Pass it on...

Mar 25, 2006 08:46

(The following is from phoenixeye)

South Dakota's governor has signed into law a bill that prohibits abortion except to save the life of the mother. According to him, a"simple rape" isn't grounds for abortion.

In reply, from http://www.indianz.com/News/2006/013061.asp:
The President ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 6

anonymous March 25 2006, 21:59:16 UTC
.....
..........."a simple rape"?

Not to sound like a non-shavin' feminist cad, but....that sonuvabitch.

Thank you for this information. I'm following up on it.

Reply

kaikaku March 26 2006, 05:55:44 UTC
I looked it up. "Simple rape" is actually a defined type of rape--specifically, it is rape that occurs when the victim is unable to consent due to intoxication or mental illness, or when they are deceived into sleeping with someone other than who they thought they were sleeping with (ie, identical twin passing for their brother/sister. There have also been cases where women who liked to be blindfolded during sex had someone other than the partner they consented with deceive them).

Reply

meganglo March 26 2006, 14:36:57 UTC
....Doesn't sound so simple to me...

But, what do I know? I'm just a girl >_<.

Seriously though, where did you find that definition?

Reply


kaikaku March 26 2006, 03:27:57 UTC
I'm also willing the bet that the "to save the life of the mother" exception involves a certain amount of bullshit. There are a lot of medical conditions that raise the risks of pregnancy considerably--not the the point where you could claim that the woman absolutely had to get an abortion to save her life, but where the risks are high enough that by the time she was having problems it could be too late to save her with an abortion (ie, kidney conditions, cancer, autoimmune problems come to mind). Pregnancy carries considerable risks for some people, and knowing that, I find it repulsive that women might be forced to risk life and limb over a pregnancy. I mean, are they only going to do it once you're literally dying? Because if they don't have an exception for 13-year olds who are brutally raped by their fathers, I don't see why they'd care about your safety if you're early in your pregnancy and have a serious blood clotting disorder.

Reply

meganglo March 26 2006, 14:38:47 UTC
Unfortunately, the only way we're going to find out how South Dakota reacts to those kinds of emergencies is by hearing an actual account on the news.

They say no news is good news...

Reply


the_archmage March 29 2006, 10:40:50 UTC
I'm glad to see that at least I managed to get someone's attention with my post. Thank You Meg for taking it and posting it in your journal.

Sincerely,
Q

Reply


Leave a comment

Up