Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping!
Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping list...
Posted on 02/28/2006 10:01:34 PM PST by West Coast Conservative
A Mississippi House committee voted Tuesday to ban most abortions in the state.
The only exception would be if the life of the pregnant woman were in danger. There would be no abortions allowed in cases of pregnancy caused by rape or incest.
House Public Health Chairman Steve Holland, D-Plantersville, says he brought up the proposal because he's tired of piecemeal attempts to add new abortion restrictions year after year.
Holland says he has voted for some abortion restrictions and against others in the past. His committee amended an existing Senate bill.
The revised bill moves to the full House for consideration. Holland says a vote could come by next week.
South Dakota lawmakers have passed a bill that would make it a crime for doctors to perform abortions in the state except to save a pregnant woman's life. Gov. Mike Rounds has said he's inclined to sign it.
The bill is Senate Bill 2922.
I predict 1,000+ replies by dawn.
As I said in a previous thread, this is going to reach the Supreme Court very quickly, and most probably will be another win for the pro-abortionists. And then there is nothing we can do for many, many, many years. We should take our time, and do this in a more appropriate time.
Yep. This is going to eventually show where most states lie on the issue. That's a good thing for those who track such votes.
The difference in abortions limited for three exceptions and one exception should make it so that either side should support the other at least until Roe v Wade is overturned. I can accept either as the law of the land since the actual difference in legal abortions would be negligible.
Blah blah blah good thing you weren't around when we invaded Normandy.
There you go being a pro-life extremist again, EEE. Now stop it.
We must think hard on this issue. It's very complicated and takes lots of time to absorb. Stop reacting and think, EEE.
:)
Bush's Fault! heh
I can accept either also. Just so it eventually happens. What we have now is pathetic!
The RATS are trying to recruit pro-life people to run for office in Red States. With abortion bans occuring in SD and MS, the RATS will have to think long and hard about supporting pro-life candidates.
Agreed. We needed one more vote. The only hope at this point is to hope for something that I'm not going to hope for, namely the poor health or death of one of the liberals on the bench.
Yes, lucky me I wasn't here when you invaded Normandy. I wonder what that has to do with my post. I doubt you are more extremely extreme extremist than me in abortion. But with these kind of arguments, boy!, you are counterproductive to the cause.
Actually the abortionists will probably be happy. If just SD had done this it would be one thing because the Supreme Court would probably all agree to deny cert to the case and just be satisfied with letting the appeals court decision stand.
This is brilliant on the democrat legislator's part. If more than one state passes this law the supreme court is far more likely to address it right now, and guess what - the current Supreme Court is almost certainly going to support Roe vs. Wade again. And if they issue ANOTHER decision backing it up, it'll be at least 5 years and probably more before it gets addressed again because even if the President gets to appoint another Justice they won't look at the issue right away because the SC is too proud to make it look like quid pro quo.
This is just terrible strategy for pro-life, thanks to a) a press-hungry Republican legislator and b) a wily Democrat. 10 more years of Roe dominance coming up.
Yep...I see what your saying and it makes more sense than I want to admit. I was actually real surprised when SD came out with it so soon.
If Miss. legislators think this might be the case, do you think they might kill it, or would they get too much flak from the voters?
Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping list...
I agree. I think that the Dems are trying to get this pushed to SCOTUS before another lib justice retires.
But even with true conservatives elected to the court, the right way to handle the abortion debate, considering that the current law of the land is Roe v. Wade, is through a Constitutional Amendment passed by 3/4 of Congress and 3/4 of States declaring that the termination of a pregnancy is a legal issue to be decided only by the several States. Stare decisis is a pain, when it goes against the original intent of the Constitution, but amendments, and not changes in law, are the check and balance to bad decisions. The judicial power can't be so arbitrary as to change the primary Constitutional law of the entire nation every time two or three justices die and get replaced by others who have different opinions on things.
They send me stuff often.
Here is the latest on South Dakota.
******************************************
Dear Arthur Idis,
As early as this week, the South Dakota legislature is expected to send a bill that would ban all abortions to the desk of South Dakota's anti-choice governor who has said, "[a]bortion...should always be illegal."
In the words of the ban's sponsor, "'I'm convinced that the timing is right for this,' noting the appointments of Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. to the [Supreme] court." (New York Times, 2/22/06). Click here to help us fight politicians who won't respect a woman's right to choose.
Make no mistake: this ban is a direct attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade. And, as I know you are aware, it is only the beginning. I am asking you today for your help. Please make an emergency gift to save our rights, our freedoms, our right to choose.
The good news today is that a generous donor has made a $100,000 challenge grant to match your donation right now. So this is your chance to double the impact of your gift. Please, give generously.
My quote in today's Washington Post said it all, "When you see them have a ban that does not include exceptions for rape or incest or the health of the mother, you understand that elections do matter...We will be very active in '06 and in '08 in electing candidates that represent the views of most Americans."
Those who want to take away women's privacy and freedom wasted no time in putting the wheels in motion on plans that will ultimately lead to the dismantling or even overturning of Roe v. Wade. And to the women of South Dakota -- well, it already seems like Roe is overturned. This is a state where anti-choice activists have already made it nearly impossible to access reproductive-health care, let alone abortion services. If passed by the governor, the ban would outlaw abortion altogether without an adequate exception to protect women's lives and with no exception for women whose health is in danger or are pregnant due to rape or incest!
And this anti-choice victory means anti-choice forces will move on to other states to deny the rights of women across America.
If there was ever a moment that should galvanize pro-choice Americans, this is it. It's time to elect pro-choice candidates who will respect women's health and women's right to choose. I hope that I can count on you to stand with the women of South Dakota, and to stand with NARAL Pro-Choice America.
Help us take our work to defend a woman's right to choose twice as far. Please, click here to make your emergency contribution today -- our generous donor will make your gift go twice as far, when it's needed most. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Nancy Keenan
President, NARAL Pro-Choice America
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.