S. Dakota Gov. Signs Yet Another Anti-Abortion Law

The Republican war on women’s rights, South Dakota chapter

PoliticsMarch 2011 • Views: 28,753

The Republican governor of South Dakota, Dennis Daugaard, has signed a law that forces women considering an abortion to wait three days after meeting with a doctor — and also requires them to undergo “counseling” at anti-abortion “pregnancy help centers” run by religious fanatics.

And it’s coupled with an attack on Planned Parenthood, of course.

Supporters of the measure say South Dakota’s only abortion clinic, Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls, gives women little information or counseling before they have abortions done by doctors flown in from out of state. The bill would help make sure women are not being coerced into abortions, they said.

“Coerced into abortions?” This shows the distorted and paranoid thinking of these anti-choice groups. They actually believe that Planned Parenthood wants to promote abortions and will “coerce” unsuspecting women. The fact that women walk into a Planned Parenthood clinic of their own free will is of absolutely no importance to them.

The law, which takes effect July 1, says an abortion can only be scheduled by a doctor who has personally met with a woman and determined she is voluntarily seeking an abortion. The procedure can’t be done until at least 72 hours after that first consultation.

Before getting an abortion, a woman also will have to consult with a pregnancy help center to get information about services available to help her give birth and keep a child. The state will publish a list of pregnancy help centers, all of which seek to persuade women to give birth.

So to counteract the influence of Planned Parenthood, who they say “coerces” women into abortions, they will force women to go to anti-abortion “counseling” centers run by nutjobs.

Who’s coercing whom?

Jump to bottom

72 comments

Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:07:13am

Another reason I am glad to live in California.

iossarian Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:08:11am

These people are not far away from honor killings.

"I was trying to protect my unborn son."

jamesfirecat Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:10:32am

"a law that forces women considering an abortion to wait three days after meeting with a doctor"

Of course we must make sure that this waiting period is obeyed and that these women don't go to some kind of "abortion shows" where they'll be able to purchase one without even needing a background check!

Kronocide Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:11:47am

I thought Sharia was outlawed.

Sol Berdinowitz Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:12:32am

The choice is to remain theirs, without "coercion" from either side of the issue.

Nonetheless, I am all in favor of people doing all they can to convince women to keep their children, especially if it involves offering them practical assistance in childcare, education and finding work or obtaining training to enhance their professional chances.

That is supportive work, but the anti-abortionists are not for supporting anything, they are for banning abortion, and focus so heavily on the unborn that they do not see the situation of the mother who is to bear and raise the child they want to protect.

And this does not square at all with the Pawlenty School of "it's not my problem"

mr.fusion Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:13:42am

Ah, it's so refreshing to see small government Republicans in charge

lawhawk Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:14:53am

For a party that likes to claim that government has no business interfering in ... well pretty much anything... they're sure as heck interfering in one the most personal of options - whether to consent to have an abortion or not.

Targetpractice Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:15:09am

We must stop women from being "coerced" into having abortions, so that we might bring these children into the world...and immediately abandon them because they're "not my problem."

[deleted] Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:16:09am

SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:16:13am

re: #5 ralphieboy

The choice is to remain theirs, without "coercion" from either side of the issue.

Nonetheless, I am all in favor of people doing all they can to convince women to keep their children, especially if it involves offering them practical assistance in childcare, education and finding work or obtaining training to enhance their professional chances.

That is supportive work, but the anti-abortionists are not for supporting anything, they are for banning abortion, and focus so heavily on the unborn that they do not see the situation of the mother who is to bear and raise the child they want to protect.

And this does not square at all with the Pawlenty School of "it's not my problem"

The worst thing is, there are good organizations out there, that will actually help pregnant women and make it possible for them to choose not to abort. A friend of a friend was given great help by Birthright. They got her maternity clothes, and coached her through getting some financial assistance, and were a great support.

But these asshole 'counseling' places have a rep that smears everyone, good and bad alike.

elizajane Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:16:33am

Note the subtlety here. The doctor who performs the abortions in South Dakota must be flown in from out of state -- because, as in so many places in the American heartland, no such doctor dares/wants to reside in that area. Under the new law that SAME doctor (not just any doctor, but the very one who will perform the abortion) must meet with the woman three days before the abortion is performed.

The result will be to at least double the cost of the operation, if the doctor can even manage to fly all that way twice in a week at all. Sioux Falls being not exactly close to any major metropolis.

Net result? Poor women are denied a choice, once again. Rich girls fly out of state. Good job, Republicans! Keep the poor poor. Barefoot and pregnant, that's the way it should be.

Sorry, just losing my temper a tiny bit.

SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:16:38am

re: #9 MikeySDCA

All of this is going to cost money. Do these ninnies have any thought on where that is going to come from?

Your tax dollars at work.

allegro Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:17:29am

re: #9 MikeySDCA

All of this is going to cost money. Do these ninnies have any thought on where that is going to come from?

They're probably going going to charge the women seeking healthcare services for these added "services" they clearly need since they're obviously too simple minded to know what's best for them and their families.

Sol Berdinowitz Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:17:38am

re: #11 elizajane

They have found a convenient way to get around Roe v. Wade, which will do them just fine until they can repeal it entirely...

Jdorfma4 Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:18:26am

re: #10 SanFranciscoZionist

The worst thing is, there are good organizations out there, that will actually help pregnant women and make it possible for them to choose not to abort. A friend of a friend was given great help by Birthright. They got her maternity clothes, and coached her through getting some financial assistance, and were a great support.

But these asshole 'counseling' places have a rep that smears everyone, good and bad alike.

And then they supported her financially for the next 18 years right? Paid her rent, bought her food, paid for summer camp? Or did they just abandon her once the kid took a breath and was no longer at risk for abortion?

wrenchwench Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:19:30am

I hate how they assume the thought process only begins when a woman sees a doctor.

An unintended consequence: A woman finds out she's pregnant. Doesn't yet know what she wants to do. Figures she better sign up for the abortion in case that's what she decides on, since she'll be delayed after that for three days. Then goes ahead with what's in motion, and has the abortion without further thought. Result: more abortions!

allegro Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:19:45am

re: #11 elizajane

Net result? Poor women are denied a choice, once again. Rich girls fly out of state. Good job, Republicans! Keep the poor poor. Barefoot and pregnant, that's the way it should be.

Exactly right.

Charles Johnson Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:21:22am

re: #11 elizajane

Sorry, just losing my temper a tiny bit.

I'm amazed that women in South Dakota (and some of the other states where these laws are being passed) aren't out in the streets protesting. There's a very serious right wing effort under way to roll back all the advances made in women's rights over the past 40 years.

leftynyc Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:21:33am

Their contempt for women truly knows no bounds.

Kronocide Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:22:33am

re: #5 ralphieboy

A minor quibble: they are all for supporting young mothers and newborns.

As long as they commit to being 'saved' by Jesus.

But I know have to go save my mortgage by committing capitalism.

Sol Berdinowitz Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:24:17am

re: #20 BigPapa

A minor quibble: they are all for supporting young mothers and newborns.

As long as they commit to being 'saved' by Jesus.

But I know have to go save my mortgage by committing capitalism.

If they are attaching strings to it, then it is not true charity...

SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:24:24am

re: #15 Jdorfma4

And then they supported her financially for the next 18 years right? Paid her rent, bought her food, paid for summer camp? Or did they just abandon her once the kid took a breath and was no longer at risk for abortion?

She placed the child for adoption. It was her decision to do so.

theheat Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:25:00am

re: #18 Charles

When you look at the indigenous population, it's not really surprising there aren't more than a handful of women that would find this intolerable. The Dakotas might not be technically Heartland like Iowa, but the climate is way fundie friendly.

iossarian Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:33:35am

re: #18 Charles

I'm amazed that women in South Dakota (and some of the other states where these laws are being passed) aren't out in the streets protesting. There's a very serious right wing effort under way to roll back all the advances made in women's rights over the past 40 years.

The world is not short of people who have been persuaded that things that are bad for them are in fact good for them.

Kragar Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:40:43am

Arab uprising infects 'immune' Syria

The Syrian regime in Damascus, which President Bashar Assad recently claimed was "immune" from the political upheaval gripping the Arab world, is now grappling with street protests on a scale not seen for a generation.

The trouble hasn't yet taken root in the heavily guarded capital of one of the Middle East's repressive states outside of the occasional skirmish. But the regime has cracked down harshly against unrest in the poverty-stricken southern city of Daraa in recent days in which troops fired on protesters, killing at least five and possibly as many as 25.

Tens of thousands of protesters torched the offices of the ruling Baath party, the Palace of Justice and a cellphone company run by Assad's cousin, Rami Makhlouf. Damascus blamed unidentified hidden hands for "acts of sabotage."

John Q Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:41:13am

Er, Charles:

Don't you mean - Who’s coercing whom?

jaunte Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:42:03am

South Dakota already has laws (S.D. Codified Laws §§ 34-23A-11 to -14)
that allow medical workers, businesses or pharmacists to refuse to provide abortion services, without requiring notification of the person affected, factually accurate medical information, or referral to any other provider. There are no circumstances in law that would prevent a refusal. This new law is just piling on to the powerless.

kirkspencer Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:43:38am

re: #9 MikeySDCA

All of this is going to cost money. Do these ninnies have any thought on where that is going to come from?

Yes, they have. It isn't going to come from anywhere. No funding, no abortions.

Ericus58 Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:48:37am

re: #25 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Arab uprising infects 'immune' Syria

"1745: Russian PM Vladimir Putin has been speaking on the situation in Libya, saying those responsible for civilian casualties in Libya "should pray to save their own souls", Reuters reports. He has also said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev represents Russia's position as president."

There was no response when asked his thought's about the Libyan regimes crimes against it's citizens....

HappyWarrior Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:51:51am

You can really see how much South Dakota Republicans "value" small government and individual liberties. Listen, they don't have to like the fact that abortion is legal but they do need to respect the choice of a woman to get what is a legal procedure without harassing her or acting like she is too stupid to make her own choice. I understand opposition to abortion. What I don't understand are pussyshits like this doing all they can to make life miserable for women who get abortions.

Fozzie Bear Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:53:07am

re: #9 MikeySDCA

All of this is going to cost money. Do these ninnies have any thought on where that is going to come from?

That same money would prevent far more abortions if it were applied toward contraception and support for new mothers. Then again, this isn't really about abortions. It's about controlling women.

Fozzie Bear Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:59:35am

re: #18 Charles

I'm amazed that women in South Dakota (and some of the other states where these laws are being passed) aren't out in the streets protesting. There's a very serious right wing effort under way to roll back all the advances made in women's rights over the past 40 years.

I had a rather enlightening conversation with a conservative (but not insane) attorney with whom I work. His view is that the fringe right is all talk and no walk, and that they won't accomplish much in the way of enacting their stated goals, and thus, are not much a problem. He thinks it's mostly just hyperbole on the part of the left. This is how he justifies voting republican year after year.

So, in the long run, this kind of thing has to happen, over and over again, until it gets to the point where it starts impacting the lives of significant numbers of conservatives directly. My co-worker won't change his mind until someone in his immediate circle of friends dies from a back-alley abortion, or loses their life in an industrial accident, etc. In other words, i think the political atmosphere will just get increasingly crazy for another decade or two. This has a long way to go before it unravels, imo. We are nowhere near bottom yet.

I Am Kreniigh! Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:03:29pm

re: #3 jamesfirecat

Imagine the rage explosion if a law was passed requiring a gun buyer to go see an "anti-gun" counselor before making the purchase.

iossarian Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:04:29pm

re: #33 Kreniigh

Imagine the rage explosion if a law was passed requiring a gun buyer to go see an "anti-gun" counselor before making the purchase.

Or indeed if you had to undergo counseling before being allowed to feed your children junk food.

Sol Berdinowitz Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:06:08pm

re: #34 iossarian

Or indeed if you had to undergo counseling before being allowed to feed your children junk food.

Hey, once those fetuses are born, they are no longer our problem...

wrenchwench Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:10:13pm

re: #26 John Q

Er, Charles:

Don't you mean - Who’s coercing whom?

My favorite English teacher: If you need to know whether to use "who" or "whom" in a sentence, you should rewrite the sentence.

Sol Berdinowitz Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:11:33pm

Whom do you love?

jaunte Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:12:55pm

re: #37 ralphieboy

Whom is where the heart is.

Interesting Times Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:13:08pm

re: #32 Fozzie Bear

I had a rather enlightening conversation with a conservative (but not insane) attorney with whom I work. His view is that the fringe right is all talk and no walk, and that they won't accomplish much in the way of enacting their stated goals, and thus, are not much a problem. He thinks it's mostly just hyperbole on the part of the left. This is how he justifies voting republican year after year.

I see those exact same arguments on this very board as typical pushback to the posts Charles makes.

Charles Johnson Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:16:05pm

re: #26 John Q

Er, Charles:

Don't you mean - Who’s coercing whom?

Aw, come on. Whom cares?

Fozzie Bear Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:16:54pm

re: #39 publicityStunted

I see those exact same arguments on this very board as typical pushback to the posts Charles makes.

It just has to keep going until the false equivalence seems absurd to enough conservatives that they can no longer win elections. It doesn't matter how enthusiastically you or I vote. We still only get one vote. The only thing that can stop this is if the people who currently defend the GOP cease to do so, and decide to either not vote or vote against the GOP.

The fate of our country rests in the hands of the Bucks of the nation, not the Fozzies. The Fozzies can't vote any harder.

sagehen Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:18:12pm

re: #9 MikeySDCA

All of this is going to cost money. Do these ninnies have any thought on where that is going to come from?

I'm just adopting Rachel's mantra for any and all Republican initiatives, whether state or federal: "It's not about the budget. They say it's about the budget, but it's not about the budget."

CuriousLurker Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:18:36pm

The bill would help make sure women are not being coerced into abortions, they said.

You know what these people are with all their faux distress over abortion and religious talk about wanting to save America from the sin, creeping sharia, etc.?

The world's biggest CONCERN TROLLS.

wrenchwench Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:19:29pm

re: #41 Fozzie Bear

The fate of our country rests in the hands of the Bucks of the nation, not the Fozzies. The Fozzies can't vote any harder.

Fortunately, Buck is Canadian.

/wait, you're not Canadian too, are you?

ProMayaLiberal Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:19:56pm

Good news and bad news from Libya.

Bad News: Canada had to cancel an attack on a position because of collateral damage potential. I guarantee that Gaddafi is using human shields.

Good News:

8:50pm
Hussein El Warfali, one of the heads of a Gaddafi brigade near Tripoli, has reportedly been killed.

wrenchwench Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:22:08pm

re: #43 CuriousLurker

You know what these people are with all their faux distress over abortion and religious talk about wanting to save America from the sin, creeping sharia, etc.?

The world's biggest CONCERN TROLLS.

Uh oh, giant concern trolls and armies of sockpuppets! Oh my!

sagehen Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:22:45pm

re: #18 Charles

I'm amazed that women in South Dakota (and some of the other states where these laws are being passed) aren't out in the streets protesting. There's a very serious right wing effort under way to roll back all the advances made in women's rights over the past 40 years.

In every visible way, whether protests or petitions or letters to the editor, the women of South Dakota think all this is just fine.

But in the privacy of the voting booth, when actual abortion laws are on the ballot -- none of the restrictions ever pass.

(Since the midwest states are all being assholes about it, there's now a movement among feminists to locate abortion clinics on Indian reservations. Sovereign territory, not subject to state laws, yadda yadda.)

ProMayaLiberal Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:24:04pm

Oh, also this bit of stupidity from Libya

7:25pm Channel 4 News is reporting that six villagers in a field on the outskirts of Benghazi were shot and injured when a US helicopter landed to rescue a crew membr from the US fighter jet that crashed late on Monday.

It said the local Libyans who were injured in the rescue mission are currently in hospital and that one young boy is expected to have his leg amputated due to a bullet wound.

That's not a good thing for us. Hopefully, we can make reparations for the mistake.

darthstar Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:24:21pm

When fetuses are outlawed, only outlaws will have fetuses.

jaunte Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:24:40pm

Here's another SD law that uses the term fetus and infant interchangeably.
I wonder if that means in SD that causing the death of a fetus at any age will be defined as infanticide?

34-23A-33. Fetus and infant defined. For the purposes of §§ 34-23A-27 to 34-23A-33, inclusive, the term, fetus, and the term, infant, are used interchangeably to refer to the biological offspring of human parents.[Link: legis.state.sd.us...]

Sol Berdinowitz Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:25:20pm

re: #47 sagehen

Since the midwest states are all being assholes about it, there's now a movement among feminists to locate abortion clinics on Indian reservations. Sovereign territory, not subject to state laws, yadda yadda.

Right next door to the gambling casinos?

only_me Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:26:06pm

I used to work for a Planned Parenthood. There is absolutely no coercion involved. In fact, there is a script we used when we had a positive pregnancy test. I don't remember it exactly, except that it said there were 3 options available--keeping the baby, giving the baby up for adoption or abortion. We'd then wait until they gave us an answer, and then give them the corresponding information and go over it with her. Only once when I was there do I remember someone who had absolutely no idea what to do, and she left without any information (and I'm not sure to this day that she wasn't a plant by the pro-life "crisis pregnancy center" in town). I also worked there during the Rust v. Sullivan "gag rule" in 1991, where we weren't allowed to mention "abortion" at all. Only if the woman said the word "abortion" first could we discuss it. We just dropped the whole "3 options" part and asked "do you know what you want to do?" Again, most women had their minds made up when they came in the door.

Also, slightly OT, I don't know that I can ever recall in my year working there any of the "regular" patients (those using the family planning services/birth control) coming in for an unplanned pregnancy. Cutting funding to Planned Parenthood WILL NOT reduce abortions. In addition, in the town I lived/worked in, Planned Parenthood was the only health care many women could get. There were NO doctors taking new patients.

iceweasel Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:28:16pm

No Evidence for Claim that Sixty-Four Percent of Women Seeking Abortions Were Coerced To Do So

So, to boil it down, 139 women who self-selected to participate in a study about traumatic effects of abortion, a majority of whom thought abortion was a morally wrong procedure to which women did not have a right, stated that they "felt pressured by others" to have an abortion. Based on that result, anti-choice politicians and activists have been declaring that "64 percent of all women are coerced into abortions" and that laws need to be made to restrict their access to the procedure to protect them

Reality's bias again.

Sol Berdinowitz Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:28:18pm

re: #52 only_me

Availability equals "temptation". And that is every bit as evil as coercion.

wrenchwench Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:30:45pm

re: #53 iceweasel

No Evidence for Claim that Sixty-Four Percent of Women Seeking Abortions Were Coerced To Do So

Reality's bias again.

Irrelevant.

Get those facts away from me! They burn!!1!!

Jeff In Ohio Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:33:43pm

re: #11 elizajane

Note the subtlety here. The doctor who performs the abortions in South Dakota must be flown in from out of state -- because, as in so many places in the American heartland, no such doctor dares/wants to reside in that area. Under the new law that SAME doctor (not just any doctor, but the very one who will perform the abortion) must meet with the woman three days before the abortion is performed.

The result will be to at least double the cost of the operation, if the doctor can even manage to fly all that way twice in a week at all. Sioux Falls being not exactly close to any major metropolis.

Net result? Poor women are denied a choice, once again. Rich girls fly out of state. Good job, Republicans! Keep the poor poor. Barefoot and pregnant, that's the way it should be.

Sorry, just losing my temper a tiny bit.

Quoted for truth.

Anyone who says the SD law is anything but this right here is a goddamn liar.

TedStriker Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:40:54pm

re: #26 John Q

Er, Charles:

Don't you mean - Who’s coercing whom?

GRAMMAR NAZI!!!11ty

///

iceweasel Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:44:42pm

re: #55 wrenchwench

heh.

Not in the eyes, not in the eyes!

iceweasel Tue, Mar 22, 2011 12:49:31pm

The worst part of the waiting period issue is that it infantilises women; it presumes that the decision to have an abortion is like getting your nails done: groups of women just randomly decide to do it in the mall on saturday because their friends are. Ooo, Abortion Apple, what a great colour, what the heck, I'll have one too.

Robert O. Tue, Mar 22, 2011 1:09:11pm

I am beginning to wonder if the day may come when the US has to outsource abortions" - i.e., American women will have to travel abroad to, say, China, to get their abortion.

garhighway Tue, Mar 22, 2011 1:29:46pm

re: #9 MikeySDCA

All of this is going to cost money. Do these ninnies have any thought on where that is going to come from?

For some things, cost is no object.

CuriousLurker Tue, Mar 22, 2011 1:36:44pm

re: #55 wrenchwench

Irrelevant.

Get those facts away from me! They burn!!1!!

Kinds like holy water & vampires.

yasharki Tue, Mar 22, 2011 2:16:54pm

I don't know much about this whole choice-life war, but it seems to me that most women would consider abortion for financial reasons. If pro-lifers don't want them to have an abortion are they willing to pick up the tab for giving birth and raising a baby if a woman is in such a financial distress?

Mr.Boots Tue, Mar 22, 2011 2:29:01pm

Maybe I missed this, but isn't this a violation of HIPAA, or is the state going to set up a massive state funded medical counseling program that complies with the mandated right to privacy? Wouldn't this require licensed or certified personnel? Or, is the state expecting to set up these "counselling centers" with local church volunteers and HIPAA be damned?

Not sure how the state can mandate the sharing of confidentiality.

SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Mar 22, 2011 2:41:27pm

re: #60 Robert O.

I am beginning to wonder if the day may come when the US has to outsource abortions" - i.e., American women will have to travel abroad to, say, China, to get their abortion.

Girls go from Ireland to England all the time.

That's a bit closer. You can take the ferry and a bus.

Lidane Tue, Mar 22, 2011 2:56:31pm

LIMITED GOVERNMENT! INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS! LIBERTY!

Unless you're a woman, of course. =P

Lidane Tue, Mar 22, 2011 3:00:06pm

re: #9 MikeySDCA

All of this is going to cost money. Do these ninnies have any thought on where that is going to come from?

Who cares? Let the abortion-loving slut pay for it. If she didn't want to deal with all these laws, she would have kept her legs closed.

Our Precious Bodily Fluids Tue, Mar 22, 2011 4:49:42pm

The first time someone whips out religion or any of its trappings at one of the legally-mandated "counseling" session (which will be about 5 minutes after the first poor patient enters the door), then it's hello Supreme Court.

theheat Tue, Mar 22, 2011 7:08:59pm

re: #68 negativ

Some of these women aren't even go to know better. Which is exactly what these fundie freaks are banking on.

Querent Tue, Mar 22, 2011 7:32:55pm

Moral Derpitude... derp derp derp

are they just aggravated felony-stoopid, or are they really evil?

/// (of course they're evil)

Querent Tue, Mar 22, 2011 8:01:02pm

re: #63 yasharki

I don't know much about this whole choice-life war, but it seems to me that most women would consider abortion for financial reasons. If pro-lifers don't want them to have an abortion are they willing to pick up the tab for giving birth and raising a baby if a woman is in such a financial distress?

Of course not!

labman57 Tue, Mar 22, 2011 11:19:59pm

Ironically, another South Dakota law states that one must wait only two days to buy a handgun if it will be used to shoot an abortion clinic worker. /s/

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

S. Dakota Gov. Signs Yet Another Anti-Abortion Law

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud