Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

South Dakota Governor Signs Pro-Life Bill Banning Late-Term Abortions After 20 Weeks
lifenews.com ^ | March 11, 2016 | Micaiah Bilger

Posted on 03/11/2016 10:10:39 AM PST by Morgana

South Dakota just became the next state to protect unborn babies from painful, late-term abortions.

On Thursday, Gov. Dennis Gaugaard signed into law a bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks and penalize doctors who do late-term abortions in non-emergency situations, the Argus Leader reports. Penalties for violations of the law include up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine, according to the report. The only exceptions would be in certain medical emergency cases, the report states.

“It’s a great day for South Dakota,” said Debbie Pease, lobbyist for South Dakota Right to Life. “Our hope is that this is going to save the lives of babies by decreasing the number of abortions.”

South Dakota state Rep. Isaac Latterell, who sponsored the bill, also celebrated the governor signing it into law on Thursday.

“I think it’ll save lives because it lets women know that their children really are humans just like us,” Latterell said. “I think it’s a great step forward for our state, and I would like to see us do more to protect the innocent.”

The state House passed the pro-life measure last week, LifeNews reported.

South Dakota has one abortion clinic left, a Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls that does abortions up to 14 weeks; however, the new bill would ensure that later abortions will not be done in the future in the state. More than 18,000 very late-term abortions are performed every year on perfectly healthy unborn babies in America.

A few pro-abortion groups expressed outrage at the new law on Thursday. Susan Kroger, executive director of the radical abortion advocacy group NARAL Pro-Choice South Dakota, claimed the 20-week abortion ban is unconstitutional.

“I hope the voters remember these legislative priorities in the ballot box,” Kroger said.

Daugaard spokeswoman Kelsey Pritchard told the Associated Press that the state’s attorney general “will be prepared to defend the constitutionality of the bill” if pro-abortion groups challenge it.

The governor did not comment on the bill Thursday.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

The bill is modeled after the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which has become law in 12 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

A national poll by The Polling Company found that, after being informed that there is scientific evidence that unborn children are capable of feeling pain at least by 20 weeks, 64% would support a law banning abortion after 20 weeks, unless the mother’s life was in danger. Only 30% said they would oppose such a law.

Though abortion advocates deny the science of fetal pain, researchers have established that unborn babies can feel pain at 20 weeks or earlier. Dr. Steven Zielinski, an internal medicine physician from Oregon, is one of the leading researchers into it. He first published reports in the 1980s to validate research showing evidence for unborn pain.

He has testified before U.S. Congress that an unborn child could feel pain at “eight-and-a-half weeks and possibly earlier” and that a baby before birth “under the right circumstances, is capable of crying.”

He and his colleagues Dr. Vincent J. Collins and Thomas J. Marzen wrote, “The functioning neurological structures necessary to suffer pain are developed early in a child’s development in the womb.”

“Functioning neurological structures necessary for pain sensation are in place as early as 8 weeks, but certainly by 13 1/2 weeks of gestation. Sensory nerves, including nociceptors, reach the skin of the fetus before the 9th week of gestation. The first detectable brain activity occurs in the thalamus between the 8th and 10th weeks. The movement of electrical impulses through the neural fibers and spinal column takes place between 8 and 9 weeks gestation. By 13 1/2 weeks, the entire sensory nervous system functions as a whole in all parts of the body,” they continued.

Further research showed that hormone levels in unborn babies decrease when pain-relievers are supplied, LifeNews previously reported.

As a result of this research, a pro-life Utah state senator recently proposed legislation to require that unborn babies be given anesthesia prior to being killed in an abortion.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; US: South Dakota
KEYWORDS: abortion; prolife; southdakota

1 posted on 03/11/2016 10:10:39 AM PST by Morgana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Personally I would not be passing these bills until the status of SCOTUS is settled.

A new Lib majority might eagerly take a challenge case and use it not only to kill this law, but to gut all prior Conservative decisions regarding abortions.


2 posted on 03/11/2016 10:14:49 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
So the "pro-life" bill is really pro-choice for the first 19 weeks, 6 days, 23hrs, 59 minutes, 59 seconds...THEN, as if by magic it's suddenly a pro-life bill...

Got it.

3 posted on 03/11/2016 10:39:42 AM PST by lewislynn (Ted Cruz: " I'll never have 'a plane with my name" (or a Presidential seal))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

A poser. This guy just gave a thumbs up to letting “transgender” people use whatever commode they want to in public schools.


4 posted on 03/11/2016 10:59:59 AM PST by SoFloFreeper (I am undecided between Cruz, Rubio & Trump...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn

Just as abortion throughout pregnancy did not happen overnight, turning the tide against abortion will not happen instantly, either.

Rather than rejecting a bill forbidding abortion after 20 weeks, I would use it as a stepping stone towards eventually eliminating all abortions of babies who are capable of feeling.

With an all or nothing approach, one ends up with nothing.


5 posted on 03/11/2016 7:23:15 PM PST by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom
With an all or nothing approach, one ends up with nothing.
The bill is fine but if you want to fool yourself into thinking having an abortion before 20 weeks is "pro-life" who am I to say?
6 posted on 03/11/2016 8:48:05 PM PST by lewislynn (Ted Cruz: " I'll never have 'a plane with my name" (or a Presidential seal))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn

The pro-aborts did not start out with promoting abortion up to birth. They started out by insisting that abortion is only a very early procedure done in the most extreme circumstances. Soon after Roe v. Wade, many pro-aborts would deny vociferously that abortion would eventually be committed on babies that would be viable outside the womb if not killed first. It took decades before they reached the point where women were using it as routine birth control throughout pregnancy. They never would have reached that point if it weren’t for the gradual pushing of the limits.

If you want an all or nothing approach, unrestricted abortion for birth control will always remain legal. But if you accept, as a starter, a prohibition on abortion after 20 weeks because the fetus definitely feels pain at that point, you can use that to get people to think. If the fetus feels pain at 20 weeks, why wouldn’t it feel pain at 19 weeks 6 days? At 19 weeks 5 days? What about at 18 weeks, or 17 weeks? What is so magic about 20 weeks? In reality, nothing. The brain forms between 2 and 5 weeks; all organs are functional upon formation; there is every reason to think that the fetus is capable of feeling pain when there is a functional brain.

I’m completely pro-life. However, I realize that it will take a while before babies are protected by law, and it won’t happen all at once. Certainly, protecting babies after 20 weeks is preferable to protecting them only after birth. It is a step in the right direction.


7 posted on 03/11/2016 9:13:56 PM PST by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom

Very well stated.


8 posted on 03/11/2016 9:28:40 PM PST by proud American in Canada (God bless the United States of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson