Right To Life Hour of Reflection


I just spent the last hour and a half at the Right to Life hour of reflection. I've got some video, some photos, etcetera that I'll be posting. But the big thing I wanted to note is that I had it confirmed with some conviction that an abortion ban is in the pipeline, and will appear this session.

Watch for it to have exceptions for rape, incest and the health of the mother, and expect it to be sponsored by Rep. Howie.

I'm going to try to get my hands on an early copy and if I can, I'll post it for you to review.

Comments

Bonnie said…
Right to life? Please. Why is the state so concerned with the not-yet-born; while failing to protect one half of the population?
http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070122/NEWS03/70122034

The rate of men with a Scott Peterson mindset, who opt for murder instead of a divorce, is ever increasing yet seldomed reported in scope.

This includes national stats of men murdering women, and themselves
http://www.vpc.org/studies/amroul2006.pdf

So deal with what is at hand, before invading a uterus.

More details at www.FamilyLawCourts.com/domestic.html
which includes California, where 80% of murdered women are murdered at the hands of their "intimate partner."
http://www.cwlc.org/files/docs/MurderAtHome_FULL_REPORT.pdf

along with a mention that various "anger management" programs don't work - except for the directors who pay themselves grant funds.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/10/13/MNGPF8VQE160.DTL

How is it so many women are killed (Including the wife of the former Police Chief from Tea), without widespread attention?

Because misogyny in publishing has existed for decades.
http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2005/12/02/66440

And more bad news; it's getting worse.

As such www.FamilyLawCourts.com recommends boycotting Memphis' Cumberland House Publishers for recently inking a deal with Stephen Baskerville for his skewed view, entitled "Taken Into Custody" a book about poor abused men. Baskerville's website lists skewed stats.
www.Stephenbaskerville.net

(In this regard the title, "Taken for a Ride" seems more appropriate for the public who should avoid spending their hard earned dollars on this kind of claptrap which will benefit Baskerville and no one else.)

But Cumberland House Publishing decided Baskerville has the right idea. Yes, it's men who are abused.

For a list of mostly men parents killing their children, or the children of their girlfriends, see
www.FamilyLawCourts.com/kids.html

Although misogyny is also in law school and law firms,
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1163066717588

Enough is enough. Cumberland House Publishers has sunk to a new low to make a huge profit. Not that Cumberland is Concerned with Facts.

Their website www.Cumberlandhouse.com already has disclaimers out from other publications.

But that's not the point. The point is to sell books no matter what the facts are.

Please support the boycott of Cumberland House Press. Do not BUY books from Cumberland Press, and help send Baskerville's book to the Remainder pile in Record time.

Again, there is NO credibilty here until one deals with what is at hand. No utero invasion until one addresses the murder rate.
Anonymous said…
Baloney, Bonnie.
And...it will be VERY interesting to see how many legislative "no" votes switch to "yes" even though their excuse the first time was lack of exceptions. We'll see if they were being honest, or not.
jeez bonnie, how do you really feel?
Anonymous said…
Like you said, pp - Protect from do-gooders. That includes people like Howie who want to make decisions for women in crisis.
PP said…
Bonnie is posting again? I must have turned off the goofy JAIL-4-Judges advocate filter.
Anonymous said…
*sigh*

Why do we have to go through this nonsense again? The abortion debate fueled petty bickering and mean-spiritedness all last year. I was hoping for a break.
VJ said…
Yes! Yes! Yes!

Our prayers have been answered!

It may take a long time, but good always overcomes evil!
Anonymous said…
Awww...It's Brock, our virgin senator!
Anonymous said…
Brock save us from ourself
Anonymous said…
You know Brock may have burned some bridges in some peoples eyes, BUT, Brock is really a nice guy and you should get to know him!
Just becasue you don't believe in someones every opinion doesn't mean they are not a good person!

Heck, lets face it we don't always agree with each other and sometimes in the end we change our own minds and that means we didn't agree with our selfs.

As for some men being abused. Yes there are abused men just as there are abused women. Men for the most part do NOT report it. They think it is not the man-thing to do!

Family violence is ugly and yes sometimes it gets out of hand, way out of hand. It is wrong and those in those relationships have to find the power to remove themselves and not go back no matter what! It seems in most of the cases that i have read about death occuring there is a history of repaeated violence and the prep promises not to once again and the victim beloieves them. Yes, there are other cases but we should to lum sum them. I will stop now.
Anonymous said…
sorry for the mis-spellings.
Bob Newland said…
Lots of morons are nice guys.
Anonymous said…
And Bob is the best example of that, isn't he?
VJ said…
"The sanctity of life is written in the life of all men and women. And so I think, go forth with confidence that a cause rooted in human dignity and appealing to the best instincts of our citizens cannot fail." President Bush
Anonymous said…
"It may take a long time, but good always overcomes evil!"

VJ, you are one step away from strapping explosives to your body and blowing up a bus, cafe or the argus leader. Do you realize (if you are real and not just a Dem plant for my amusement) that your rhetoric is one step away from the advocation of violence against the infidel?

Funny thing is VJ, you may not be a plant and may be someone in charge of setting the party platform in SD for the GOP.
Anonymous said…
Speaking of that, why not follow the lead of Kansas? Where is the origin of species bill? Aren't we breaking another of His commandments by allowing evolution to be taught in school?
Anonymous said…
I hope all the legies who will vote for the new abortion ban will also support protecting chidren as they grow older by requring them to sit in booster seats (see next article on the blog).

After all, if we're about protecting life, why stop when the child is out of the womb?

As sad as it is - not all parents are good, responsbile people who put the health and safety of their children first.
VJ said…
7:41 AM

I am a REAL REPUBLICAN! A real CHRISTIAN Republican!

I said "It may take a long time, but good always overcomes evil!" I also quoted President Bush: "The sanctity of life is written in the life of all men and women.”

You reply "your rhetoric is one step away from the advocation of violence against the infidel?"

We speak out and say “the murdering of babies must stop today”! The Democrats and Liberals just don’t care! If you want to talk about “advocation of violence”, you better talk to your friends!

The vast majority of Christians do not support the Democrats! The vast majority of churches and their ministers do not support the Democrats!

The Democrats just don’t get it!

Yes, good always overcomes evil, so there is still hope the Democrats will see the light some day!
Anonymous said…
Christians don't support the Democrats? Meaning, of course, that Christians are Republicans? Yeah, I'm sure Jesus would have ordered the Iraq war, would have done nothing to stop the genocide in Darfur, would have cut taxes on the rich while cutting programs for the poor and would have sat idle while a whole city (New Orleans) drowned. All very Christian of you!
VJ said…
You better start listening to the news a little more. Every religious group is "Standing Up" for the Republican Party and their "Moral Values" agenda! I haven't heard of any religious group standing up for the anti-family Democrats!

Don't you know that just about every church in South Dakota danced with joy when Daschle was defeated! They may have not used names, but everyone that attended church services knew darn well which political party represented Christian Values, and it wasn't the Democrats!

From Focus on The Family: “If church people understand the issues, and become motivated to act on what they know, they will turn this country around. The stouthearted stand for life in South Dakota convinced me of that. Yes, our side lost, but, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, this was not the end, nor was it the beginning of the end; it was, rather, the end of the beginning. We will prevail eventually. To God be the Glory!”

I don’t think you will find “Focus on the Family” supporting any Democrats and there is a darn good reason why!

We are here and you will be hearing from us everyday! Get used to it! We will turn this country around! To God be the Glory!
Anonymous said…
It all depends on what the language of the law says. If it's as poorly written throughout as HB1215 was, it should be challenged aggressively. It would also be good if the legislature had real research this time instead of cherry picking the facts and refusing to listen to the whole story.
Anonymous said…
keep posting vj please!!! you are my comical release.
Anonymous said…
8:24 AM-

Democrats have been in power for a little less than a month now... what have they done for Darfur, and what has every one else done who thinks they need to trumpet that cause? What have Democrats done to help try and rebuild New Orleans? And please tell me, what the heck do they want to do for Iraq?? Since it's their responsiblity now to try and lead, I'd sure like to hear a plan rather than just saying the President is wrong...
Anonymous said…
Well, according to VJ, the churches are so engrossed with Republican politics that they should probably be taxed!
Anonymous said…
I say Amen to 8:24! As to VJ, it's amazing that all of the religious organizations would be dancing for joy when Daschle was defeated, did they all forget all of the good that he had done for our state? Basing their opinion of Dashchle on one issue, the issue of abortion, shows the simple mindedness of the "religious people".
If you religious freaks want to ban abortions so bad, you better start doing something to change society. This isn't the 50's anymore, the majority of our teenagers are having the "s word" and not using protection. We need to start from the beginning and attempt to reform our morals and values before we attempt to "fix" the outcome of the lack of morals and values.
I for one believe that abortion should remain legal and I believe that many legislators will vote as they had previously done so.
Anonymous said…
12:17:

This isn't about religion. This is about science and reason. Science tells me that conception creates life and because of that the unborn are humans lives.

Reason tells me that when one wants to cause an act to undo that life it is harmful to both the child and the mother.

This is not about "regligious freaks" although I understand your need to make ad hominem attacks given the sparsity of your ability to make an intelligent argument.

If you support abortion say so and stand up for it instead of calling names and ruining your credibility.
Anonymous said…
It won't make it out of State Affairs. Member have tons of political cover just to say "let's let the dust settle after the recent election" and not debate the merits this year.

After the GOP hit last year, pragmatic politics will rule in the caucus, not ideology.
lexrex said…
the message from the last election wasn't "no ban." it was "ban with exceptions." the legislature should pass the ban and move on, already.

it shouldn't require much debate or testimony. we've seen and heard it all the past 3 years. enough said. just do it.
Anonymous said…
lexrex and others are you aware of any polling numbers? The message was that an overwhelming majority of the voters were against 1215. Yes for Life said there were exceptions. So are you really sure that the message was ban with exceptions.
I think the message was that our legislature is out of touch. The bill passed overwhelming. All who voted said this represents the view of a majority of South Dakotans. They were wrong.
Minnehaha County Republicans didn't get the message at they have elected Dick Kelley as party chair.
lexrex said…
if you look at polling, 3:58, a large number of those who voted against 1215 said they'd vote for a ban with exceptions, more than enough to pass it.
Anonymous said…
Yea great. So women get laws slapped on them from a bloated gas bag who has never had sex with anyone other than himself. The post elections stats showed that many of these legislators who voted for the last ban were horribly out of touch with the voters.

If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. Stay out of other people's medical decisions. This is nothing more than morality law meant to punish women.
Anonymous said…
Yea great. So women get laws slapped on them from a bloated gas bag who has never had sex with anyone other than himself. Tell Brock to get a life. The post elections stats showed that many of these legislators who voted for the last ban were horribly out of touch with the voters.

If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. Stay out of other people's medical decisions. This is nothing more than morality law meant to punish women.
Anonymous said…
Bonnie said, "So deal with what is at hand, before invading a uterus."

Nearly half of those pre-born children are women.

I support victim of crimes programs but you make it difficult for me to do so as long as you disguise them as abortion clinics.
------------------

10:10 pm said, "Why do we have to go through this nonsense again?"

It is sad that you are tired of hearing that pre-born lives are at stake and reasonable people want them saved.
------------------

10:06 am said,It all depends on what the language of the law says. If it's as poorly written throughout as HB1215 was, it should be challenged aggressively."

If your idea of "poorly written" means it will safe pre-born lives then I'll take it.
Anonymous said…
Anon 3:58

Did you not look at the KELO/Argus polling numbers during the campaign? According to their own poll the ban passes by around 75% if the bill contains more clearly defined rape/incest clauses.

planned parenthodd and naral brought in their out of state people and had the media on their side there was nothing for rape and incest victims and many people bought into it. The MSM going to have to find another lie this time around. I'm just curious on what that will be.
nonnie said…
I agree a bill including rape/incest exceptions would pass. That's exactly what many, many voters said last time around. PP and NARAL and ?Healthy" Families spouted lack of exceptions so often that they should have lost their voices! If this bill would have exceptions, believe me it would pass. At least it would force PP et al to support this bill or admit they lied the last time around. Actually it might be kinda fun to see Kate Looby or Jan Nicolay worm their way out of that one.
Anonymous said…
How can Leslee Unruh support such a bill. Dead child bad, live child good. Duck, Duck, Goose.
Anonymous said…
You'll never get to find out if a bill containing exceptions would or would not pass. They'll take it directly to the courts, who will declare it to be unconstitutional, because they are obligated to do so. Then it will go to the Sup Ct, who will also, in a 5-4 decision, declare it to be unconstitutional. Thereby wasting a great deal of time and an even greater amount of state resources.

If you think that the Sup Ct will change by then, you might be right. But with the new Dem-controlled Senate, you can kiss your chances of getting an expressly pro-life judge in there. So it's an incredible long shot to think that the Sup Ct will overturn Roe anytime soon.

Too bad, losers.
Anonymous said…
11:10-

Yeah, that might happen...
But it also may not happen. You are also forgetting that their are two new judges on the Supreme Court bench, who have really never been asked to rule on the abortion issue while on the court... and current trends point to the fact that those two new judges may vote pro-life. So please, don't automatically just assume that the court will go one way or another. Their is really no constitutional basis for the "right to abortion"... it is merely an "interpretation" of the Constitution that the court at that time decided upon
Anonymous said…
I took those two new judges into account when I predicted the 5-4 decision. I put both of them in the dissent, with Scalia and Thomas. There's a solid 5 who will surely vote to uphold Roe.

Yeah, you can hope for one of the 5 to retire, but like I said, good luck getting a pro-lifer confirmed by the Dem Senate.

And even better, good luck getting the next Pres, who will almost certainly be a Dem, to appoint a pro-lifer.

In short, you're screwed for another 20 years or so. Tough break. I'll see you in 2030, when SD *might* have a better chance of successfully outlawing abortion.
Anonymous said…
2:24-

Ok, I see your point. You could put the Chief Justice and Alito in the dissent, but their's just a little thing called the swing vote... meaning that the certain justice who holds that vote could go either way, so by no means is it a solid 5 who might vote to uphold abortion or any case related to it. The swing vote Justice got their name for exactly that, being willing and able to examine the facts of the case and make a judgement on those rather than simply voting on a party line.

Oh, and on the next President being a Dem... gimme a break. Who are they gonna run? Senators Clinton and Obama are only popular enough in the Northeast and amongst their constituents. The Democrats really don't have a solid candidate yet to run as President, one who can truly be popular across the country, and especially in the West and Midwest. So in those great old immortal words "...it ain't over till it's over".

So, in short... I'll see ya next year. This issue isn't going to die anytime soon.
Anonymous said…
11:30 ... the decision has been upheld dozens of times. JusticeRoberts himself considers it settled law and said so in his hearings. That's pretty Constitutional if you ask me. The SCOTUS has been doing the job the Constitution stipulates that they should do.

Now, if you don't like the Supreme Court, and think their decisions carry no constitutional weight, THAT's unconstitutional, don't you think?
Anonymous said…
9:19-

Hardly. One of the greatest things about this Constitution is that it stipulates the fact that if you disagree with the government, or in this case, a decision by the Supreme Court, then by all means disagree. It's two great little things called freedom and liberty... just like I'm sure you probably disagree with President Bush, or have disagreed with some part of the government in your life.

Yes, abortion has been upheld in some way, shape or form in front of the Supreme Court, but that doesn't necessarily make it right, or constitutional for that matter.
Anonymous said…
5:23

Oh, so you're talking about dissent?

And civil disobedience.

Got it.

I thought that's what liberals and anarchists do.

Are you one of those?

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: After the television commercial salvo fired at them, Vote Yes For Life Fires back.

Heidepreim: Republicans are the party of hate

The Day in politics - October 24th