I’ve never been to South Dakota (praise be). But, if it operates similar to every other goddamn state in the union, we can conclude that women generally aren’t being forced to get abortions (not by doctors, anyway). I’m assuming there aren’t gangs of docs, swinging coat hangers like scimitars, preying on the pregnant. I’m also assuming that during the procedure, there isn’t a RN stationed nearby holding a gun to a lady’s head.
SO WHAT THE FUCK, SOUTH DAKOTA?
A law under consideration in South Dakota would expand the definition of “justifiable homicide” to include killings that are intended to prevent harm to a fetus—a move that could make it legal to kill doctors who perform abortions. The Republican-backed legislation, House Bill 1171, has passed out of committee on a nine-to-three party-line vote, and is expected to face a floor vote in the state’s GOP-dominated House of Representatives soon.
Specifically, the bill would make homicide justifiable if committed “while resisting an attempt to harm” a woman’s unborn child—or the unborn child of a woman’s spouse, parent, partner, or child.
You’re really going to make it legal for a pregnant woman’s immediate family or her partner to kill a doctor attempting to provide her with an abortion, if she wants one?
The bill’s sponsor Representative Phil Jensen (one guess which party he swings for) says that the bill couldn’t possibly be interpreted that way, because, according to his interview with Mother Jones, “if you look at the code, these codes are dealing with illegal acts. Now, abortion is a legal act.”
What a bullshit, mealy-mouthed response.
South Dakota already has the most aggressive abortion laws in the country and legislators have attempted to ban the procedure altogether twice in the past five years. Since they haven’t been able to outlaw abortion outright (although they’ve managed to ensure there are no abortion providers stationed in the state—they fly in for clinics), they’re content to simply toe the line and all but encourage violence. Clearly, South Dakota is on the cusp of becoming a very scary place for women’s health providers.
Go read the whole article. I feel like my head’s about to explode.
Hat tips and curtsies to the herds of outraged individuals who sent the link along.
Your move, Arizona.
Way to get outraged w/o reading.
“”This simply is to bring consistency to South Dakota statute as it relates to justifiable homicide,” said Jensen in an interview, repeating an argument he made in the committee hearing on the bill last week. “If you look at the code, these codes are dealing with illegal acts. Now, abortion is a legal act. So this has got nothing to do with abortion.””
Basically, if a man kills a pregnant woman in SD, he can be charged with 2 counts of murder. As of right now, the fetus can be murdered but cannot be justifiably defended with lethal force. The bill is, as the person above was saying, bringing consistency to their homicide statutes. Nothing to do with abortion.
It’s so wonderful that all those republibaggers got elected to create jobs, instead of wasting time on health issues like the democrats.
@2 neener neener. you dumb duh miss der duh point duh
republicans love killing and cancer
Don’t forget South Dakota also has one of the poorest counties in the country, if not THE poorest county in the country. South Dakota also tried or is trying to pass a mandate for citizens to own a gun for their own protection.
Seems incredibly unconstitutional, to say the least.
I wonder if “justifiable homicide” includes killing an abusive husband to prevent death to yourself.
Well, what we should really be afraid of is Sharia Law.
@6 beat me to it. SD can propose or enact all the batshit crazy laws they want, doesn’t change the fact that federal trumps state law.
Glad to see I wasn’t the only one out there with that feeling of impending head asplosion.
All women in South Dakota, please leave. There’s plenty of other places in this country where you’re much more appreciated, or at the very least, not as hated. Maybe once these fuckers realize there’s no one left in their sorry state to get pregnant, they’ll wake up to their idiocy.
@2 You are correct in that you have quoted what the bills sponsor said in the interview. Nice work. Did you read anything else or did you stop when you saw that the bills sponsor would not come out and openly tell people to kill abortion providers.
This bill has nothing to do with charging someone with 2 vs 1 murder. That would be in relation to the state’s ability to prosecute. This bill is in relation to an individual “protecting” an unborn child. The current law in SD says that you can kill someone who is trying to kill a woman. That’s already law. This law says that you can kill someone who’s trying to kill a fetus even if they’re not trying to harm the woman. I don’t know of many ways to kill a fetus that don’t harm the woman. In fact, abortion is the only one I can think of. So, I don’t see any way of reading this law except that it’s trying to make it legal to kill abortion doctors.
@9, doesn’t stop Californians from opening pot dispensaries.
Damn.
@12: This is a symbolic bill that in the end means nothing. Because abortions are legal, killing a doctor would still be an unjustified homicide UNLESS abortions are made illegal, in which case we have a whole other battle to fight. This bill is just another attempt from the right to apply rights to unborn fetuses, stupid if you ask me, but be realistic. It does not make abortions illegal and it does not legalize the murder of doctors.
You fail to mention that the two attempts to outlaw abortion in SD went to a public referendum and were voted down both times. Before you start throwing rocks our way (yes, I’m a South Dakotan) look at all the pro-lifers around you. These are the people who keep flooding our state with money and influence every political season trying to turn us into the test-state to repeal Rowe. As much as I’d love to bury our state senate for their general fucktardedness, it’s a much larger picture. All the billboards and bumperstickers don’t come from them. We may be the backwater joke, but we’re out here fighting against a well-funded operation without much help from the pro-choice crowd. It’s surreal to see my home town at the beginning of the Lake of Fire documentary, but we’re the battlefront.
As for this bill, yeah. Retarded. But what do you expect.
OuterCow! <3!
Oh Republicans, you’ll never change. Keep right on living in the early 1800s!
This shit is a fuck. Goddamn dumbfuckistanis.
#11 – Exactly.
Can the leaders of these rabble-rousing idiots please call them to heel? Anybody with a brain can see what they’re doing. The means to the end is getting pretty ugly.
@2/15: The actual text of the bill is here:
http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2011/B…
You’ll note that, aside from the ‘design to commit a felony’ clause, it also says that homicide is justifiable in order to prevent someone from doing ‘great personal injury’ to an unborn child.
If this law were enacted and were somehow deemed Constitutional, you could make a strong legal case to justify the murder of an abortion practitioner that is preparing to perform an abortion.
Why couldn’t you kill the mother? At least propose a law to imprison the mother and force her to give birth before you murder the doctor. I mean, if you’re going to be a murderous Christian fanatic, don’t let a little thing like law and order get in the way. History is replete with Christian’s murdering like crazy and they’re just itching to start murdering again.
@16 makes a good point (for anyone not reading unregistered comments). And the name is clever too.
OMFG! OMFG! OMFG!
::jumps around living room not knowing what to do with self::
@23, “that’s ridiculous; the doctors are only doing their jobs. if you’re going to kill someone, kill the mothers – that’ll stop them. oh, i know what you’re going to say: ‘if you kill the mother, the fetus dies, too.’ well, the fetus is going to be aborted anyway, so why not let it go down with the ship?”