Hungry Hungry Hippo Habitat

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Well THAT didn't take long... South Dakota abortion ban

(Cross-posted from http://spaces.msn.com/beoshingus)

The legislature of South Dakota has decided to be the one to push the envelope and see just how pro-life this new U.S. Supreme Court is going to be. More info here.

Quoth the article:

Under the new bill, doctors in South Dakota would face up to five years in
prison for performing an abortion. The only exception would be for women who
need abortions to save their lives.


I don't really have a problem with that. It's a difficult situation, but I believe that sacrificing one life to save another is not something to condemn or scorn. It is an extremely sad situation when that happens. But it is fairly rare. The majority of abortions are performed as a means of birth control. I believe that using abortion as birth control (at any phase of the pregnancy) is nothing but infanticide.

I'm sure you'll be following this discussion, whether you want to or not. This will be all over the media for some time to come. One thing is clear (to me, at least): Roe v. Wade was a political decision; pure judicial legislation. Our Constitution forbids the judiciary from making law, and yet that is just what happened. Whether you agree with the law created by RvW or not, the simple fact is that the law would never have passed Congress and the signature of the President at the time the ruling was made. That is the only legal way for a law to be passed, and RvW circumvented the process to push a political agenda. There has been a culture war over this issue ever since.

Expect it to continue. To intensify. To get violent, on both sides. But for now, it is a waiting game. Be certain that when this law is passed in SD and goes into effect, the lawsuits will begin that day. The Supreme Court will be hearing the case soon. And then we'll know the next chapter in this sad, sad story.

4 Comments:

  • Encouraging as this is, I know that criminalizing abortion isn't going to stop abortions - and stopping abortion needs to be the primary goal. The first step is excising from our vocabulary the word "abortion" and using instead the real word for what's happening: Infanticide. Thank you for being brave enough to do this. Keep it up.

    By Blogger SME, at 9:37 PM  

  • Thanks for your comments. However, I think that criminalizing abortion (infanticide) is kind of a "duh" step in the process. After all, nobody questions the criminalization of murder when it comes to people who have already been born. If you truly think that abortion is murder (as you seem to by your agreement with the term "infanticide,") then you probably agree that existing murder laws should already cover it. I do as well. However, since some people seem to think pre-born children are exempt from these laws, I think that any law to further specify its bounds is not a bad thing. (Somebody will probably try to get abortion defined as a "hate crime," as well.)

    And no, criminalizing abortion will not put a stop to it. But it WILL slow it down, and dramatically, I believe. If you make something difficult enough and dangerous enough, most people are less likely to try it (in general.) People who use abortions as emergency birth control will be more likely to take other steps rather than relying on the fallback of an abortion.

    The interesting thing to watch about this SD legislation will be to see if it can remove some of the protection that RvW has been giving to this awful practice.

    By Blogger Beo, at 8:33 AM  

  • Criminalization is, indeed, a "duh" step.

    By Blogger SME, at 10:11 PM  

  • South Dakota's my state. *Hugs it*
    I can't believe the politicians there actually had courage for once, but I certainly am happy about it.

    Criminalizing abortion may not stop it completely, but what law does stop every incident it's written to prevent?

    By Blogger Miranda, at 8:13 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home