South Dakota clears the air
Like most people in this country, I am favor making abortions safe and legal while taking every opportunity to create policies that result in their decline. In that light, I am completely opposed to South Dakota's new law banning abortion.
In another light, I appreciate the integrity of the law. It's really the first time since Roe v.Wade that a totally pure abortion law has been passed. They aren't fooling around with chipping away at the issue by passing minor restrictions. They are waging the battle sans hypocrisy. The line has been drawn clearly, for a change.
I believe Roe will weather this challenge. South Dakota's law is too aggressive by half. There is a small percentage of americans who agree with this law as it is. There is a plurality that disagree, even in South Dakota. For that reason alone the law will probably not stand. It may be put to a simple majority vote in South Dakota, where it will probably lose.
Even if it does stand in SD and makes its way to the Supreme Court, I believe Roe will be upheld again. When that happens, perhaps it will lead to a greater understanding and acceptance of the limits of government. Perhaps this could lead to shared strategies between anti-abortion activists and liberal health care, education and economic activists. Maybe we need to have this conversation now, not later.
posted by Chris Dykstra @ 2:50 AM |
| 
9 Comments:
The "conversation" link isn't working...
-O-
I believe that abortion should be safe and available to who ever can pay for one. (Just like any medical practice.)
I would be more likely to support a candidate who believed that, but its a secondary issue for me. Tax and economy is still how I choose how to vote. So as a fairly reliable conservative voter I would have no problem voting yes on a referendum to permit abortion.
Regardless, I'm not sure there will be a referendum, and there is no evidence that a plurality of SD natives disagree, that survey was of CO residents. Even if they do disagree, how many are like me? i.e. Don't feel strongly enough to make it part of the candidate selection process.
I think that the SCOTUS is going decide that its up to people in SD, via thier elected officials, to decide for themselves what they want. Roe will be overturned, not because of any constitutional right being taken away, but rather the seperation of powers weren't enforced in its creation.
Laws should be the laws of the land, not decisions. And while I support a woman's right to choose, I'm not willing to subvert our law making process to achieve that end.
-Censored
South Dakota is basing their new law on this: http://ivotemyvalues.com/pdf/contentmgmt/Task_Force_Report.pdf which is really something else. It's not exactly what you'd describe as "exploring both sides".
I'm not going to approach the idea that abortions should only be safe available to those what can pay for it.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Fixed the link.
I definitely didn't mean that the SD legislature is exploring both sides. I meant that they are very clearly pushing one side, instead of taking little baby steps and pretending that they aren't going after Roe. Their course is more intellecutally honest. They aren't spinning for a change.
This makes it easier to fight.
CD: Oh, by "you'd" I didn't actually mean you. I meant the general "you" as in anyone-who-thinks-this-bill-was-based-on-an-examination-of-both-sides-in-a-balanced-and-nonemotional-manner", which it wasn't. Poor writing on my part. I actually totally agree with you regarding the balls-out vibe of the bill. I imagine there are some pro-lifers who aren't thrilled with South Dakotas approach: if Roe v. Wade DOES weather this challenge, other similar approaches will be completely doomed.
Which is fine by me...I am cautiously (very cautiously) optimistic.
The South Dakota legislature crafted the law to find the marks the new playing field.
If the various polls I've read are to be believed, most people in this country want an end to abortion as on demand contraception but are willing (for now) to allow it in cases of incest, rape or to protect the mothers life.
Karen, plug "pro choice vs. pro life polls" in Google. Most (not all) of these would refute what you're saying. Hell, even in the most recent SurveyUSA poll, there's only a 2% difference in South Dakota.
Post a Comment
<< Home