, they aren’t members of society. I suppose we should charge mothers to be with negligent homicide if they have miscarriages, as they obviously not taken care of something so precious.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:25 pm#64 Hey, don’t blame Ratzinger. The antiabortion ones in the south of your country are protestants. We (theoretically) catholics don’t obbey our preachers too much at all. In Spain, we have a broad abortion legislation, and there are not demonstrations against doctors or clinics doing them. And when it was illegal, rich catholic women were continually doing trips to London.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:25 pmNot to worry, the Bush twins would be able to have their abortions. And you know, Bush and Laura did IVF. I wonder where their extra embryos are? I know from experience that there are always either extras or ones that don’t look ‘good enough’ to implant. I’m guessing they DID NOT go to the snowflake program to let strangers raise.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:30 pmI imagine S.D.’s emergency rooms should get ready for an increase of young women coming in claiming rape or incest.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:30 pmbs – what does that stand for? turn on your “b.s. meter” or your “sarcasm button” or whatever…tom the repub is not…
mary poppin – that s.dakota bill was WRITTEN by a democrat…
March 7th, 2006 at 1:31 pmCould everyone write in complete sentences, please? I’m having trouble following the arguements.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:31 pm72b…a democrat WOMAN at that, i should add
March 7th, 2006 at 1:33 pmthe sectors of religion: houses they call baptist, federated, luthern, etc. the founders saw that not everything in the bible stood for them so they cut and paste and create their own. manipulation?????? no 2 people think alike. that tells you something about the so called “free-thinkers” of this nation. the majority of them are sheeples. everyone sees the world differently through ones eyes. that tells you the majority of folks are followers. these folks are at loss with themselves and their lives are out of control that is why they need to control everything—to make themselves feel bigger. if they only knew.
who is the bigger fool, the fool that is doing it or the ones that is letting it happen?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:35 pmkunta kente
what do they make in SD? I want to go out and not buy it!
http://blogdebogs.blogspot.com/2006/03/tuesday-troika-coercion.html
March 7th, 2006 at 1:37 pmHey Katy, where’s your proof? In any case, it DOESN’T matter WHO wrote the South Dakota bill. Get it? This should not be a Democratic or Republicant issue as the right-wingers are making it out to be. This is a women’s healthcare issue, period.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:39 pmC’mon folks. Let’s get real. I’ve seen several posts saying that the rich won’t be able to get abortions now either.
That is so false. Before Roe v Wade, the rich would visit their GYN and the GYN would do a D&C and write it up as a uterine fibroid. That will still happen. Money talks.
It’s the poor that are gonna be hurt by this. Another example; right now S. Dakota only has 1 abortion provider, a Planned Parenthood in the capitol. Do you think wealthy women in the far reaches of the state want to go to the capitol to see a GYN they don’t know? No, they don’t & you can bet your ass that their local GYN’s are doing them in their office for these nice (wealthy) women.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:40 pmwhat kate????
March 7th, 2006 at 1:41 pmThe Goverment owns America.
They take your money away
Now they take Womens Body rights away
If a women wants an abortion whats up with that so long as the unborn child is no more than 21 weeks old
Come on its a women right
and we need something to keep the furnaces alight at hospitals
There not fossil fuel and abortions make cheap non pollutant alternative anergy
March 7th, 2006 at 1:43 pm#31 Katy,
Please don’t blame Nader voters. They have nothing to do with macho boy George stealing the election. Blame Gore for being a weak, try-to-please-everyone candidate. Look at how he blew a big lead in the polls. Blaming Nader for all of this is like blaming Clinton for Bush’s failures. I despise Bushco and everything he does, but regardless I voted for Nader and I’d do it again if the circumstances were the same.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:44 pmTherefore, according to lawmakers in South Dakota, you can have an abortion after rape or incest…but only if you are a virgin, religious, brutally sodomized, and not entirely sure whether the rapist or family member actually impregnated you. – Amanda
smarmy
You’re slipping a little.
Abortion is a choice. The State has no right to control a woman’s body. South Dakota should be forced out of the Union.
Tom the Repulbican is even smarmier.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:46 pmThis is indeed a test of Roe vs. Wade, but the next test will be Griswold vs. Connecticut. We are marching toward a radical fundamentalist government
March 7th, 2006 at 1:47 pmWonder what song Napoli would sing if his wife or married daughter was brutalized in the manner he so graphically describes?
March 7th, 2006 at 1:49 pmKaty, You are wrong this was not written by a Democrat. State Rep Roger Hunt and this Bill Napoli who sponsored this bill.
March 7th, 2006 at 1:57 pm#84 A lullaby for his new grandson, no doubt /Sarcasm off
March 7th, 2006 at 2:07 pm#74–who is the democrat woman? and what was #72 really about? i don’t want to start assuming?
i’m an INDEPENDENT woman, i must add. and that is only kind of woman there should be.
March 7th, 2006 at 2:13 pmSo, it’s OK to take a “morning after pill” after a rape if you’re not sure you’re pregnant, but it’s NOT OK to take a “morning after pill” after consensual sex if you’re not sure you’re pregnant?
That means the difference is based on the perceived moral values of the woman — if she consented to sex, she’s immoral and deserves any unwanted consequences.
What if she’s a rape victim and the Wal-mart pharmacist refuses to sell her the pill she’s been prescribed? She spends a couple days finding a pharmacist who doesn’t feel it’s morally inappropriate (hmm, back to judging morals again) but by then she can take a test to determine pregnancy. Does the rape victim then have to have the child because the pharmacist disagreed with the law’s grey area? Can the pharmacist be charged for violating the law?
March 7th, 2006 at 2:15 pmthis is not really about abortion. even though it is a big issue for women. this is about stacking the court with bushco cronies, think-a-likes so when the lawsuits start coming they will be thrown out the window. and to do away with our liberties. so the nazi/zionists can start ruling america like they have been trying to do since day one.
March 7th, 2006 at 2:20 pmI do not understand why there is no provision for vicims of rape or incest. This reveals an utter lack of compassion or understanding, or even common decency. Only those who will never be on the “receiving end” of an unwanted pregnancy could possibly have thought of this travesty of law. Does anyone remember that man that was photographed with GW, and GW was praising him, as an “ideal” family man, someone to emulate, who then was arrested for sexually abusing his daughters? Why do men only consider their OWN feelings, when trying to abolish a woman’s right to make her own decisions ? Selfish bastiges. Oh- maybe Napoli has read Scooter Libby’s book?
March 7th, 2006 at 2:24 pm#48- You are ABSOLUTELY correct ! And with these fools, “Nothing exceeds like excess !”
March 7th, 2006 at 2:29 pmAND, men are forgetting that if these children are born, they get divorced, they’re going to have to pay child support.
All these people thinking it will never happen to them…
March 7th, 2006 at 2:29 pmBorn at the Crest of the Empire has a great post on the real world implications of this legislation.
http://bornatthecrestoftheempire.blogspot.com/2006/03/more-from-south-dakota.html
Great post. It is info like this we need to get to the people. The media won’t touch the real stuff. I have it on my blog and have passed it on to a few others.
This whole issue is about creating a Christian theocracy, a radical right Christian theocracy. A Christian version of the sharia that the Taliban followed. Women are to be controlled, they are nothing more than chattel.
This whole abortion issue exposes the hypocrisy of the religious right. The want to force poor women to give birth as punishment for having sex. Whether that sex is within marriage or not, whether the child will have a good life or not, the religious want to punish the woman for having sex for pleasure. The thing is that this will not affect the wealthy, because the wealthy will always be able to afford to send their teenage daughter where ever it is legal to have abortions.
The hypocrisy is rampant because the right claims to be for the protection of the life of the fetus, but when it is born they want nothing to do with it. Where is the support for daycare, for head start, for schools and healthcare. They have cut all of that to the bone. They want to make the child suffer as much as the mother. They would rather unwanted, drug addicted babies be born and then left for a life of suffering and then because there is crappy opportunities for them, build more prisons, just so they can say they have the moral high ground. They claim the moral high ground by saying they did such a good thing by protecting the unborn fetus. They lose more than the moral high ground in the treatement of the poor and unhealthy baby after it is born. They lose their soul.
March 7th, 2006 at 2:32 pmSo, it’s OK to take a “morning after pill†after a rape if you’re not sure you’re pregnant, but it’s NOT OK to take a “morning after pill†after consensual sex if you’re not sure you’re pregnant?
I am guessing the number of rapes in SD will dramatically rise.
March 7th, 2006 at 3:05 pmthis law doesn’t come into effect until 1st July and looks set to be overturned by a judge before then. Guess what, when this happens
March 7th, 2006 at 3:34 pmits over to Alito
lydia 77 and bs 85 – “In my opinion, it is the time for the South Dakota Legislature to deal with this issue and protect the lives and rights of unborn children,” said Sen. Julie Bartling, a Democrat who is the bill’s main sponsor. this is just one source:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/23/politics/main1339393.shtml
excuse me “sponsor” not writer…and it could be “julie” is a man…
bs 87 – tom the republican is not a republican…it’s sarcasm…get it?
willy – then thank YOU for helping with this mess…you were warned…
March 7th, 2006 at 3:47 pm#88 … That means the difference is based on the perceived moral values of the woman — if she consented to sex, she’s immoral and deserves any unwanted consequences.
Exactly. That’s why the hard-line anti-abortion fanatics make no exceptions at all. That is the only intellectually consistent view, since aborting a 2-day old fertilized egg is the same as killing a 25-year old woman in the minds of these fetus fanatics.
March 7th, 2006 at 3:49 pmthat s.dakota bill was WRITTEN by a democrat…
Comment by katy — March 7, 2006 @ 1:31 pm
72b…a democrat WOMAN at that, i should add
Comment by katy — March 7, 2006 @ 1:33 pm
This is an absolute falsehood.
The first draft of the bill was written by Leslee Unruh, an anti-abortion activist in Sioux Falls.
From the Sioux City Journal:
Unruh, president and founder of the Alpha Center in Sioux Falls, wrote the first draft of House Bill 1215, which was sponsored by state Rep. Roger Hunt and numerous others.
Rounds signs controversial abortion ban
The bill was later sponsored by Rep. Roger Hunter, a state Republican.
It wasn’t long ago that Fidelis, a Catholic and anti-abortion organisation was praising Unruh and Hunter for their efforts:
Fidelis also acknowledged the courageous leadership of Rep. Roger Hunt, the sponsor of the 2006 legislation, and Leslee Unruh President of the South Dakota based Alpha Center and the Abstinence Clearinghouse. “Representative Hunt and Leslee Unruh deserve enormous praise for their efforts on this bill,” said Burch.
Fidelis Urges South Dakota Governor to Protect Women and Sign Abortion Ban
This is the ultimate spin: Take a Republican-sponsored bill and blame the Democrats for it.
What is it with “conservatives” that they cannot take responsibility for what they do?
March 7th, 2006 at 3:49 pm#93 … This whole abortion issue exposes the hypocrisy of the religious right. The want to force poor women to give birth as punishment for having sex.
You just hit the nail right on the head.
March 7th, 2006 at 3:52 pmThe ban on abortion, is like Prohibition, during the 30’s. Doesn’t matter if it’s legal or not. Many who want one, will get one. The difference being social class. More lower class will die from botched procedures and the upper class will buy the best or go where it’s legal. To not allow incest or rape victims, to have an abortion, unless they meet standards set by a man, is outrageous. Well, I have a standard for such men, it’s called catrastion.
March 7th, 2006 at 4:25 pmIf you don’t mind a whole lotta rudeness, head over to the Rude One’s place and see what he has to say.
March 7th, 2006 at 4:33 pmhttp://rudepundit.blogspot.com/
Cool, you’re going to remove all such men’s cats…
Ummm… I know you meant castration but I couldn’t resist.
My wife and I both agree on abortion, and we would require a certain amount of councilling and try and lower the abortion rate by providing education, access to bith control, and promoting adoption…
However we would both still allow it, and my wife is a Catholic.
Does this mean I have to be castrated now, or is my opinion acceptable?
Z.
March 7th, 2006 at 4:36 pmBoycott South Dakota
As a resident of S.D. who strongly opposed this legislation, I am kindly asking you to boycott S.D. until this is overturned or otherwise eradicated. The tourist attractions will continue to exist untill it’s overturned and our legislators need to understand that their actions have much broader consequences. They need to be bitten in the a** financially by the loss of tax revenue generated from tourist dollars.
So if you are thinking about coming here, please, think again. If you know others coming to vacation, attend the rally, or other functions please encourage them to wait until our backwoods legislators are either voted out of office or overturn their idiotic legislation.
As a resident, I am sickened by this action. These same anti-abortion pundits have also passed legislation to allow private in and out of state donors to contribute to a legal defense fund as this traverses through the courts without so much as an audit trail as to who contributes. Our state will not be sovereign much longer. Our state government has allowed outsiders to influence our state policies and how residents conduct their personal lives.
PLEASE BOYCOTT SOUTH DAKOTA
March 7th, 2006 at 4:55 pmZwack,
March 7th, 2006 at 5:07 pmThanks for the correction. Get really heated up over this, but you’re safe. I agree with your opinion 100%.
Abortion isn’t something taken lightly. Many women face a very difficult and emotional choice when trying to decide. I think it should be a last choice, but still a choice. I agree with education, birth control and counseling first. I just hate, these sanctimonious neanderthals saying I or any woman has to meet their standards.
As far as the cat reference, some men prowl around like alley cats and probably should be catrasted! :)
gregor – see #96 … my bad – i should have said “sponsored” not “written”
March 7th, 2006 at 5:09 pmstill, a woman democrat behind this bill…
given that, i’ll assume she’s not really a democrat… in my opinion…
If the pro life crowd really believes this is murder, why isn’t there a death penalty charge to mothers who ‘murder’ their children? They don’t even charge the mothers, only the doctors. And the doctors aren’t charged with ‘murder’, despite their continuous and rigorous claims that abortion is murder.
Their ‘reason’ isn’t very consistent, is it? Are abortion murders just less heinous to them than regular murders? If they say they value all life equally, then why is it many are willing to murder a baby that’s the product of rape? Is a rape baby less deserving of life somehow?
The abortion crowd is all hyped up on emotion, and they can’t even see how silly and out of context their arguments are. Poor things, they deserve our pity and our forgiveness for their ignorance and arrogance.
March 7th, 2006 at 5:18 pmLisa W,
March 7th, 2006 at 5:18 pmWhat’s the general mood of the people of your state, on this? Does the majority agree with this ban? Did it go out for public hearings, before going back to be voted on? (Or does SD have a different way of handling their legislation?) What a major blow, for PRO-CHOICE. I can’t believe the people of your state, would even want it. I’ll be more than happy to spread the word about boycotting SD. Good luck.
still, a woman democrat behind this bill…
given that, i’ll assume she’s not really a democrat… in my opinion…
Comment by katy — March 7, 2006 @ 5:09 pm
I didn’t mention this before but I don’t think this is a Democrat vs Republican issue. I am sure many Democrats voted in favor of the bill.
The issue is that the religious right has successfully pushed a bill that punishes female sexuality. Napoli’s rape scenario is very telling: Only “good girls” and virgins are deserving of compassion.
March 7th, 2006 at 5:31 pm[...] Think Progress [...]
March 7th, 2006 at 5:39 pmLisa W. I wrote a nasty letter to your Governor. I told him here in Wisconsin we are going to boycott your state and hope you lose money this summer. I am disgusted about this. A man has no right to tell a woman what she can do with her body. This is all about control. Are these Right Wing Religious Republican Nuts going to step up to the plate when a woman can not take care of this baby? I think not.
March 7th, 2006 at 5:41 pm#96 katy, check your comment before you put peoples names behind it. #85 is mary poppin. and tom the republican, bad, i thought that is what you meant but wasn’t sure. just finish the sentence, forget the rest of the sarcasm.
March 7th, 2006 at 6:25 pmto tom the republican, my bad, i’m an independent on the board and don’t know anyone ( the buddy ball system). i don’t read all the comments to know if there is convo. or what. and “know of” the regulars and what they represent. i was just commenting on the post and i apologize.
March 7th, 2006 at 6:29 pmThe man sounds like a juvenile-except I don’t want to offend juveniles.
March 7th, 2006 at 7:32 pmNow I know what G.O.P stands for: the Grand Ole Perverted party.
March 7th, 2006 at 7:34 pmDon’t these religious conservatives just make you want to throw up?
March 7th, 2006 at 11:09 pmThis is life in the Theocracy. Get used to it.
March 7th, 2006 at 11:27 pmIf the pro life crowd really believes this is murder, why isn’t there a death penalty charge to mothers who ‘murder’ their children? They don’t even charge the mothers, only the doctors. And the doctors aren’t charged with ‘murder’, despite their continuous and rigorous claims that abortion is murder.
RightPunch, somebody in Oklahoma (or some other enlightened state) did actually propose the death penalty for abortion doctors.
March 8th, 2006 at 3:31 am#110 bs How dare you call me a Republican. I see you must be new. If you read this thread State Rep. Roger Hunt and Bill Napoli did also sponsor this bill. I am pro-choice and don’t insult me by asking if I am a Republican.
If you would of read my comments in #62 & #109 you would of found out I am disgust that this idiot Governor sign this bill. The women in S. Dakota should be outraged over this bill. They need to vote this man out of office.
I wrote this governor of S. Dakota a nasty letter that we in Wisconsin will boycott his state this summer.
Hopefully the courts will rule that this is unconstitutional.
These Religious Right Wing Republican nuts are trying to take our America over.
We the people have to rise up and take our country back. November cann’t come soon enough. Time to impeach old Bushie.
bs If I want to add sarcasm I will and if you don’t like it don’t read it.
March 8th, 2006 at 8:31 amLET’S SECEDE SOUTH DAKOTA TO IRAN…they have the same women’s rights standards.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:06 pmMary Poppin – thank you for expressing your opinion to Gov. Rounds. But it seems like with so many of our politicians, if we’re not in agreement, they don’t listen. I hope many boycott our state. Although it will affect many of us, our close-minded legislators need to understand that their actions have negative consequences. I hope that they see a direct affect by decreased tax revenues from our tourist industry which has been a major financial source keeping our state fiscally viable.
Nancy L. – there was a ‘task force’ that was very skewed to the right. Pro-life pundits did not deem it necessary to support their opinions with facts and basically refused to listen to those that had the facts available to show that education was the most effective means to decrease abortion. As to how S.D. constituents feel, in general, I’m not sure. We are a red state in which our media is dominated by their perspective. From those I’ve spoken with, they do not agree. I’m very discouraged that ‘we’ have voted these legislators in that pushed this through along with the law to allows anonymous donors to fund legal action to uphold the legislation. Since secrecy is involved here, this money can be potentially used to fund ultra-conservative Republican campaigns thus making us more regressive than what we already are.
It would appear that our state politics are being strongly manipulated by outside forces; the first major indication being the narrow defeat of Tom Daschle. I am very disheartened by the digression of our state. So many problems and yet no one with enough foresight and moxy to lead this state out of the dark ages. I fear not only for the status of our state, but our country.
March 8th, 2006 at 1:35 pmIf the Asshat Bill Napoli makes you see RED, here is something everyone can do:
March 8th, 2006 at 10:15 pmhttp://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php/weblog/bill_napoli_is_spelled_a_s_s_h_a_t
It’s already catching on…and Bill Napoli deserves it!
http://www.blogsnow.com/bnxcqq
[...] And if she was a rape victim who wasnt a virgin? or religious? What if she was only raped but not sodomized? What if she was religious but already married? Read for more idiotic republican quips about who qualifies and about how emergency contraception is permissible if a girl didn’t know she was possibly pregnant before theres enough time to actually get pregnant (ya think I’m kidding about that one?) [TTC Crosspost] [...]
March 9th, 2006 at 1:18 pmEUROPE:
Most European countries have legalized abortion, with limits. A representative sampling:
_ Britain: Available with limits until the 24th week, after that if the pregnancy threatens the women’s life, may cause grave permanent injury to her physical or mental health or if there is a substantial risk that the baby will be seriously handicapped.
_ Germany: Available in the first 12 weeks if the woman is in a “state of distress” and undergoes counseling.
_ Spain: Legalized in 1985, available in cases of rape, fetal deformation or risk to the mother’s mental or physical health.
_ Sweden: Legalized in 1975 and available on demand until the 18th week; after that social authorities must give permission.
March 10th, 2006 at 5:58 am[...] Apparently the SD abortion law actually does carry an exception for rape…If the woman was a religious, virgin. [...]
March 10th, 2006 at 6:06 pmI think South Dakota should be labeled, the “Inquisition State”,
since the oppressive Far Right has stripped away individual freedom.
And as an indigenious free-thinking non-conformist in Montana, I am in rebellion
against these narrow-minded Far-Right fanatics, who have stripped away individual liberty
As part of my rebellion, I refuse to travel through, visit, relocate to, do business, or buy products from South Dakota, or even establish “diplomatic relations” with that state, or any other state that condones such oppression.
In addition, I am flying the rattlesnake/DON’T TREAD ON ME flag and other banners of freedom, in place of the Stars & Stripes, until such oppressive laws have been abolished forever and those who passed such legislation are driven out of office and/or no longer in power.
As a politically neutral indivdual who is not conservative or liberal,
March 15th, 2006 at 11:08 pmI refuse to conform to any oppressive factions and their narrow-minded views or religious dogma.
I refuse to allow these ultra-conservative fanatics thrust this nation back to the Dark Age of the Inquisition or the infamous “Salem Witch-hunts”.
This is 2006 A.D., ladies and gentlemen…Not 1692.
The abortion flap is old news that goes back to the primative 20th Century.
This is the 21st Century.
Let’s focus on keeping jobs here in the states, and keeping our eco-system from
becoming victim to a buncha greedy corporate polluters.
Roger Hunt should, at the very least, have had the decency of keeping his own sexual fantasies within the BDSM subculture and to not expose the rest of us to his private wet dreams. By relating in such detail who he thinks should be allowed to have an abortion, Roger Hunt has throughly exposed himself as the sexist pig and the religious bigot that he is as well.
April 8th, 2006 at 9:34 pmMake that BILL NAPOLI is the sexist pig and the religious bigot with the BDSM fantasy. Geesh, that is what comes when I react with emotions first and foremost; chalk it up to being a mother of a young adult daughter whose human rights are being violated in this country.
April 8th, 2006 at 9:49 pm