Mar 06
South Dakota can kiss my ass.

I saw some article titled something like "Is this abortion law the next gay marriage?" Um, what?!

Sorry for all you gals livin' in South Dakota. If your cousin/brother/stepfather/mom's boyfriend rapes you and you get pregnant, you get to give birth to that child. Hell, if you get raped by anyone and get pregnant, you get to carry that child to term. Unless you find a pharmacist in the state who carries Plan B right after you get raped, and that doesn't sound too easy right now.

CNN.com: South Dakota law bans nearly all abortions

at 2:28 PM
 
Trackbacks
Trackback URI: http://mt.pinkdome.com/mt-tb.cgi/1727
 
Comments

So when would SD's exception actually apply?

I found this link off of kos: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/jan-june06/abortion_3-03.html

According to State Sen. Bill Napoli (well, duh: R):
"A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life."

So a religious virgin has to be brutally raped and sodomized.

Fine Bottled Water at March 6, 2006 4:16 PM

"She planned on saving her virginity until she was married."

Ok, so what if she was a virgin...but had considered not remaining a virgin once she got to college and had a few beers at an SAE party or something? Because she'd considered that a possibility then a.) she deserved to be raped and b.) she should be forced to keep the baby?

This logic rocks man. Why there are not riots in the streets of America sometimes, I'll never know.

Anonymous at March 6, 2006 4:21 PM

See, I'm reading the text of the bill, and I'm not finding an exception for that poor religious virgin.

The only way that the one exception (to protect the life of the mother) would apply would be if the attack either:
a) put her in such a physically tenuous position due to injuries sustained in the attack as to make pregnancy possibly deadly; or
b) put her in such a terrible state of mind as to make her suicidal.

Somehow, I don't think "suicidal" was being considered by the drafters - unless, of course, the suicidal person was a really religious virgin. Maybe they did mean to cover her. Otherwise, what's with the sob story? Either her life is endangered, or it's not. For example, if the girl in question has a known medical condition and goes out and gets accidentally knocked up, she wouldn't be protected under the exception if the pregnancy threatened her life? What if she were raped? Is she covered if she's not a virgin?

How confusing.

jd0505 at March 6, 2006 4:58 PM

Gov. Mike Rounds: "In the history of the world, the true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society."

I suppose a girl being raped by her dad or brother isn't helpless or vulnerable. Prick.

RockStar at March 6, 2006 5:38 PM

...this makes my blood run cold..."Right To Life" should be re-purposed "Right To Misogyny".

jimmycity at March 6, 2006 5:42 PM
Post A Comment




Remember Me?