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

Skip to comments.

Bush disagrees with South Dakota abortion ban
AFP ^ | 1 March 2006

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.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: South Dakota
KEYWORDS: abortion; abortionban; deadbabies; freepertimewarp; incest; misleadingheadline; presidentbush; rape; readthearticle; southdakota
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 1,061-1,073 next last
To: HoustonCurmudgeon

Well you must have mistaken me for some one who gives a shi*.


521 posted on 02/28/2006 8:20:57 PM PST by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 499 | View Replies]

To: lesser_satan

No one said we were forcing her to carry the baby - she just could not live in South Dakota and abort that baby, that's all.


522 posted on 02/28/2006 8:21:06 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher

According to the last stats I saw (and it's very tough to get any sort of accurate number), the rape and incest argument is bogus as less than 5% of those sorts of pregnancies are rape or incest caused.

The feminazis raised it to emotionalize the issue. In order to keep their bed-hopping "Sex and the City" lifestyle safe, they must preserve that final, after-the-fact method of disposing of an unwanted "cell mass" called abortion.

Must work: Bush fell for it.


523 posted on 02/28/2006 8:21:40 PM PST by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
"I'm talking about the feelings of the woman, not the baby."

I understand -- that was the point I was trying to make. All the attention seems to be focused on the woman, and the woman only.
524 posted on 02/28/2006 8:21:53 PM PST by jdm (I do not allow any liberal to swim, er, ride in my car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3

In the article you reference, maternal causes of death include "complications of unsafe abortion". Perhaps that is also the reason for the rise in pregnancy-related deaths in the U.S. in the past 5 years, hmm?


525 posted on 02/28/2006 8:21:59 PM PST by luckymom (Forget the baby whales, save the baby humans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
If men carried babies, abortion would be paid for by the State.

You have a low opinion of men.

526 posted on 02/28/2006 8:22:54 PM PST by SwordofTruth (God is good all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: boomop1
You can use the "s" word since you've been here so long. I see it here quite a bit. Just don't bold it. :)
527 posted on 02/28/2006 8:22:55 PM PST by jdm (I do not allow any liberal to swim, er, ride in my car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 521 | View Replies]

To: Aussie Dasher

Bush. The new squishy 2006 model. All he needs now is an adequate supply of white flags.


528 posted on 02/28/2006 8:22:55 PM PST by Mad_Tom_Rackham (A Liberal: One who demands half of your pie, because he didn't bake one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper

I did not change subjects.

I asked you if killing children because of the crimes of someone else is right.

You replied that it is legal.

I replied that slavery and segregation were legal too. Meaning that just because something is legal doesn't make it right.

That is NOT changing the subject.


529 posted on 02/28/2006 8:23:02 PM PST by frankiep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 505 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Cold, hard fact of life is that babies get sold every day in this country.Are you suggesting that we sell the baby on the black market and give the proceeds to the mother in return for carrying the baby?
530 posted on 02/28/2006 8:23:02 PM PST by lesser_satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies]

To: jdm

I've noticed many of these women don't really want to talk to me about this! LOL!

they find it much easier to attack men....


531 posted on 02/28/2006 8:23:09 PM PST by eeevil conservative (Seeking to marry a RICH MALE CHAUVANIST PIG! Cedar Dave admits to being 2 of the 4!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 524 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

I (finally) agree with you - I think it is clear Scalia would not impose a federal ban on all abortions - I doubt Chief Justice Roberts would either.


532 posted on 02/28/2006 8:23:28 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 503 | View Replies]

To: lesser_satan
Just telling you that it goes on.

Amazing isn't it? Rather than killing their kids some mother sell them.

533 posted on 02/28/2006 8:23:46 PM PST by muawiyah (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
No one said we were forcing her to carry the baby

By abolishing abortion your forcing her to.

534 posted on 02/28/2006 8:23:47 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Proud to be a cotton-pickin' Republican on the GOP Plantation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: SwordofTruth

ain't THAT the truth...


535 posted on 02/28/2006 8:24:05 PM PST by eeevil conservative (Seeking to marry a RICH MALE CHAUVANIST PIG! Cedar Dave admits to being 2 of the 4!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 526 | View Replies]

To: Peach
I can't imagine many freepers being upset about the president's statements. Only those who are looking for something to be upset about.

I don't agree with the president's statements on this, but don't find them totally unreasonable either.

I can see where a woman may not want to carry a child who is the result of rape or incest.

536 posted on 02/28/2006 8:24:50 PM PST by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

There would be a SPECIAL place in heaven to the woman that gives life to a child after being raped.....the same place in heaven where mothers that die in childbirth......total selflessness.........SAINTHOOD.


537 posted on 02/28/2006 8:24:56 PM PST by Ann Archy (Abortion: The Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience. T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: frankiep

The child did nothing wrong - do I need to explain "justifiable homicide" again to you?


538 posted on 02/28/2006 8:25:04 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 518 | View Replies]

To: frankiep
I replied that slavery and segregation were legal too.

I replied that slavery and segregation wasn't federal law, but state rights. Roe v. Wade is federal law and not state rights. I believe states should decide, not the federal government.

539 posted on 02/28/2006 8:25:16 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Proud to be a cotton-pickin' Republican on the GOP Plantation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 529 | View Replies]

To: SwordofTruth
"You have a low opinion of men."

Wow -- very insightful.
540 posted on 02/28/2006 8:25:20 PM PST by jdm (I do not allow any liberal to swim, er, ride in my car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 526 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 1,061-1,073 next last

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