South Dakota Abortion Ban?

This would be a huge milestone.  South Dakota Legislature To Consider Abortion Ban.  We know the libs will go apoplectic on this, but that is only to be expected. 

Thanks for the courage SD Legislature.

Error: Unable to create directory wp-content/uploads/2023/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?

About waynem

As a Minnesota based photographer and artist I have been greatly influenced by the Upper Midwest. I focus my skills and energies on portraits, landscapes, cityscapes, architectural and fine art work. My best work comes from images first painted in my mind. I mull over a prospective image for weeks or months, seeing it from different angles and perspectives, then finally deciding what to capture. The result is images that deeply touch people's emotions and powerfully evoke memories and dreams. My images are used commercially by companies and organizations ranging from Financial Services firms, mom and pop Ice Cream shops and The Basilica of St Mary to communicate their shared vision and values. Book and magazine publishers have featured my images on their covers. My photographs also grace and enhance the decor of many fine homes.
This entry was posted in Current Affairs and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

101 Responses to South Dakota Abortion Ban?

  1. DA says:

    While I have no personal axe to grind on the abortion issue, either way, zealots and those who would hypocritically stand in the public square and profess to be speaking for God, and who seek to infringe upon individual rights, and another’s personal relationship with God … those same folks make an easy target for poking sticks at the animals [so-to-speak].
    I am reasonably confident that those who fail to recognize the LOG in their own eyes, and who take it upon themselves to publically speak for God, against God’s other children, whose eyes appear to them, to contains specks, well, those folks are highly likely to find themselves desparately begging for God’s mercy come judgement day.

  2. cwv warrior says:

    Praise God! We will give Him all the glory if this pans out!
    DA, we ARE speaking for God. The judgment is toward the lawmakers/ judges who have taken this country on wayward paths. How can God be pro-death? Do you know Him?

  3. KevinO says:

    Wow u are a self-righteous bunch.
    is God just for the life of the unborn, or does He believe in the sanctity of all life?
    Does He believe in a better life for those who are alive?
    and does He believe in the promise of the life yet to come.
    Pro-death … God has the power over life and death and isn’t taking up your fight for you.
    This is just going to lead to a lot of unwanted children, higher crime and poverty, and all of you saying these unwanted people should pull themselves up by the boot straps and take responsibility for themselves.
    God — I would be a follower of Christ if it weren’t for all of the Christians — to paraphrase Ghandi.

  4. Melody says:

    Don’t know what to say really. People asserting that God wants this or that and legally demanding codification of his desires…Do you think that God is so weak that he needs your help on this? Created the entire universe, sent his only son (aren’t we all his children), and keeps the sun burning bright day and night…you’re a fruit if you think God is watching you and even cares about your pitiful attempts at moralizing. It’s too bad, the christian right apparently wants to cause a revolution, because that is what your asking for by passing laws like this. I wish Jesus had stayed dead…

  5. Wayne says:

    What can I possibly say?

  6. Someone says:

    I find it amazing that so many people claim to speak for the desires of their god. I also find it mightily convenient that their god’s alleged will coincides so perfectly with their own. Feh.

  7. Informed Opinion says:

    As a follower of Christ I find that I am continually becoming aware of my many faults and shortcomings. (That is why I came to Christ in the first place.) I have found that I must surrender my will, my self-interest … mySELF to Him daily. As I conform to God’s will as demonstrated through His son Jesus Christ, I gradually take on God’s will and leave my own behind. This process is called sanctification. It is a mystery but a reality. God’s Word provides clear guidance that He considers life in the womb with the same value as anyone already born.
    Setting theology aside, it seems pretty obvious that a fetus is also a human life and worthy of protection. If we are truly “evolving” as a species, culture and society shouldn’t we hold life more sacred rather than less sacred through the years. Since Roe vs. Wade, we have sacrificed 32.5 million children at the altars of selfishness, free love and convienience. That is a number equal to the current population of Canada. How many great scientists, writers, entertainers, policitians or doctors will we never meet because of this? Is this the way we improve our world? Is is possible we made a mistake on January 22, 1973? I believe so.
    A Genuine Citizen of South Dakota

  8. IceChimara says:

    Specious reasoning! How many criminals and wastrels will we never meet, either? There’s no shortage of people. I’m not advocating abortion as the first method of birth control, but I seriously object to this kind of argument that every new clump of non-sentient cells in the next pope. If we seriously valued human life, we’d not only be evaluating abortion, but we’d evaluate the harm caused by blind reproductionism as well. What would happen if every potential for life was fulfilled? As it -is- we can’t provide sufficiently for all the lives that have already come into the world. Wouldn’t it be more prudent to worry about those humans born already?
    If you would have every child born, if you would say that life is precious, you should be willing to follow up.

  9. C.S. says:

    God is all knowing. He knows the past, present, and future. He is mighty enough to guide us as spiritual beings to the events that mark our lives.
    How can people be arrogant enough to assume that life starts and stops on this physical plane we call earth. Could it be that when someone decides to abort their child, there is a reason behind that decision that supercedes the “selfish” decision of the individual? Could it be that God’s hand is a guide in that decision? Maybe the unborn child wasn’t meant to be brought to full term, but in turn, was meant to be born at a later time. I don’t think anyone has the answers to these questions but God himself. Do you speak for him?
    Legally outlawing abortion is not going to stop the practice but will only drive it underground. The wealthy, who can afford to travel overseas, will continue to obtain abortions when they want to as they have always done pre-Roe v. Wade. In certain latin American countries where abortion is banned outright, there are a higher percentage of abortions carried out than in countries where abortions are legal. This could be due to the social and political atmosphere of the country in terms of whether women’s health care and repoductive health services are readily available. Anyone naive enough to think that the amount of lives saved directly correlates to the amount of lives lost under a legalized abortion system will be in for a rude awakening if Roe v. Wade is ever overturned.

  10. Another Real South Dakotan says:

    I am appalled that my State legislature would believe that religion should be legislated. No one has the almighty Authority to judge a persons action except God himself. Because there are arguments in scripture for and against the life of a fetus as well as a human, it is impossible to derive what the Bible actually wants us to believe on the specific issue. I am a religious person but I also know that if we legislate morality we are going to end up in a theocracy which will escalate us into wars and such with countries that support conflicting religions. I also believe that the United States of America is the land of the free and if this law passes it would prohibit rights granted to American citizens, in other words regress back into the early 1900’s when women hardly had rights. Further more I believe that people who think their duty is to spread the word of God because he told them, to be an ignorant breed of people who use the Bible as a crutch in life and not as a tool to use for the betterment of their person both spiritually as well as bodily. This law is proclaiming that we the people will make decisions for women because we know better, when again there is no one on this green earth who knows better than the rest. I will not judge a person on what they do until I have a vested interest in it myself. No one has the right to come into my life and tell me that I cannot do as I please unless I subjugate my life into the rules. The Unites States must remain free.

  11. Wayne M says:

    Another Real South Dakotan,
    All legislation is a legislation of morality.
    1. Our murder laws are legislating morality
    2. Our burglary laws are legislating morality.
    3. Our traffic laws are legislating morality based on the value of life and property.
    4. Social security is one way to attempt to care for the least of these.
    Please show me were in the Bible it argues for killing a fetus or a baby?
    You need to work on your clear thinking a little.

  12. Another Real South Dakotan says:

    Wayne M
    How many of the 10 commandments are made into law. Adultury?, Swearing (Taking the lords name in vain)?…no, Worshipping idol gods…no, Lying?…no, Honoring your parents?…no, Working on Sunday?…no. The point is that the bible is the source of Christian Morality. Just because there is a protection against murder and such within a society isn’t because it came from the bible. Ancient Rome/Greece/Egypt etc. All had laws against such “bad” things but of course the bible wasn’t written yet. Social issues are also the bain of politics and not religion. You cannot classify all good laws as moral/religious because those laws would have taken place despite religion (again look to historical examples). Further more I can perfectly see your narrow mindedness because of your firm belief in religion. This is not a bad thing but it does make you come across as someone who thinks they can tell someone else what to think as well as criticize them. So in other words I would like to thank you for making true my original point about the conservative religious. Please do not tell anyone to think clearly when you do not understand both sides of the issue. Also make sure you know what you are talking about before you decide to post because you could get caught in a paradox as you have proven that the religious try to think they are the morally correct persons when you have no authority to tell me what I do, know or think. This is exactly what I am talking about when America needs to remain free. Free from the types of people who want to bring the bible into the government.

  13. Wayne M says:

    South Dakota,
    I did not say all of the Bible has been or should be codified into law, I said all laws are a legislation of morality. There is a huge difference.
    Let’s think and communicate clearly now.

  14. stevodevo says:

    Amazing (not really when you think about it) how many people argue so hard for maintaining the status quo. Sounds to me like the only freedom that matters to most of you is the freedom to do want you want. I guess if there’s no way of defining what is right or wrong then hey we’re all free! Sweet!

  15. Kit B. Talich says:

    It scares me that my state is not doing more to keep college graduates in this state, and fighting such useless battles. I highy doubt a million dollars will get this done. My view, stay the F*CK out of my life and worry more about you own kids! Lets work on finding a home for the children that would have been aborted, one example is the ones in the Foster homes. What is it about christians that make them think they have to save everyone everwhere? As far as I can tell they just want more warriors for their holy wars with the Muslims. Hope I made most of you mad, as this bill has done me. Good Day

  16. a.j. says:

    “Please show me were in the Bible it argues for killing a fetus or a baby?”
    1 Samuel 15:3 (KJV)
    “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”
    (That’s a command from god, btw.)

  17. Myra says:

    Unfettered religiosity is a state of mental illness.

  18. NotARighty says:

    One wonders, with the availability of contraceptives, why do we still have so many abortions? I can see abortion due to rape and incest, but otherwise, due to contraceptives, it is uncalled for. Shotgun weddings, which we see so few of these days, but were the unspoken glue that instilled responsibility for both man and women, would not be such a bad thing. Not that it should be legislated, but it would probably make a comeback if abortions were restricted. Would it be so bad if society demanded responsibility?

  19. Adrian Porime says:

    Your abortion ban is a disgrace. America is supposed to be the most advanced country in the world and yet you come with these medieval conceptions. When will you pass a law that authorizes witch hunts? I think a child who is raised without love is worse than a dead child. If you oblige people to raise unwanted children, then congratulations, you’ve just laid the basis for a new generation of serial killers. That’s a genuine American phenomenon too, isn’t it?

  20. anonymous says:

    i believe in god, but my god is kind & compassionate. he would understand my need for an abortion if i were the victim of rape or incest. to force the innocent victim of a serious
    crime to carry a rapist’s child to term is cruel & unusual punishment. and allowing the rapist 50% of the rights to that child is sheer lunacy. why is the law more concerned with protecting the rights of the rapists & sexual predators that it’s victims? (mother & unborn child included). according to the people wanting to pass this law, they must think rapists make a wonderful parents. i would like to ask them what kind of world they’re bringing a child like that into? life is hard enough even when you’re wanted & conceived out of love. if abortion is banned, millions of children are going to end up homeless, abandoned & abused, with their rapist fathers in jail. and the women who were forced to have those children after being victims of rape or incest will have their own lives ruined beyond repair too. it should be a crime to force a woman to carry a rapist’s child to term & then make her share parental rights with a monster. if men were the ones being directly affected by banning abortion in this way, it would never happen in a million years. and that’s the sad, sad truth about the state of this country. woman are becoming 2nd class citizens once
    again. welcome to the 21st century.

  21. Leigh says:

    I support this legislation, and I hope that it is followed by social service programs to benefit the mothers who would have previously turned to abortion. Many of these women feel love for the new lives inside of them, but don’t have the means to properly care for a child. At the same time, they often aren’t even aware of the help that is out there. As a 22 year-old single mother in college, I know what I am talking about. When I was pregnant, I looked abortion straight in the face, as I sat in a clinic. I paid for my abortion and everything. But something inside moved me to leave that clinic, and I have not regretted it for one second in the three years that have passed. I made it; these women can too, they just need some help. Let’s support social programs that won’t make abortion seem like the only hope to a scared, single, pregnant young mother. We have more than enough in this country to go around, and I would more than gladly do everything I can to make a positive mark on this world, and to set an example for my own son.

  22. Wayne M says:

    I find it so interesting that so much tension and fear and may I say hatred is being spewed by those that support the killing of the unborn. Aren’t you guys supposed to be loving and inclusive and open minded? It’s the conservatives that are supposed to be mean. OOOOhhhh, the real truth is coming out.

  23. Wayne M says:

    Not a righty,
    This is the first time I have agreed with you in a long time. Welcome to the right side….lol

  24. Wayne M says:

    Who is talking anything about “Unfettered religiosity?” What the hell is that anyway?
    The real issue is, science has proven beyound a shadow of a doubt that a “fetus” is a little fully human person, viable at as early as 20 weeks, and soon it will be earlier yet. The insane position is to think it is ok to kill that at will.
    In fact, liberalism is a mental disease.

  25. Wayne M says:

    In that nice quote of yours you failed to ask or show why God was ordering the killing of all those people.
    People cause they were wicked and debauched, like the modern day liberals.
    that is not what is going on with abortion today.
    Remember, in scripture contents is always important.

  26. Wayne M says:

    Kit B. Talich,
    A better fix would be reduce the sex outside of marriage so there are fewer unwanted babies. This is a moral issue.
    Also, eliminate nofault divorce laws which would end easy divorce which would also reduce single mother poverty.
    What you people cant see is that all these “unwanted babies” are being cause by poor moral decisions. Change the moral decision making and the problem will be solved.

  27. NotARighty says:

    “I think a child who is raised without love is worse than a dead child”
    No, a dead child is much worse. Get a grip.

  28. anonymous says:

    here’s a question for leigh & wayne. do you think rapists & men who commit incest make good parents? do you think they should have the right to a child which was conceived due to the heinous crime they committed? do you think a woman should be forced to carry & love a child created by the monster who raped them? if you or your children were the victim of such crimes would you torture them by making them continue their pregnancies?

  29. NotARighty says:

    “In fact, liberalism is a mental disease.”
    Oh really? Whoring for blog activity I see. You know you will win converts by denigrating people who have just as much integrity and morality as you think you do. This is what is so troubling about todays conservative Christians — they think “absolute truth” is strictly their own — umm – that is the message of radical Islamic fundamentalism. No thank you.

  30. Another Real South Dakotan says:

    I find the Christian Right (Which is neither Christian nor right) to be the most upset about this issue. Just because you believe in almighty God in the most compassionate way possible (I believe in God however I have to agree God is a temperate being) you think that you are more “moral” and thus better a person than those who have opposing views. I challenge everyone to ask themselves what authority you have over another person. What makes you the “better human being” than say myself or someone who is more open minded about society. If you can tell me that you are better than me and prove it than I will listen. But because all men are created equal and in Gods eyes everyone is equal I find it hard to believe someone can pull that off. The point is everyone can have personal opinions about abortion and responsibility but why do we have to take away the rights of American citizens in the process? Why must we enslave people for misfortunes such as rape or unwanted pregnancy when God will determine their virtue on judgment day and not people who believe they are the right hand of God?

  31. anonymous says:

    hallelujah “another real south dakotan”!!! thank you for being another voice of reason amidst all of this moral chaos.

  32. Sally Smith says:

    I find it so fascinating that “open mindedness” is the criteria for judging everything and truth never coming into the discussion. The scientific truth is, that fetus is a baby and abortion is killing it. 2,000,000 couples are waiting in line to adopt a baby but can not get one. How is killing a baby a good thing?
    Could it be that you have boughten into an emotional lie?

  33. Wayne M says:

    Of course Rapists and men who commit incest would not make good fathers.
    There are several problems with this argument though.
    1. The percentage of these abortions are so incredibly low as to be also insignificant.
    2. Rape as be redefined to be even consentual sex where the woman changes her mind. In our highly sexualize culture this happens a lot. Women do have some level of responsibility for the act in these cases. Why dont we teach our youths and unmarried adults not to have sex. I know what a novel idea. How radical!!! Stop telling this stupid lie that our kids are going to have sex anyway so let them do it and then just have an abortion afterwards.
    3. Just because a woman was raped does not mean she should abort the baby. Two wrongs does not make a right. I know several women that had been raped and became pregnant. I know several because over the years I have been involved with crisis pregnancy centers etc). Any way I know women that have had the baby after being raped and the baby has actually become the best healing tool for the rape. Somethingb beautiful comes of something terrible. It is the concept of redemption.
    4. No you don’t force the women to love these babies, it generally comes naturally but if it does not, there is adoption.
    5. If my daughter were raped and became pregnant, I would indeed indeed encourage her to carry the child to term. Killing the baby would not lesson the pain of the rape. That is a false assumption or even a lie.

  34. Leigh says:

    Hi, I am responding to the person who was asked, “here’s a question for leigh & wayne. do you think rapists & men who commit incest make good parents? do you think they should have the right to a child which was conceived due to the heinous crime they committed? do you think a woman should be forced to carry & love a child created by the monster who raped them? if you or your children were the victim of such crimes would you torture them by making them continue their pregnancies?”…
    Okay, I looked a little bit online… in the case of rape or incest, pregnancy is VERY rare. That being said… I understand this concern, and it is a difficult issue that should be addressed, no less. Personally, given my previous experience of almost having an abortion, I would not have an abortion if I was raped. Some people may find this surprising. Fact is, no matter how I would feel about my child’s father, that would still be MY child too. I love my son I have now, BUT, I cannot stand his father. At all. He left me at 19 years old to raise a child on my own. He has nothing to do with my son, but that only makes me love my son even more, because I know that I am his only chance to grow up to be a good man. Secondly, I absolutely, positively do NOT think that a rapist would make a good father. And I do understand that there apparently are a lack of laws that prevent these monsters from having contact with the children they wrecklessly father. This is wrong, and I can only hope that legislation will be passed to deal with this. On a side note, I don’t realistically see any sane judge granting visitation to a rapist father. If for no other reason than the fact that the child would inherently be endangered while spending time with a rapist. Judges do not want that kind of liability on their own shoulders, so I don’t feel that that these hypothetical visitations would ever happen. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong though. To directly address the issue, I do not think that rape is a valid reason to have an abortion. The woman should be given the option of adoption though. That is my personal view. If I or a daughter of mine were to become raped and pregnant, my view would be no different. I would be even more emotionally devastated if I had an abortion on top of being the victim of a rape. Furthermore, I would love that child just as I love my son.
    I support the ban on abortions, from every angle. (except in cases where an abortion is 100% required to save a mother’s life. But I still don’t think I could have one myself, even then, I would gladly give my own life for the life of my child, born or unborn, in a heartbeat.)
    Another common pro-abortion argument, is that if not given easy access to an abortion, then many women would have illegal abortions. This is similar to the “They’re going to do it anyway, so let’s make it legal.” argument that people use when they believe we should legalize drugs such as cocaine, heroin, etc. Further, I don’t buy it. Yes, I understand that when abortions were illegal, decades ago, women did indeed, perform these, and some becam ill, or even died. BUT… here’s the thing… These women did NOT have the benefit of the many social programs that we have now. And, the child support enforcement program we know today was NOT an option. In addition, it was MUCH more of a public disgrace to be an unwed mother then than it is now. These mothers would have had a DAMN hard time raising their children, or even just going through with the embarrassment of the pregnancy. So, I think that what happened back then is irrelevant to the way that we deal with things today, we have come a long way as a nation in supporting single mothers and their children. I know because I was able to find an abundance of resources when I needed them (and I’m not even including child support, which, by the way, I have NEVER received). Just a couple of points I wanted to make to counter that particular argument.

  35. anonymous says:

    wayne, you should go back in stone ages where you belong. to suggest that rape is sometimes consentual is a pathetic way to try & argue your support on abortion bans. and to say that those women who are victims of rape & incest are “insignificant” is arrogant, cruel & dispicable. and i’m sorry, but a child that comes out of rape isn’t something beautiful to me. just because you think having the baby would lessen the pain of rape, doesn’t make it so for the rest of the world. i truly feel sorry for your daughter if you have one. to think that you would care more about an embryo, than her own life here on earth, is tragic. and believe it when i say, that if i were ever raped & aborted that child, god would forgive me 100% & you don’t have the right to tell me otherwise. some people just shouldn’t be allowed to procreate. rapists & men who commit incest are some of them. i wouldn’t want that kind of evil growing inside of me. and i wouldn’t want a rapist to be the father of my child. the law they’re proposing clearly states that the rapist would have equal rights to the child as the mother. and i wouldn’t trust any judge to protect me from him either. you need to keep your own religious extremist views to yourself & stop trying to force your own opinions down others throats. this is america & you are not god.

  36. Another Real South Dakotan says:

    I think and hope that rape and incest are mindsets that people are against. I know I am. If someone is contending that God wants the fetuses who were the product of hannus crimes and immoralities such as rape or incest to survive, than I want them to think about that life style. It goes something like this: The child is born in a hospital to a mother who is severely emotionally injured. The damage emotionally and psychologically cannot be repaired. This child is a reminder to the mother of the terrible atrocities and damage done to her body. As the child grows up he/she can tell that there is fear, anger, and hate in the mothers eyes. The mother bounces in and out of deep states of depression. There is no love, no compassion, no truth to this relationship. As the child’s life goes on he/she realizes why the mother feels this way. The child becomes depressed. One fateful day the child has had enough of the life that has been lead. The lack of emotion, love, and sense of wantedness has depleted the child’s sense to live. The child commits suicide. Rape and incest are not the only causes of this type livelihood, if you can call it that, but so are the lives of unwanted children. How many people do you wish this sort of event to be taken onto people? God says treat others how you yourself would want to be treated. Could you imagine being the mother or the child? Again put yourself in their shoes. Then tell me that Abortion should not remain legal. Granted the mother would still be left with a whole inside of her that tells her “what if” but the repercussions that result from rape, incest, unwanted pregnancy are drastically worse. Their souls will be evaluated on their judgment day but I believe that God will judge the person reasonable, unlike many of the people who are posting on this blog.

  37. Wayne M says:

    Another Real South Dakotan,
    You sound as if you have never experienced the redemptive cleansing work of the God of the universe. I have. I have seen hideous ugliness turned to pure joy by the power of God.
    So, you may be in a bit of a conundrum. Until you believe it, you will not see it and maybe vice verse. My prayer is that you will be able to see the transforming work and the power of God.

  38. Wayne M says:

    A fine discussion based on the merits of the arguments and the points raised. Well done.

  39. Wayne M says:

    Thank you for your thoughtful and open response.

  40. stevodevo says:

    It’s interesting how lots of people just have their own made up conception of who God really is… like the comment earlier that basically said ‘I can do whatever I want and God will forgive me.’ If that weren’t so tragically wrong I’d almost laugh.

  41. stevodevo says:

    Again – I’m glad you used a little ‘g’ in this sentence:
    “i believe in god, but my god is kind & compassionate. he would understand my need for an abortion if i were the victim of rape or incest” (anonymous)

  42. anonymous says:

    stevodevo, it’s people like you who lack human compassion & understanding, that don’t know the 1st thing about god. i was taught that god is all about love, not hatred & fear as you seem to imply. people like you shouldn’t go around giving religion a bad name. i don’t see anything loving or righteous about preaching intolerance. your beliefs are tragically wrong, not mine. and the fact of the matter is, religion doesn’t belong in politics in the 1st place. you’re free to believe what you want to believe, but not to force your beliefs on others. especially when your beliefs can cause others tremendous harm.

  43. Leigh says:

    I just wanted to comment on the post by “another real south dakotan”. I feel that it is extremely assumptive to say that all raped women who have their children would eventually become depressed and resent their child, who would, in turn, also become depressed. With minimal online research of this subject, you will find two sides to that coin. There ARE women who have their babies that are conceived out of rape, and love them unconditionally. There are even a few men, who I personally feel must be of the highest integrity possible, who will support their partner (the raped woman) in carrying, and even raising, these children. It is VERY possible to love a child when you don’t necessarily have any kind of bond with its father. To say that there must be a bond with the father’s child is to say that adoptive parents cannot possibly love a child as much as if it was conceived within their own loving relationship. I cannot speak definatively for other people, but my personal opinion is that there are women who love their children conceived by rape, who would consider your comments a slap in their face. A lot of the discussion here regarding rape is purely hypothetical. Possible, by a stretch, but still hypothetical, and we should be careful not to confuse a hypothesis with a proven fact.

  44. Wayne M says:

    Just a little fyi for you, it was people of very strong Christian faith that first brought slavery to and end in England and then that same movement came to America to end slavery here. That same type of movement is attempting to bring an end to abortion. A hundred years from now when abortion has ended history will look back at this time and see abortion correct as the scourge that it is to our country.

  45. Jodi From MI says:

    This is absolutely appalling This is plainly and simple individuals FORCING their beliefs on others.
    Government does not have the right to legislate the personal reproductive decisions of ANY person, in the name of God or anyone else. Let us not forget that women have not even had the vote in this “great” country for 100 years. We have had to fight for all of our rights here in America, including the right to divorce and own property. It is not a question of whether women (and men) should be more responsible before conception because that is not for us to judge. If abortion is banned, let us be clear that it will not stop abortions, it will only take us back to the days of back alley abortions and put more womens lives in danger. Will banning abortion create a society that uses more contraception? I doubt it. Will women still get pregnant and have an abortion? Probably. Will she be safe if she does? Probably not.
    My next question is: Who is going to fund all of the births in South Dakota for children born to women who would have otherwise had an abortion? Will forcing people to have children make people better parents? Most women abort because they know that they could not financially support a child, so who is going to support these growing families at a time when America has a marginal, at best, economy? I personally, would never have an abortion, but I am adament that I would want the right to choose for MYSELF and not have my government legislate my body.
    The fact is that our republican senate, house and president have all been heavily funded by the right to life groups and these groups will not rest until they have seen a return on their investment. The separation of church and state in our country has become so blurred that the church has become the state.
    We have set about spreading democracy throughout the world and yet we are restricting the rights of our citizens daily. Soon the women of Afghanistan will have more freedome than the women of the good old U S of A. Maybe I’ll have to go there to have an abortion should I ever need one.
    I am appalled that people in this country think that they have a right to legislate my body, and that a right could be afforded for thirty years and now we decide to rethink it. While we are at it, let’s reimplement the Jim Crowe Laws and bring back Prohibition. We saw how well that worked. We cannot go back in this country, we MUST continue to move forward.
    Individual states do not have the right to legislate my body, nor does my federal government.

  46. Leigh says:

    I agree with the point brought up by Jodi, that many mothers who have an abortion do so because they cannot afford a child.
    BUT… does that woman, who sees only one way out really feel like she has a CHOICE? It seems very ironic to me that the abortion agenda is labeled as “pro-choice”. A choice, by definition means that you have more than one option. Many of these women would jump at the chance of another option, but instead feel helpless and alone, so they resort to abortion. The abortion problem is so complex… you asked who will support these children… that is where we ALL need to come together. We need to help those who need it. That means that we need to support lawmakers and legislation that will respect life, give these women a REAL choice, the choice to keep their child. A lot of women who have abortions wouldn’t even consider an abortion if they had help. Many need financial help… not total support in the great majority of cases, but they DO need some help. Affordable childcare, Education and Employment Assistance, Social programs, these are all needed to at least reduce or, we can only hope, to eliminate abortions. As pro-life supporters, we have got to “put your money where your mouth is”, so to speak. When we are writing our congressmen about other issues, such as taxes, etc., let’s remember just where this money is going. The money that came out of your paycheck may well be putting food on the table of a child, and his or her mother who was brave enough to choose life. Just a side note.
    God bless you all,

  47. Wayne M says:

    On this one I will have to disagree with you a little and let me be as clear and concise as possible.
    BTW I was speaking with the president of my church denomination on this issue just this weekend. He mad the same point that we need to help those in need and I agree with that. The problem is, this is actually the churches responsibility and not the government’s. We the church have failed I believe to do our job but that does not mean we should just hand it over to government.
    1. The government would do a very inefficient job at it.
    2. The government would not bring in any issues of actions and consequences. Generally speaking the person or people are in this situation because of poor personal and/or moral decisions. Throwing government money without accountability at these issues produces more of the problem, produces dependency and produces a cycle of poverty.
    3. Having a mentor come along side a person produces growth and improvement.
    You are right, we need to care but we need our churches to wake up and do the caring. The church needs to be the church.

  48. anonymous says:

    wayne, your comments are so offensive that it’s difficult for me to know where to begin. but as a little “fyi” to you, it was abraham lincoln who abolished slavery. and although he beleived in god, he wasn’t a christian. so you’d better go & check that fact book of yours. and by the way, smart & reasonable human beings don’t give way to cultish, religious movements like yours. christian extremists are no better than the muslim extremists who want to destroy our country. any religion taken to an extreme is a serious danger to the civilized world. the reason for most of the world’s suffering is due to extremist religious views. because people like you don’t have tolerance or understanding for anyone else’s belief systems but your own. like i’ve said before & will say it again, keep your religious views to yourself. they don’t belong in politics & they don’t belong in the laws of this country.

  49. Hannah says:

    “because people like you don’t have tolerance or understanding for anyone else’s belief systems but your own” (Anonymous)
    I’ll be honest, you don’t sound very tolerant or understanding of any other view, but your own.
    “like i’ve said before & will say it again, keep your religious views to yourself. they don’t belong in politics & they don’t belong in the laws of this country” (Anonymous)
    To simply write off anyone who has a moral opinion that may coincide with a mainstream religious as being someone who is an extremist is rather intolerant. Besides, what is a “religious view”? A religious view cannot be simply contained within a heading such as Christianity or Islam, it has to be defined by the ideology that the person holds. This ideology is shaped not exclusively by “religion,” but by the experiences and beliefs that the person holds. The person’s personal metanarrative is usually the guiding force behind their beliefs. Everyone has a metanarrative that has been shaped by numerous forces and many times some of those forces would include religion. Basically what I’m trying to say is that everyone has a metanarrative from which they will have opinions about politics and you cannot simply discount someone’s views because they have a religious background. If I may bring back your comments from an earlier post: “you need to keep your own religious extremist views to yourself.” No, this is America and that is what we thrive off of. We thrive off of the clash of ideas and pursuit of knowledge. We acknowledge the diversity and seek ways to better our own lives off of the different perspectives of other people. Please, quit writing off people because of their religious views and realize that we all have something to learn from others. As you said in an earlier post: “this is American and you are not god.”

  50. anonymous says:

    exactly hannah, “this is america & you are not god”. i never said you didn’t have the right to your own opinion. but you don’t have the right to impose that opinion on other people. you don’t have the right to tell me i can’t have an abortion if i’m raped. you don’t have the right to tell me i can’t have an abortion if i’m the victim of incest. you don’t have the right to tell me i have to share my child with a monster. you don’t have the right to tell me what to do with my body. you don’t have the right to tell me how to live my life. you don’t have the right to tell me what i should believe. you don’t have the right to force your religion on me. and that’s what these anti-abortionists are trying to do. and that’s why the separation of church & state exists in this country. my moral law isn’t the same as yours & shouldn’t have to be. i’m not telling you people how to live your life. and you don’t have the right to tell me how to live mine.

  51. Hannah says:

    In actuality society in general does have that right to tell a woman that she cannot have an abortion unless her life is in danger or in the case of incest and rape. Contract theory of government allows for that. In reality, any law that is created is an imposition on the people. Many times these laws directly affect the way people live, but that does not mean that they are wrong. To single out the abortion aspect and not consider other examples is rather selective and does not provide for an accurate portrait of what you are talking about. The people of the United States have a right to outlaw marijuana, ban same-sex marriage and create other laws that people will disagree with. Yes, many of the laws may be from a “religious view,” but as I pointed out in the last post that is not necessarily relevant. When these issues come before the Supreme Court, the Court has to determine if the motive behind the law was religious or whether the benefit of the society as a whole was the motivating factor (granted this is just one issue of many that they address). In the case of abortion, I really believe that the South Dakota legislators, from their metanarratives, believe that abortions are degrading our society (which they probably include the fetus which is totally subject to debate). Just because they may come from a religious background does not mean a thing. Now if you want to debate the merits of effect on society or the individual rights that may be infringed because of the ban on abortion by all means go for it. To simply call legislation religious and thus invalid is ridiculous and goes against what this country stands for.
    You’re absolutely right when you say that I don’t have a right to tell you what to believe and I don’t think that I have done that at all. That addresses what is in my mind one of the greatest flaws in American education: the lack of clash of ideas. When someone disagrees the immediate response is to tell them that they are imposing their ideas on everyone else and to start throwing personal attacks. I am not by any means inferring that Anonymous has done this, but rather am venting about something that is rather annoying to me. There is so much to learn from other people and too often in our liberal society (I’m not talking political liberal), we view the freedom to have our ideas as something that guards us against other people’s ideas clashing with our own. If only our society would recognize that clash is a good thing and something to be desired we would all be in a better place to argue the current issues of our day.

  52. Hannah says:

    In actuality society in general does have that right to tell a woman that she cannot have an abortion unless her life is in danger or in the case of incest and rape. Contract theory of government allows for that. In reality, any law that is created is an imposition on the people. Many times these laws directly affect the way people live, but that does not mean that they are wrong. To single out the abortion aspect and not consider other examples is rather selective and does not provide for an accurate portrait of what you are talking about. The people of the United States have a right to outlaw marijuana, ban same-sex marriage and create other laws that people will disagree with. Yes, many of the laws may be from a “religious view,” but as I pointed out in the last post that is not necessarily relevant. When these issues come before the Supreme Court, the Court has to determine if the motive behind the law was religious or whether the benefit of the society as a whole was the motivating factor (granted this is just one issue of many that they address). In the case of abortion, I really believe that the South Dakota legislators, from their metanarratives, believe that abortions are degrading our society (which they probably include the fetus which is totally subject to debate). Just because they may come from a religious background does not mean a thing. Now if you want to debate the merits of effect on society or the individual rights that may be infringed because of the ban on abortion by all means go for it. To simply call legislation religious and thus invalid is ridiculous and goes against what this country stands for.
    You’re absolutely right when you say that I don’t have a right to tell you what to believe and I don’t think that I have done that at all. That addresses what is in my mind one of the greatest flaws in American education: the lack of clash of ideas. When someone disagrees the immediate response is to tell them that they are imposing their ideas on everyone else and to start throwing personal attacks. I am not by any means inferring that Anonymous has done this, but rather am venting about something that is rather annoying to me. There is so much to learn from other people and too often in our liberal society (I’m not talking political liberal), we view the freedom to have our ideas as something that guards us against other people’s ideas clashing with our own. If only our society would recognize that clash is a good thing and something to be desired we would all be in a better place to argue the current issues of our day.

  53. Leigh says:

    I really like and agree with your posts… thank you for pointing out that all laws DO impose restrictions on people in some way. There are all kinds of laws that regulate the body, too. For instance, minors may not obtain tattoos or piercings in many of the same states where they could easily have an abortion without their parents’ consent. And, if you want my opinion, a tattoo is a very insignificant decision compared to the decision to have an abortion. You can have a tattoo removed, and you can take out a piercing, but there is NO way to undo that abortion. But nobody is raising a fuss about the tattoo law, even though it is bodily control by the government. And, there are other laws; laws against walking around nude, yes, the government forces us to wear clothes, on OUR bodies. Prostitution is illegal, and that is direct regulation of our bodies… Oh, and if we try to commit suicide, which only involves our OWN bodies, they throw us in some type of center! If this pro-life law holds up, which hopefully it will, it won’t be the start of some snowball of the government telling us what to do, as many people have said. And I’m sorry to say, but the government needs to give us some guidelines by which to live, because many people don’t always do the right thing on their own. The government tells us what we can’t do with our bodies every day, and let’s not forget, these women don’t just wake up pregnant one day, and not know how it happened. NO… I’m not judging, I’m nobody to be doing that. I am a single, young mom too, who was seconds away from having my own abortion, as I said earlier… and, before anyone even says, it, no, a raped woman didn’t cause her rape. But, really, let’s stand up and hold ourselves accountable. There is a reason for the saying “you can’t turn back time,” so let’s stop trying to undo what has been done, and let’s work on moving forward, as women, and as a society. Let’s give women a little credit. We can take care of our children!!! If I can, then I know that anybody can.
    Lastly, I wanted to address Wayne’s comment that you don’t agree with my opinion that we need government programs to support these women who choose life. I agree with you that churches should get involved and help, but that cannot be legally guaranteed. We need this legislation. I know, taxes are no fun, I pay them too, but I would pay even more taxes any day, rather than to feed my son a hot meal, knowing that there are women out there who don’t have anything to feed their children. I don’t care how or why these women were pregnant, or if they have 15 kids by 15 different men, and have not worked a day in their lives. (luckily that wouldn’t be the case 99% of the time!) But, I care about the KIDS, just like we cannot punish an unborn baby for the crimes his father commited (Re:rape), we cannot financially punish these children whose mothers may not have as much as we do. Although I believe strongly in financial assistance, I believe even more strongly in childcare and educational assistance. I don’t think that money or childcare should EVER be a barrier to a woman who is trying to support her kids and better herself. When we tell these women that there will be no more abortions, we need to follow through with open arms and an outstretched hand.

  54. anonoymous says:

    blah, blah, blah.

  55. Wayne M says:

    I recommend you do your research on the Abolition Movement. If you think Abraham Lincoln ended slavery on his won you are mistaking.
    Here is a good place to start

  56. anonymous says:

    blah, blah, blah.

  57. stevodevo says:

    haha… I’m glad anonymous has finally shown their true colours…see ya

  58. stevodevo says:

    Here are some questions to consider:
    1. Is murder illegal? Do you think it should be illegal?
    2. Is a fetus a living organism? Does it have its own identity (DNA etc)? If left undisturbed would it grow to become a person like you or I?
    3. Is destroying a fetus murder?
    Number 2 is the sticking point for most ‘pro-choicers’. But as science catches up with ‘religion’ it’s becoming more and more clear that there is uniqueness after conception.
    If you answered ‘no’ to either part of question 1 then I can’t help you there!
    So there are a lot of non-‘religious’ reasons for banning abortion. And considering it was illegal prior to Roe v Wade it’s not the ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ that has changed but the premises on which we base right and wrong.

  59. Jodi From MI says:

    My question still remains. Will banning abortion in America create a more moral society? Will it create better parents? Will it make us more sexually conscientious society? Will it promote abstinence? Will more people become sexually responsible? In what specific ways can you tell me that banning abortion will improve american society?

  60. Jodi From MI says:

    I do not want to get on here and bash Christians, (although I am a reformed catholic), but, Wayne, I do have some serious problems with your argument. Being that I am a student of Spanish, I have not only studied our history, but the history of Mexico, central and south america and the islands, which tragically, all these histories carry a striking similarity. When settlers from England, Spain and France came to colonize it was firstly in search of gold but secondly and probably more importantly, they decided to stay and colonize in order to “civilize” the barbarians (native indians, Aztecs, Mayans etc.) The fact is is that these societies were not unicivilized (our native americans being the most “uncivilized”by modern standards), the Aztecs and Mayans had a religion, cities, forms of commerce and trade etc. What the spanish french and english wanted to “civilize” was the the fact that these people were not christian and did not believe in only one god. So they set about their efforts of civilization by massacring and enslaving people in order to enforce their beliefs. This is the effect that imposing ones religious beliefs has on another. This is not the only instance of this historically, which I’m sure that you know, the Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials, etc. It can be said that this imposition is in the name of God and for God but it still comes down to imposing your beliefs on another human being. I think that you can believe whatever you want, and you can believe that abortion is wrong, but when those beliefs are turned into legislation it becomes a very dangerous thing. By the way Wayne, most of the slaveholders in the south were devout christians, another fine example of religious hypocrasy.

  61. Jodi From MI says:

    a fetus is only a fetus after the eighth week in-utero, until then it is an embryo, and even after the embryo becomes a fetus, the fetus is not viable (able to live outside of the mothers womb) until six months. So are we discussing limiting abortion, or is abortion still wrong when it is still an embryo?

  62. Wayne M says:

    What a great question!
    Of course it will not, that will take a spiritual revival. Meaning, people all of a sudden having a hunger for the things of God and being moral. This is a supernatural event and it has happened several times in recent history (meaning the last 300 yrs.) I recommend you do some research on the great awakenings. Here is a yahoo or google search on the topic.
    It just so happens that the abolition movement (desiring to bring an end of slavery) got it’s start from one such awakening in Europe and the civil war and the ending of slavery in this country was influenced by another great awakening.
    That being said, it does not mean that a person would not work for both, good laws that help encourage what is good and right and healthy and a revival at the same time. Life is not mutually exclusive.
    On the fetus discussion, viable is not the definition of human. Human is the definition of human.
    There are people that have cancer or a heart attack or whatever that were not viable 50yrs ago but now they are. See, viable changes, human does not.

  63. Wayne M says:

    Of course anyone that thinks at all would tell you that Christianity has had a rocky past, but Christianity has been significantly reformed.
    Over the past 200 yrs have there been any examples of Christians running around killing millions etc. NO
    The real killer in the past century or so have been atheistic communism and radical muslims.
    So, the real issue is, are the things that Christains are espousing good and true? That is really the only thing that matters now.

  64. Jodi from MI says:

    Well, yes, Wayne, I can give you a very current example. Let us make no mistake. What we are doing in Iraq under the guise of “spreading democracy” is a farce. We are trying to impose our belief system on another culture just as was done in the days of colonizing. We colonized the barbarians, and yes Wayne, we are trying to colonize the Middle East. One cannot “spread” democracy…it has to come from within, with the people desiring it and usually having to revolt against tyranny. What we can and are trying to do there is spread Christianity to save the heathen muslims, and to colonize the Middle East. And once again, like the Good Americans that we are, force others to adhere to our belief system.And really, the issue isn’t Christianity versus anything else. It is FUNDAMENTALISM that is dangerous to human health, whether that be communistic muslim or christian

  65. anonymous says:

    thank you “jodi from MI” for being just about the only other voice of reason on this blog. these fundamentalist christians need to be educated on the error of their ways. they claim to be so godly but all they do is preach hatred & intolerance. i want to know what makes them “holier” than thou. and what gives them the right to judge & look down on everybody else. that’s definitely not what the bible taught me about being a good person.

  66. Hannah says:

    “Will banning abortion in America create a more moral society? … In what specific ways can you tell me that banning abortion will improve american society?” (Jodi from MI)
    While I am personally a very proud South Dakotan right now, I do not think that the SD legislatures were trying to create a “more moral society” by outlawing abortion. One of the purposes of government is to promote justice in whatever way that they see fit, not create a moral society. The people who are in support of this ban on abortion view this legislation as being the only justice that they can bring to the babies/fetuses that have been aborted and could potentially be aborted. This is not an issue of creating a more moral society, but promoting justice.

  67. Hannah says:

    Jodi from MI:
    Any legislation that is passed is imposing the view of the legislature on the people. I’m not quite sure how I should distinguish abortion from any other law that has been created. I do wonder though, how you would distinguish the abortion movement from that of the abolitionist movement earlier in American history. I’m sure that some people had to refer to the abolitionists as being “Fundamentalists,” “holier than thou,” and accused them of judging the slave owners and looking down on everyone else. Obviously, as you have pointed out, fundamentalism has the potential to create a lot of wrong, but as we look throughout history, we would not be where we are today if there weren’t people who had strongly held beliefs and took a stand for them.

  68. anonoymous says:

    hannah, you’re really out to lunch on this issue. how can you possibly compare abortion to abolition? you’re talking about standing up for the rights of rapists to rape innocent women & then claim 50% of the rights to the unborn child. you’re talking about standing up for the rights of fathers who commit incest against their own daughters & then claim 50% of the rights to the unborn child. which, may i remind you, isn’t even a fetus until 8 weeks of age & isn’t viable ’till 6 months. what we should all be aiming for is “quality of life”, not “quantity of life”. why should a group of cells be more valuable that a fully formed human being? and what gives you the right to decide? why do you think it would be better for that group of cells to survive? what kind of life are they being brought into? with a mother who doesn’t want them & a rapist father in jail? where’s the moral justice in that? you’re going to bring more unwanted children into this world just so you can feel better about yourself. and then walk around talking about how “moral” you are. sounds like a really selfish proposition to me. you people couldn’t care less about those unwanted children. let’s make a deal, if i’m ever raped & forced to carry that child due to this abortion ban that you support, i’ll be shipping that child off to you.

  69. Hannah says:

    First of all, I would defend the SD legislation which does allow for abortions in the cases of rape, incest and the health of the mother – so no, I would not classify myself as defending the rights of the fathers that molest their daughters or rapists. Secondly, it is a bit presumptuous for you to assume that the quality of life of these fetuses/babies who have been aborted would be bad. What are you trying to imply by this? I would be careful in how you answer that. There is intrinsic value in the life of a human, and yes, I would even argue that there is value in the potential life of a human. Finally, there are people waiting years to adopt children. Even if you use the quality of life as a standard, adoption provides an option that would allow for a “higher quality of life.”

  70. anonoymous says:

    obviously you haven’t been reading the news carefully, hannah. because the SD abortion ban wouldn’t allow abortion in cases of rape & incest. and it’s not presumptuous to assume that the quality of life of these children would be bad. how can the life of an unwanted, unborn child of a rapist father be good? there are too many unwanted children in this country to even count. those of you advocating these abortion bans should put your money, your life & your homes where your mouth is. i think we should pass a law demanding that every anti-abortionist be put on a waiting list of their own. when your number comes up, you’ll be forced to take in an unwanted child born out of rape or incest. and according to your own belief system, you have no right to say no. because that would be immoral & unjust. someone has to care for all of these unwanted children. and if you’re against abortion, you’d better be one of them.

  71. stevodevo says:

    blah, blah, blah…

  72. Wayne M says:

    Why do you insist to miss the possibility of adoption?
    Or maybe the point of not having sex all the time in inappropriate situations?
    It is clear, the rapist should go to jail or worse. The perpetrator of incest should go to jail or worse.
    If we would be very harsh or those crimes the numbers would go down. If and when they do occur and a girl or woman is impregnated she would have the option of adoption.
    An abortion would not make the pain go away.

  73. anonymous says:

    stevodevo, i’m guessing by your comments that you must find me highly admirable to copy me. i’m also guessing you’re willing to put your money, your life & your home where your mouth is & take in some of the unwanted children forced to be born out of rape & incest. according to your own “holier than thou” ideology you’d be a sinner if you said no. and we wouldn’t want that, now would we? furthermore, you’d need to take in some of those 11 & 12 year old incest victims who get pregnant after getting knocked up by their fathers. below is a blog i think you should read & really think about:
    “If it weren’t for Roe vs. Wade, my younger sister would have had to give birth to a baby at 11 yrs old after being raped by our step-father (who’s now serving a life sentence). I don’t agree with abortion all together, however I do believe that women should still have that right. I believe it should stay legal for the simple fact that I don’t think that a 12 yr old raped by her father or brother should be forced to carry his baby.”
    just some food for thought about the kind of world you’ll be creating if abortion is banned. and that world has nothing to do with what god wants. that’s a world created mostly by ignorant, selfish, chauvinistic men who want to put women down & take away their rights. and bring to life thousands of unwanted children (sometimes born from children themselves) who start off their lives in a world where only the hope of love & family exists.

  74. Wayne M says:

    That kind of terrible world is created by the people that do those terrible things, not by the people that are against abortion.
    Those people do those terrible things because they chose to after watching terrible movies, reading terrible book and magazines and filling their mind with wickedness.
    The fix is really in removing this filth that creates the cesspool that these people chose to live in and in spiritual revival, changed hearts and minds. I know this because it happened to me and I have seen it a million times.

  75. Hannah says:

    “just some food for thought about the kind of world you’ll be creating if abortion is banned. and that world has nothing to do with what god wants” (Anonymous)
    Um … pretty sure that was the world that we lived in before 1973.
    “it’s not presumptuous to assume that the quality of life of these children would be bad. how can the life of an unwanted, unborn child of a rapist father be good? there are too many unwanted children in this country to even count” (Anonymous)
    It is rather offensive to think what you are implying about “unwanted” children. You are implying that all people that were born unwanted have lived miserable lives and would be better dead than they are alive – which is completely wrong. There is immense value in the lives that these people have lived.
    The story that Anonymous posted is awful there is no doubt about it. Honestly, that story absolutely breaks my heart and I find it hard to say that the girl should not have an abortion. Personally, I would agree with the SD legislature that two wrongs don’t make a right, but I’m not sure if I believe that should be the law. Really though, the abortion issue does not boil down to this. I think generally everyone would agree on this point. The abortion that truly appauls me is the abortions that are done for convenience sake or for financial reasons. I know too many people who were “unwanted” when they were born to be able to justify abortion. These people would probably be classified as living a “high quality life,” but that’s not the point. I have “unwanted” friends that would not be alive today if their mothers had aborted them. For me, that is reason enough to try to do everything that I can to save the lives of other “unwanted” children so that they can determine for themselves if life is worth living. I think that we need to give society a chance to prove itself that it can provide support for these mothers and children whether that would be through adoption or social programs.

  76. anonymous says:

    wayne, don’t you see that you’re punishing innocent women & children by banning abortion? they’re the innocent victims of rape & incest. and by banning abortion in those circumstances, you’re victimizing them, not the criminals. if those victims think they’re strong enough to handle giving birth to & then raising the child of a sexual predator, more power to them. but they shouldn’t be forced into that kind of traumatic situation by our government. it’s not fair for you to claim that every woman in that situation would feel better by carrying the child to term. the thought of having to carry around a monster’s baby for 9 months is absolute torture to many women. pregnancy is a difficult condition for anyone to endure. sometimes it can even be a life-threatening condition depending on the circumstances. and why should a woman or young girl be forced to go through that just because it’s against someone else’s religion?

  77. Suffer, then tell me how great life is. says:

    If I were living in a land where no abortion was allowed, I would not be around men at all. I would not date or marry and I would live in pure fear all of my life. I would never want to bring any children in such a world where your life and integrity after birth is so worthless and cheap.
    And no an unloved child is worse than a dead child. Get a grip.

  78. Horrible World of Sinners says:

    Yes, I had one of those “convenient” abortions myself. I was pressured, I was stupid, I admit that. But the abortion did relieve my pain and distress. If I brought that child into the world, my life and the child’s life would be ruined forever. I would not have loved its father and I would regret that baby all my life. I don’t regret the abortion at all. If I had to go back, I would repeat that decision. Also, it would have been totally fine with me if my mother aborted me, because guess what? I’m one of those “unwanted” people. I am most at peace when I think of how nice it would be if I was never conceived.

  79. anonymous says:

    thank you to the last 2 posters for having both a heart & basic common sense. sadly, those are 2 things that most of the people on this blog are lacking. and i find it interesting that when i say those opposed to abortion should be willing to step up to the plate & take in some of these unwanted children which they’ll be creating, that not 1 of them has offered to do so. they want to pass this ridiculous, oppressive & irresponsible legislation & then get someone else to fix the problem of unwanted babies later. they’re happy to make others suffer for their own selfish beliefs, but they’re unwilling to be part of the solution. they keep harping on adoption as being the answer to all of the world’s unwanted children. and while i think adoption is a wonderful, beautiful thing & is something i’ve contemplated for my own life. it’s not a solution for the millions of unwanted children you’re going to create out of banning abortion. i find it hard to believe that life in an orphanage is a good life for anyone. i think only the lucky ones are adopted out to good, loving homes. and the rest may find themselves moving from foster home to foster home. never staying in one place & sometimes being abused by the families who take them in. many of them may never learn what love & family are all about & grow-up uhappy & unloved or worse. and it’s all just so that many of the religious fanatics in this country can sleep well at night.

  80. Leigh says:

    “If I were living in a land where no abortion was allowed, I would not be around men at all. I would not date or marry and I would live in pure fear all of my life. I would never want to bring any children in such a world where your life and integrity after birth is so worthless and cheap.
    And no an unloved child is worse than a dead child. Get a grip.”- Suffer, then tell me how great life is
    Okay, so you said that you wouldn’t have sex wrecklessly if you knew that you couldn’t just run down to an abortion clinic at your convenience. What a shame… Sounds like you’d actually just be a really resposible person. Mabye you’d even consider birth control and condoms – !!! What a shame – lol! Mabye if women knew that they couldn’t have abortions, and they were more careful, we wouldn’t have the aids/std crisis that we have now. Or, since you’re so pro-death, are you pro-aids too? Come on, it’s not that hard to prevent pregnancy, let’s be real.
    Oh, and anonymous, you keep playing the rape/incest card. Fine, let abortions be allowed in those cases. Now, what is your argument in support of convenience abortions? Because those do make up less than 1% of all abortions, but 99.9% of your argument. You are magnifying that particular scenario, and insulting the intelligence of everyone here by assuming that nobody could figure that one out.
    Leigh (Not ashamed to use my name!)

  81. anonymous says:

    listen leigh, the main reason why i keep playing the rape & incest card is because the current SD abortion ban proposal wouldn’t allow abortion in those extreme cases. that’s the crucial point that you people keep missing & that’s what i find to be so incredibly & indescribably abhorrent. to agree with the current legislation is to say you think it’s okay to force a raped woman or child into giving birth to a monster’s child & then share 50% of the rights to that child with a criminal behind bars. and i don’t care if it’s 1% or 50% of all abortions that make up those cases. to say that the lives of those women & young girls who are victims of such heinous crimes are so insignificant that they don’t matter is inhumane. and by the way, i do believe 100% that their lives are more important than the cluster of embryotic cells inside them. and no, i don’t believe that group of cells is a human being until it reaches a “viable” age (when it can live outside the womb without the mother’s help). and yes, i do agree that the child is a sort of parasite during pregnancy & that the mother’s the host. and no, i don’t think that we should strive for “quantity” of life over “quality” of life. and no, i don’t think that every child conceived is meant to be born. and no, i don’t think that more unwanted babies is what this world needs. and no, i don’t think that building more & more orphanages is a solution to the problem. and by the way, you still haven’t said that you would adopt one of these unwanted children yourself!!!

  82. Leigh says:

    I would adopt an unwanted child… I donate money every month to children’s charity, and I do a bonus donation at Christmas. I CARE about these kids!!! I have talked with my fiance about adopting another child in two years; a year after I’m out of school. He doesn’t want to, but I know he will if he knows I really do mean it. It is unbelievably insensitive to call an unborn baby a parasite. Abortion is for people who don’t want to accept responsibility for their actions (except for rape, obviously). Oh, and if the ban allowed an exception for rape, then every woman who wanted an abortion would claim rape. So, what would be the point of a law with that exception?

  83. anonymous says:

    sorry to sound insensitive leigh, but the definition of a parasite is “an organism living in, with, or on another organism in parasitism”. in the most basic & scientific terms, that’s what an embryo is until it’s a “viable” infant. the mother has to give up her body for 9 months to create a child. and why should a woman be forced to do that for a child she doesn’t want? especially if that child is the product of rape or incest? the point is, that i don’t think any abortions should be made illegal in the U.S.A. women fought too long & hard for that choice, for a group of male politicians to take it away. and while i don’t agree with abortion as a form of birth control, i’m outraged that the religious right wants to force millions of unwanted children into this world. we can’t even take care of the ones we have now, so what are we going to do if abortion is banned? the only waiting lists for adoptions in this country are for healthy, white infants. so, what happens to all the rest of those poor unwanted children? maybe you care about their plight & would be willing to step up to the plate & adopt one of them (which i commend you for). but i highly doubt that most of the people leading this charge would do the same thing. more sex education, more traditional forms of birth control & more personal responsibility will help the problem. but we’ve got to accept that we’ll never be living in a utopian society where people don’t have sex until marriage & where unwanted pregnancies only exist in cases of rape & incest.

  84. Wayne M says:

    You are totally disingenuous. Everyone here has conceeded to the reality of a probable need for allowing for “Real” rape cases and incenst cases.
    My wife and I are open to adopting, I know couples that are foster parents and other that have adopted. And there are are 2 million couples corrently on waiting lists trying to adopt. Your arguements hold no water.
    So now let’s get on to the real discussion. You really want abortion all the time for any circumstance. Admit it.

  85. anonymous says:

    you’re totally wrong about me being disingenuous wayne. how can you say that when i’ve been 100% upfront & honest about my opinions throughout? however, you’re absolutely right that i want abortion to remain legal in all cases (even though i don’t personally condone it as birth control). i’ve already stated my position quite clearly in my posts above. you’re also wrong that everyone on this board supports abortion in cases of incest & rape. the majority of people on this board (including yourself) want a blanket ban on it regardless of the situation. also, the very abortion legislation in SD that we’re all talking about, doesn’t allow for abortion in those cases. and while i commend you for your wish to adopt an unwanted child, you don’t seem to grasp the reality of the situation. those waiting lists you’re talking about are for healthy, white infants. not minority babies or children with birth defects, AIDS & other health problems. so, what happens to all of those babies after they’re born? that’s the crucial question i want you to answer for me. the craziest part about it is we’re both fighting for the same thing, but on opposite sides of the fence. above all, we both want what’s best for the children in these situations. but our views of what’s best for them are radically different. i don’t believe in condemning unwanted babies to a life filled with misery & hardship. where only the mere “chance” of having a family & love exists. but you insist on making every unwanted child be born & then having to fend for itself in a sometimes cold, cruel world. i don’t believe in bringing children into this world without careful thought, consideration & planning. and i don’t believe that every child is better off being born.

  86. Wayne M says:

    You may be correct that many on the adoption list are waiting for healthy white babies but certainly not all and maybe not even most.
    My relative adopted two steet children from columbia, we have friends that have adopted black babies and we have other friends that have adopted special needs babies. In fact just the other day I was speaking with a woman that adopted a blind, deaf, autistic, downs syndrome baby with many other ailments. While this woman is not the majority these cases are not that infrequent either.
    But again, the issue is, most aborted babies are indeed healthy white babies, so your argument breaks down again.
    Also, most people I know and communite with are totally color blind racially so your race argument totolly breaks down.
    If you don’t want to condemn unwanted babies to a life of being unloved, work for people to be less sexually promiscuous. Then there would be many fewer unwanted babies.

  87. anonymous says:

    sorry wayne, but the majority of children in this country waiting to be adopted aren’t white & 30-40% of them aren’t healthy either 🙁 i congratulate your friends & relatives who have adopted minority & special needs children. that’s a highly admirable act of love & kindness. but here are some statistics for you to ponder when considering what’s best for all of the unwanted children that abortion bans would create:
    “approximately 64% of children waiting in foster care are of minority background; 32% are white. 51% of all foster children waiting for adoption are black, 11% are hispanic, 1% are american indian, 1% are asian/pacific islander, and 5% are unknown/unable to determine.”
    and of those children waiting to be adopted, most of them spend 2.5-5 years waiting for adoption. and many of them are never adopted at all:
    “approximately less than 1% of waiting children resided in continuous foster care for less than a month. 3% resided in foster care 1-5 months, 6% resided 6-11 months, 8% resided 12-17 months, 10% resided 18-23 months, 10% resided 24-29 months, 9% resided 30-35 months, 26% resided 36-59 months, and 27% resided 60 or more months.”
    and here are statistics of the outcomes of children who remain in foster care & are never adopted:
    “after aging out of foster care, 27% of males and 10% of females were incarcerated within 12 to 18 months. 50% were unemployed, 37% had not finished high school, 33% received public assistance, and 19% of females had given birth to children. before leaving care, 47 percent were receiving some kind of counseling or medication for mental health problems.”
    and here are some statistics on “special needs” children:
    “special needs children are usually of mixed and minority race. many have challenges associated with pre-natal drug exposure. some of them are at risk of developing disabilities later, or have been exposed to HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. healthy U.S.-born caucasian toddlers and pre-schoolers are just as rare as healthy caucasian infants and are usually not considered to have “special needs.” 30-40% percent of children in the child welfare system have physical health problems.”
    finally, while i agree that we should work for people to be less sexually promiscuous & more responsible about birth control, that will never fix the problem in this country. sadly, rape, incest & accidental pregnancies will always happen & more & more unwanted children shouldn’t be brought into this world because of it. we need to keep abortion as an option to keep the unwanted child population down. i don’t think it’s fair or just or loving to make them suffer because of other’s mistakes.

  88. Wayne M says:

    You paint a very bleak picture, So killing them all with fix this right?
    I’m glad I live with much more hope in life.
    Killing children will never fix any of these things. Getting at the root causes of these situations will fix the issues.
    What is the root cause you ask? Well it is “man’s” (human kinds) wicked nature. The only real fix is a spiritual fix. Education, money and abortion will not fix these issues.

  89. anonymous says:

    all i can say is, thank god i don’t live in SD!!!

  90. Leigh says:

    1.a) A parasite is defined as an organism of one species living in or on an
    organism of another species (a heterospecific relationship) and deriving its
    nourishment from the host (is metabolically dependent on the host).
    b) A human embryo or fetus is an organism of one species (Homo sapiens) living in the uterine cavity of an organism of the same species (Homo sapiens) and deriving its nourishment from the mother (is metabolically dependent on the mother). This homospecific relationship is an obligatory dependent relationship, but not a parasitic relationship.
    (See Cheng,
    T.C., General Parasitology, p. 7, 1973.)–_unborn_not_a_parasite.htm
    Basically, a baby isn’t a parasite because it is the same species as the mother, and a parasite is a different species than the host; if you want to get technical and pull out the textbooks. I don’t really care about all the “official” whatever, I think it is incredibly degrading to classify an unborn child in the same class that you would a leech or a tapeworm.
    Also, I for one, am not pushing religious views onto anyone; I don’t even go to church (I hope nobody gets mad about that either!) But it doesn’t take sitting down with the bible to see that it is horrible to kill anything that absolutely cannot escape or protect itself. It takes my breath away to know how close I was to doing this to my own son. I have so much guilt over that, and I can’t even imagine how I’d feel if I had actually had the abortion; especially if I later had another baby. Two and a half years ago, when I left the abortion clinic, I never would have believed that I would be where I am today. Nobody else would have either; even my own mom told me that I had ruined my life. That couldn’t be further from the truth. My son is 100% of my motivation. I go to school and I work my ass off to put food in my son’s mouth because I don’t have another choice; and when I see those big eyes looking up at me, I know that I would do ANYTHING for him. If I hadn’t had my son, I wouldn’t have gotten my act together, I know that for a fact. I am a totally different person, and not having that abortion was the start of my life going in a clear direction. I know that there are other girls who are like myself, and others who would have changed their lives for the better if they had to, but instead were told that they couldn’t do it, so they had abortions. When I was 15, my best friend (same age) became pregnant. I didn’t care one way or the other about abortion then. She wanted her baby, but the father wasn’t around. She was scared to tell her mother, but eventually, at four months pregnant, she did. She told me that her mother didn’t say a word to her, but pulled out a phone book and scheduled an abortion appointment. No discussion. She had the abortion. Afterwards, she and her mother didn’t speak during the drive home. She went to her bedroom, and was crying. Eventually her mother came in, and stood in the doorway and said “You’re going to be okay.” My friend said “But my baby won’t, because you made me kill it!” She never had any follow-up counselling, and she had no friends who could relate to her pain. I saw her go downhill from there. By 17, she had moved out with a boy, and by 18 had a baby with a different boy. She had been a good girl who just made a mistake by getting pregnant, but because of the abortion, she began to rebel against her mother in any way possible, and was with boy after boy until she found one who would let her move in with him. She has no relationship with her mother now. The point of all of this is, who could have protected her from being “forced” to have the abortion, other than a law against abortion? She didn’t have a choice, but the abortion was still legal. Until you’re a certain age, you feel powerless against your parents. I know for a fact that this devastates these girls, especially teenagers who are pressured into it. The problem is, abortion doesn’t undo pregnancy, although that’s what many people would like to believe. Granted, no teenage girl needs a baby, but no teenage girl should have to live with that kind of guilt either. Mabye there is no perfect solution, but all I can see is that our disposable view of pregnancy isn’t doing a whole lot for this country. If a “fetus” isn’t that important, then I guess we aren’t either, because we all were fetuses at one point.

  91. Leigh says:

    (This is an objective source):
    These are objective studies. Proof that there are women who have abortions that feel they have only one “choice”. This is more likely to occur than is a pregnancy due to rape/incest. Who will be there for these women? Or do they not matter since they all are, in reality, just a huge mass of cells?

  92. Proud New Yorker says:

    My goodness – I’m just thankful to live as a free-thinking, liberated, independent and self-responsible woman right here in open-minded, culturally aware, glorious New York City. And, in turn, a large part of me weeps for any woman in need, who unfortunately happens to live in South Dakota.
    Let the assinine legislators fighting to pass this law go through the pain, humiliation and degradation of rape or incest, and bear the child, under the expectation that they should raise the child with total love, dedication, and “God’s Blessings”. I wonder if they’d change their tune, then.

  93. anonymous says:

    amen to that “proud new yorker”, as i’m a proud new yorker myself!!! i feel sorry for all of the women in SD who will become victims of rape & incest. they will now be forced to carry that monster’s child to term & then share 50% of the parental rights with him. it’s truly a sad day in history when a group of men decide that a group of cells is more important than a women’s life. especially since anyone who’s never been in that exact situation has no right to judge. and by the way, getting accidentally pregnant by your boyfriend isn’t the same thing as being raped. as i mentioned earlier, i strongly feel that an ammendment should be made to this law. that every person against abortion be put on a waiting list to adopt all of the unwanted children created by this legislation. my proposed ammendent would force anti-abortionists to take any child put up for adoption, regardless of race or health status. that’s the only solution i can find to save the lives of countless children who will go through life unwanted & unloved if this ban is passed.

  94. Leigh says:

    To anyone who is pro-abortion here: If a future ban is passed with the exception for pregnancies that occur through rape and incest, will you be okay with it? Just curious.

  95. Leigh says:

    Oh, and I would like to make a proposal… fine, if abortion cannot be banned, then women (with the exception of rape and incest) who want to use abortion as birth control, should be required to have the depo shot, or other long-acting birth control so that they don’t keep on doing the same thing. Because it is often these same women that keep coming back, time after time, after time. They will get pregnant a month or two after having the abortion! If, according to pro-abortionists, these babies “are better off not being born”, then it should be ideal if these women don’t get pregnant in the first place. Or, should a woman have the right to have not just one abortion, but as many as she wants?

  96. ProudNewYorker says:

    Answers to your questions:
    2)Good idea – but it isn’t always so easy. Many women, myself included, have a family history of dangerous medical allergies to chemical forms of birth control. My own mother suffered horrible organ damage, thanks to the Pill. I’ve got allergies to a good bunch of medications, and have been advised by my doctor to stick solely with condoms and natural prevention (ie the rhythm method). I’m a married woman, and am very happy WITHOUT children, thank you. I don’t want them, my husband doesn’t want them – we really just aren’t interested. We are very careful, as much as we can be, to prevent an unplanned pregnancy. Should one occur, I’d personally keep the child. However, we’d like to be the ones to make the decision of whether to burden ourselves with an unplanned pregnancy – the government deserves no right to make the decision for us – or anyone else.
    Accidents happen. Even with long term (ie depo-provera) contraceptives. I even know a woman who got pregnant AFTER having her tubes tied – seriously.
    As well, I have to bring up your statement that “it is often these same women that keep coming back”. I know a number of women who’ve gone through abortion – mostly in that I have a wide circle of female friends. None of them have had more than one. It was a difficult choice for them – but they now realize that in order for them to live their lives as whole people (socially, professionally, emotionally), it was necessary at the time. These are warm women, loving people – many of them loving mothers who had subsequent children at the right time, under conditions more secure, welcoming and comfortable for children to be raised. They aren’t the uncaring monsters so many pro-life advocates paint their like to be – but well-adjusted women, and devoted mothers.
    I don’t love the concept of abortion. I personally couldn’t imagine having one. But I also know that it shouldn’t be an outsider’s right to decide how a woman governs her own body. It’s a hugely personal matter, I know – but I consider myself an open-minded person, who believes in independent decision and individual rights. Between a woman’s right to live her life as she sees fit, and burdening her with the aftermath of an accident, mistake (or assault) – well, I prefer the former.

  97. GratefulToBeAlive says:

    Although women who have had abortions, and now have children that they love and care for, I can almost guarantee that there is not a day that goes by that she doesn’t think about her unborn CHILD. Yes, I said CHILD. It isn’t just a group of cells whenever the sperm meets the egg, it’s so much more than that. The heart begins beating 18-25 days after conception. Honestly, I don’t believe that these women are having an abortion before these days. Most don’t even know within 18 days of conception. Abortion is MURDER!! There is no way around it. Think about this before you go to bed tonight: Everyone who believes that abortion is ok, has already been born. So, the next time you see your mother, give her a hug and thank God that she didn’t do to you what you say is “okay” for others to do.

  98. anonymous says:

    yeah, and also think about all of those hundreds of thousands of unwanted children in orphanages & foster homes before you go to bed at night “gratefultobealive”. and think about all of the sick, unadoptable babies that would have otherwise not been brought into this world, if it weren’t for abortion bans. and think about the women & young girls whose souls you’re killing by creating laws forcing them to carry a rapist’s baby to term & then share custody with a monster behind bars. and think about all of the children who will grow up poor, abused & unloved by the parents who never wanted them in the 1st place. and think about how selfish it is that you believe this kind of life is better than no life at all. and think about how selfish it is that your stance is creating more & more unwanted children in this country, who will have to suffer & fight their way through a cold, hard world without love or family. i think you should think about that before you go to bed. and thank god above that you’re not one of them.

  99. Jim Smith says:

    You are right, we should kill all unwanted people.
    Let’s start next with lonley people, then people with blue eyes, then people without enough guts to sign their names on blogs, then peopple that make less than $100,000 per year, then people that make more than $100,000 per year.
    You people are insane! You can justify anything with your inane logic.

  100. Laura says:

    I wonder why most of the people who are pro-life in the womb are also pro-killing outside of the womb. Such mind-boggling double-talk. Is the life of the mother, or the adults and children in Iraq any less valuable than the new life growing in the womb? Absolutely not. Nothing less than pure hypocrisy appears if one is to pronounce the value of life and then turn around and sanction the killing of another human being or support a war that takes thousands of lives. If you are in support of Life, why does that support not apply across the board? One cannot honor the sacredness of life while simultaneously taking it from others. Until mankind (?) awakens to this concept, we will only continue to attract conflict, as a mirror to the ethical and moral split inside ourselves. Life is Life. Double-standards do not apply.

  101. cwv warrior says:

    So, Happy Easter! I feel compelled to write on some of these comments at my site. Like, Christians DO represent GOD…a fundamental doctrine of the Bible…by learning His will from the Bible. We submit to it–His Word. There is nothing arrogant about that. Letting God rule by trusting that He meant what He said is sheer humility. Try it anyone?
    Stopping life that is growing inside a woman’s body? How could “Thou shall not kill” mean that? It is nothing but love that provokes me to write this. And I mean it, Have a blessed Easter.

Comments are closed.