Abortion bill passes the House, and is on it's way to the Senate

The Argus Leader is reporting tonight that the Abortion Ban, HB 1293, passed the South Dakota House of Representatives, and is now on it's way to the South Dakota Senate on a 45-25 vote.

What are you not hearing in the MSM? A little bird is telling me that there's existing case law out there saying it just might be ok to refer it. (I just didn't go back far enough.)

Stay tuned for more on it as it makes it's way through the senate.

Comments

Haggs said…
Thank God this has little chance of passing in the Senate.

(Note: before anyone blasts me for my opinion, I'd like to say that I'm not "pro-abortion." I just believe there are better ways to stop abortion other than these lame bans.)
VJ said…
Rep. Gordon Howie, R-Rapid City: “The rights that we’re discussing are not ours to give. They’re given by our Creator,”

Howie is a member of "God's Army". Glory to God!
Haggs said…
But when Howie was sworn in, did he place his hand on the Bible saying to uphold the Constitution, or did he place his had on the Constitution saying he would uphold the Bible? It seems like it was the latter, when that's not the job he was elected to do.
Anonymous said…
"“The rights that we’re discussing are not ours to give. They’re given by our Creator,”

That's precisely why you can't be anti-abortion and pro-death penalty without being a total hypocrite.
VJ said…
From Assocated Press: "Legislation introduced in Tennessee would require death certificates for aborted fetuses, which likely would create public records identifying women who have abortions."

What a great idea! We have to get legislation like this passed in South Dakota!
Anonymous said…
vj, get a grip, your losing it.
Anonymous said…
I vote pro-birth

Bruce -
James said…
I thought it was great how one of the legislators spoke from the floor in favor of 1293 and it sounds like something I had heard before. It was the wording from one of the no on 6 ads.

I think it's great how the proponents are making the pro-abortion campaign eat their own words.
nonnie said…
The pro-aborts' arguments are coming back to bite them in this bill!
Anonymous said…
7:18, apparently you haven't read the BIble--" He who sheds innocent blood, my man shall his blood be shed"--giving the government of the people the right to capital punishment.
Anonymous said…
6:00 Nonnie. Not at all. Wait and see. Your boys have made a collosal error in judgement...basically biting their own butts, as well as the hands that feed them. Stay tuned. You'll see.
lexrex said…
haggs, why do you want to stop abortion? is there something wrong with it?
Anonymous said…
lexrex said...
haggs, why do you want to stop abortion? is there something wrong with it?

Yes. Of course.

By definition there is something wrong with it.

abor·tion
noun

1: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as

a: spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage

b: induced expulsion of a human fetus

c: expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy — compare contagious abortion

2: monstrosity

3: arrest of development (as of a part or process) resulting in imperfection; also : a result of such arrest
lexrex said…
1:14, let's let haggs answer the question.
Anonymous said…
And not Merriam-Webster?

Ok lexrex, whatever.
Anonymous said…
Forsooth, methinks lexrex doth oft wax rhetorical.
lexrex said…
wake up 2:45. hel-lo! tryin to make a point, here. i already know all that stuff. just let the man answer the question.

sorry, haggs. you were sayin?
been there said…
Hey haggs, when legislators are sworn in, they don't place their hand on any book. They hold their right hand up in the air. So what's wrong with the Bible anyway? Would you rather they used the koran???
Anonymous said…
lexrex 4:14. Why so prlckly, big fella? A little objectivity never hurt anybody. It's what you should get when you ask a stupid question.

Unless of couse you'd prefer a personal insult.
scimitar said…
Just 4 months ago we saw doctors in lab coats looking us in the eye and telling us that HB 1215 included provisions for rape, incest and health of the woman.

Knowing that, and believing the trustworthy doctors, the electorate voted down HB 1215.

So now here we are again 4 months later with an identical abortion ban that also purports to have the exact same exceptions claimed for HB 1215 - just worded differently.

As LEXREX would say, the record is skipping with these people.
James said…
scimitar,
While you may disagree with last years bill let's compare apples to apples shall we? 1293 is not 1215 and any comparison of it is invalid. With 1293 the pro-abortion groups can no longer use their token catch phrase of "no rape and incest", becuase it literally reads it word for word in the new law. The two laws are not identical. Feel free to look them up and read them for your own sake. 1293 has explicit exceptions that are clearly spelled out right in the law.
lexrex said…
sorry 8:43, but you're not getting it. if haggs says "I just believe there are better ways to stop abortion other than these lame bans." i want to know why he would want to stop abortion. i already know why i want to stop it.

i'm still waiting to hear from haggs. i guess he really doesn't want to stop abortion. just sounds good ... and phony.
Anonymous said…
No, I got it, lr, I think you're the one who didn't get it.

In his very first post, haggs said "I'm not pro-abortion."

That's the only reason he needs to want to stop it.

He doesn't like it.

I didn't see anything phony, contradictory or dishonest at all about what he said.

He said there was a better way to stop it than passing "lame bans" — which I took to mean unconstitutional laws that will never go into effect and will instead inflame and divide people who should be working toward a common cause.

As we've learned from our fearless leader, Mr.W and his buddy Rummy, sometimes a "my way or the highway" position isn't the right one to take if you want to get where you're going.

It sends your friends down the road and leaves you sitting in your unarmored humvee, out of gas.
lexrex said…
unless you are haggs, 3:23, get to steppin. and let haggs answer the question. (sorry to sound harsh. just tryin to be cool.)
Anonymous said…
Well lexrex, while we're waiting for haggs, how do you and and PP square your conviction that we should have less government intrusion in our lives with your support for laws like this that promote more of it?

Are you saying that abortion is murder?

And if so, why do you exempt the women who are complicit in it?

Are you saying that incest is wrong, and that a child conceived in such a union has less right to live than those conceived otherwise?

And are you saying that women who have incest and become pregnant are innocent of their crime, even if they instigated the act, as long as they confess their sin and the name of their partner to their doctor and to the police?

Are you saying that a woman who was forced to have sex with her husband can rid herself of an unwanted child as long as she is willing to send her husband to jail?

Just trying to understand your reasoning here,
and challenge your true comittment to the life and liberty of your fellow Americans.
lexrex said…
2:02, yes abortion is murder, and it is well within the state's police power to prohibit murder.

this bill is not a perfect bill. it's a compromise that i'm willing to accept. a large segment of 1215's "NO" voters said they wanted clear, explicit rape/incest exceptions. this bill gives it to them.
Anonymous said…
So if it's murder, why hold the woman harmless?
And why not charge the doctors accordingly?
Anonymous said…
4:29

Sorry, but I don't have the patience of a Hagg, or a lexrex.

The reason is, that none of you right wing, social conservatives have the courage of your convictions.

You know that if you accuse these women of murder, they will cook your politcal gooses, giblets and all.

And so you won't.

And so they will.

And so it goes.

Amen.

Thus endeth the lecture.

Popular posts from this blog

Why should we be surprised?

That didn't take long