Posted on 02/28/2006 6:36:43 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
US President George W. Bush signalled his opposition to a South Dakota abortion ban that forbids the procedure even in cases of rape or incest, saying he favors such exceptions.
But Bush declined to predict the outcome of any legal challenges to the legislation, which would make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy except in rare cases when it may be necessary to save the life of the mother.
"That, of course, is a state law, but my position has always been three exceptions: Rape, incest, and the life of the mother," the US president told ABC news in an interview.
Asked whether he would include "health" of the mother, Bush replied: "I said life of the mother, and health is a very vague term, but my position has been clear on that ever since I started running for office."
The bill, which recently gained final approval from South Dakota's House of Representatives, directly contradicts the precedent set in 1973 when the US Supreme Court ruled that bans on abortion violate a woman's constitutional right to privacy.
The bill grants no allowances for women who have been raped or are victims of incest. Doctors who perform abortion would be charged with a crime. It also prohibits the sale of emergency contraception and asserts that life begins at fertilization.
The governor of South Dakota has indicated he is likely to sign the bill.
A leading pro-choice advocacy group has already vowed to challenge the ban in federal court. But that seems to be exactly what many promoters of the legislation seek.
Advocates of the ban do not deny they aim much higher than South Dakota, a rural and socially conservative state, which even today has only one abortion clinic.
Instead, they are hoping the bill will offer a full frontal assault on legal abortions now that the balance of power in the Supreme Court appears to have shifted with the confirmation of conservative jurists John Roberts and Samuel Alito, both of whom are seen as pro-life.
Well if someone steals my car- do I get to steal someone else's car? do I get to create a NEW victim- just because now I have no car and no way to get to work and provide for my family?
stop with all the hyperbole..
it is terrible.. rape is HORRIFIC! but this is NOT a free license to BE HORRIFIC TO ANOTHER LIFE>.. no excuse.. NONE...
I must have replied to the wrong message, sorry this thread is moving too fast, and I'm watching the Shield on FX, good ep!
Execute the child, too?
Some don't even want emergency contraception which I am totally in favor rather than an abortion. I am a rape survivor and would not wish it on anyone. If that happened again to me, i'd probably have the baby but it'd not be a happy event and I would most definately give up the child for adoption with the express wish I NOT be contacted ever.
I'm saying the woman who is alive is the one whose wishes should be honored.
That's why the politics of it are bad. They didn't think it through. The object should be to overturn Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton. It appeared as though Stenberg is going down shortly. Bad timing could cause Anthony Kennedy to take it upon himself to stave off the huns.
BTW, I am one of the Huns. :-}
As a matter of principle I think all abortion should be banned except for the life of Mom. But I don't come to that lightly, I understand the enormous courage a woman would have to have to carry that baby to term.
But once again, the politics and timing are bad. They allow your bro and his fellow travelers to shift the argument from 99.5% of abortions to 0.5% of abortions. It would have been better for the babies if they had just included the exceptions, found 5 justices to return it to the states and then allow democracy to take it's course.
Bush is right, but I still think the South Dakotans have done great. Everey state should do this until the Supremes have such a backlog that they don't know what to do.
Every town and vollage and city should passs similar ordinances. No juror should ever vote to convict someone for fighting against mass murder.
Unless you are a woman who has been raped and actually had the child, you have absolutely no way of knowing that is a fact.
>>I am against abortion except for rape and insect.
How many insects get raped, and where would they get an abortion anyway?
Grin Spell check only goes so far huh?
"Anyone who can only spell a word one way is limited" - Mark Twain
(There is a reason I have that memorized ;^)
I don't mind some States having no exceptions. It's just that you cannot seriously claim those State with a ban AND these exceptions are pro-abortion either - any more than Ford is pro-killing for manufacturing automobiles.
OK and if she wishes to kill her child because it is a result of rape, that is OK, right?
Those who choose adoption are hereos.
Actually he has not. The ones who haven't been paying a helluva lot of attention to Bush's stated positions are the ones who have been running off the reservation.
You on the other hand haven't been on the reservation to begin with, and your words against Bush carry little weight.
God brings GREAT things from tragedy... some of the most beautiful and awesome things in life are born of tragedy......
it is the strong and the righteous that seek the good of such things....
We set up a bidding process, where anybody can offer a pregnant rape or incest victim as much money as they want to carry the child until it is born. After all, if saving the life of the child is so important that we would commandeer an innocent woman's womb as an incubator for nine months, why shouldn't she be compensated?
What's unbelievable is that you are now trying to condemn someone for showing you just how beautiful all life, no matter how it came about, can be. All while you go on about how someone's feelings and mental state make it ok to destroy life. Any credibility you may have had is now completely gone.
How totally sane you sound in stating the totally obvious, which you did quite well. :)
What if you were raped and were married, had other children at home...a job....what if you had health problems and being pregnant would harm you? My point is there have to be exceptions for the women carrying the child.
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.