Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
An act of social cruelty: South Dakota bars abortions for victims of rape and incest
Embarking on a deliberate challenge to the historic Roe v. Wade decision by the Supreme Court that legalized abortion throughout the United States, the South Dakota state legislature voted last week to outlaw all abortions except where the life of a pregnant woman was in danger. Governor Mike Rounds, a Republican like a majority of the state lawmakers, said he would sign the bill.
The cruelty of the new law is demonstrated by the refusal of the state senate, in response to appeals from opponents of the bill, to add exceptions for rape and incest. The upper house passed the bill by a vote of 23-12. The state senators debated for only one hour whether to compel victims of rape and incest to have their abuser’s baby.
The right-to-life forces have been emboldened by hopes that the two new Supreme Court justices named by President Bush, Chief Justice John Roberts and Associated Justice Samuel Alito, will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade if a direct challenge is brought before the high court.
The bill is the first direct challenge to abortion rights since the high court reaffirmed the 1973 decision in its 1992 case Planned Parenthood v. Casey. After the retirement last month of Sandra O’Connor, five of the justices who comprised the 6-3 majority in the 1992 decision remain on the court.
The Bush appointments still leave a presumptive 5-4 majority in favor of abortion rights, but spokesmen for one right-to-life group cited the possibility that Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, who is 85 and a supporter of Roe v. Wade, might retire or die before the South Dakota case makes its way through district and appeals courts to the Supreme Court.
The new state law takes effect July 1, but will undoubtedly be challenged in court before then, forestalling any immediate impact. It criminalizes the provision of an abortion by a doctor, with a sentence of as many as five years in prison. A woman receiving an abortion could not be charged.
South Dakota is a rural farming state in the upper Midwest, not a southern “Bible belt” state. There is considerable doubt that the population as a whole supports an absolute prohibition on abortion rights, and the Republican-controlled legislature refused to put the matter to a referendum vote, fearing the ban might be defeated.
More
http://wsws.org/articles/2006/mar2006/abor-m04.shtml
The right-to-life forces have been emboldened by hopes that the two new Supreme Court justices named by President Bush, Chief Justice John Roberts and Associated Justice Samuel Alito, will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade if a direct challenge is brought before the high court.
The bill is the first direct challenge to abortion rights since the high court reaffirmed the 1973 decision in its 1992 case Planned Parenthood v. Casey. After the retirement last month of Sandra O’Connor, five of the justices who comprised the 6-3 majority in the 1992 decision remain on the court.
The Bush appointments still leave a presumptive 5-4 majority in favor of abortion rights, but spokesmen for one right-to-life group cited the possibility that Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, who is 85 and a supporter of Roe v. Wade, might retire or die before the South Dakota case makes its way through district and appeals courts to the Supreme Court.
The new state law takes effect July 1, but will undoubtedly be challenged in court before then, forestalling any immediate impact. It criminalizes the provision of an abortion by a doctor, with a sentence of as many as five years in prison. A woman receiving an abortion could not be charged.
South Dakota is a rural farming state in the upper Midwest, not a southern “Bible belt” state. There is considerable doubt that the population as a whole supports an absolute prohibition on abortion rights, and the Republican-controlled legislature refused to put the matter to a referendum vote, fearing the ban might be defeated.
More
http://wsws.org/articles/2006/mar2006/abor-m04.shtml
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
The social cruelty is murdering innocent children within their mother's wombs.
is that dave belch's mom didn't have him scraped while she had the chance...
As recently as the 80s, there were hundreds of involuntary sterilizations of indian women at the various Lakota/Dakota reservations. The system prevented the tribes from getting their own people through school to become doctors, so they were forced to accept doctors from the BIA, who had apparently come from the eugenics old school. In the least offensive cases, they were clipping women's tubes without permission when they came in with a pregnancy, and in the worst cases they were taking incarcerated women and forcing an operation on them, plus their social work system insisted on giving away babies to white couples from other states. There are a few people in Berkeley who grew up in these adoptions.
Forcing a raped women or a women fucked by daddy or big brother to carry the fetus to term is male violence against women.
If men got pregnant, there would be free abortion clinics on every street corner.
If you are a man against abortion, either keep your fly zipped or get a vasectomy.
If men got pregnant, there would be free abortion clinics on every street corner.
If you are a man against abortion, either keep your fly zipped or get a vasectomy.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$330.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network