Posted on 06/19/2006 2:34:55 PM PDT by Publius
Voters will have the final say on South Dakota's tough new law that bans almost all abortions.
Secretary of State Chris Nelson said Monday that the law's opponents had collected enough signatures to put a question on the November 7 ballot asking voters if the law should go into effect as planned or be dumped.
The state's abortion law, among the strictest in the nation, bans the procedure in all cases except when necessary to save a woman's life, with no exceptions for rape or incest.
Supporters hoped it would prompt a court challenge that would give the US Supreme Court an opportunity to overturn its 1973 Roe. v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.
Instead of challenging it in court, opponents, who argue the law is too extreme, gathered enough petition signatures to put the question directly to voters.
A coalition of groups opposed to the law turned in about 38,000 petition signatures on May 30 to put the question on the ballot. The secretary of state's office determined that the petitions contained at least the 16,728 that were required.
The Legislature passed the measure and the governor signed it in March. It was scheduled to take effect July 1 but is now on hold pending the outcome of the public vote.
Both sides pledged Monday to conduct all-out campaigns on the issue.
Leslee Unruh, one of the main promoters of the new law, said the campaign to preserve the ban will seek to convince voters that abortion must be stopped because it harms both unborn babies and the women who have abortions.
"It's probably the loudest cry we've heard," said Unruh, who runs a center that counsels women considering an abortion. "It's because there are so many women who have been harmed by abortion, myself being one of them, who have come together."
Jan Nicolay, a former state lawmaker who led the effort to refer the ban to a statewide vote, said the issue should remain about South Dakota.
"It's no slam dunk. We've got a lot of work ahead of us," Nicolay said. "We'll give it all we've got, I can tell you that."
Well that will be good for turning out the church ladies. Any close races in SD?
Why do I somehow doubt that if the voters do support the ban, that this will somehow bring closure to the matter.
I thought it already went into effect the first of June.
My guess would be that the liberals should want to lose this in SDakota so they can appeal it. If they'll win one of these with a more conservative court, it might be one that doesn't include exceptions for rape and incest.
The rabid Hypocrisy on the Left is stunning. Back when it was Term Limits all the Leftists ran around screaming "You don't need to vote on Term Limits, the people can vote them out at the next election." Touch their sacrament Abortion and LOOK OUT, they demand the right to vote on it.
Be interesting to watch how this turns out. I suspect the Left is going to find out how weak support for some of their dogma really is.
"Secretary of State Chris Nelson said Monday that the law's opponents had collected enough signatures to put a question on the November 7 ballot asking voters if the law should go into effect as planned or be dumped."
So if the law goes into effect, will the opponents then get to collect signatures to go on the next ballot that says, "are you sure?"
Roe should be found unconstitutional, and the issue put to the voters of every state. Then hopefully get this issue out of politics once and for all.
Brown vs. Board of Education was overturned based on a long series of steps before it; that is the best you can hope for here.
My apologies. I can only say that I had a brain cancellation and wrote down Brown instead of Plessy.
mea culpa
McVey
"Well that will be good for turning out the church ladies. Any close races in SD?"
(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")
(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")
South Dakota threw out a few weeks ago the four lawmakers that voted against the ban in the primaries.
It didn't get the type or press play the Penn revolt in the primaries did, probably because peole are scared to death of the issue among politicians and press, but it was big news.
Somehow, I doubt South Dakota residents will be siding with Planned Parenthood this fall.
It was going to be the first of July; that will not be enacted now that it's on the November ballot.
I wonder how widespread support for this petition drive was among the rats and leftists? Or do they actually think the majority of people, even in a good Red state like SD, are a bunch of twisted pro-aborts?
Anyway, I will be following this story with great interest. I don't know of any situation in the past where the fundamental question of abortion has been placed on a ballot.
On November 7, this measure will be approved by the voters, and not by a small margin.
Within 24-48 hours, the pro-abortion crowd will give the voters the finger by challenging it in court. And an activist judge will comply by declaring it "unconstitutional."
"Roe should be found unconstitutional, and the issue put to the voters of every state. Then hopefully get this issue out of politics once and for all."
Here, here! Definatly a state level issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.