• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

South Dakota now requires 3-day waiting period for abortions

her209 said:
What happened to "government getting between you and your doctor" is bad, bad, bad?
Click to expand...

It's a state doing it, if its citizens do not want this they will be much more capable of punishing their government than we are of the federal government.

It is ideal that this sort of thing is not occurring to 310 million people. I say, let the people of South Dakota deal with it.
 
Jaskalas said:
It's a state doing it, if its citizens do not want this they will be much more capable of punishing their government than we are of the federal government.

It is ideal that this sort of thing is not occurring to 310 million people. I say, let the people of South Dakota deal with it.
Click to expand...

The judiciary will deal with it. If they find it an "undue burden" it'll be tossed.
 
I don't think the government restricting abortions is any more intrusive that the government restricting murder.

Whether you agree or not, that's the argument against the claim that we are hypocritically in favor of a big government when it suits our agenda.
 
her209 said:
Apples and oranges. Is the waiting period supposed to be used to persuade you to change your mind?
Click to expand...

Gives you time to think and calm down after finding out something has happened (like pregnancy test returns positive).

Sorta like having something bad happen to you and the three-day waiting period gives you a few days to think and calm down so you cannot just go out and buy a handgun to slaughter people after the incident.

Note, I am not comparing abortion to murder. IMO, in the early stages, it is not a baby, as we approach birth time, it is, we just have not figured out a way to clearly define when the transition occurs.
 
sunzt said:
If you really wanted an abortion within 3 days you just go to another state.
Click to expand...

That almost admits it's an undue burden, hence, unconstitutional.

her209 said:
Apples and oranges. Is the waiting period supposed to be used to persuade you to change your mind?
Click to expand...

The "cool off" argument is actually a prime motivator in passing such laws, so, yes.
 
Last edited:
her209 said:
What happened to "government getting between you and your doctor" is bad, bad, bad?
Click to expand...

The exception is that the government has the moral right and duty to try to prevent women from engaging in unapproved slutty behavior. Encouraging the attitude of "if you're going to play, you're going to pay" or "do the crime, do the time", where if a woman gets pregnant, God's righteous punishment of her for enjoying sex is to be forced to raise a child or give it up for adoption. We make exceptions for rape or incest because in those cases she didn't make the decision to have sex and likely didn't enjoy it, so in essense she "didn't do the crime", someone else did.

This was never about this "sanctity of human life" bullshit. Given human history, when the fuck have we ever cared about that?
 
Death Panels!!!!

It's the old Bait 'n Switch. Yell that your Opponent is going to do something, then do it yourself. Kind of like yelling that the Media was Left, then creating a Right media outlet that is so biased that it doesn't even attempt Journalistic Standards, unlike the Media before it.
 
Yup, keep government out of our lives,... unless it's for something that Christians disapprove of. Then, enforce the fuck out of it.
 
Kadarin said:
The exception is that the government has the moral right and duty to try to prevent women from engaging in unapproved slutty behavior. Encouraging the attitude of "if you're going to play, you're going to pay" or "do the crime, do the time", where if a woman gets pregnant, God's righteous punishment of her for enjoying sex is to be forced to raise a child or give it up for adoption. We make exceptions for rape or incest because in those cases she didn't make the decision to have sex and likely didn't enjoy it, so in essense she "didn't do the crime", someone else did.

This was never about this "sanctity of human life" bullshit. Given human history, when the fuck have we ever cared about that?
Click to expand...

Excuse me while I sweep up the pieces of my sarcasm meter.
 
Schadenfroh said:
Gives you time to think and calm down after finding out something has happened (like pregnancy test returns positive).

Sorta like having something bad happen to you and the three-day waiting period gives you a few days to think and calm down so you cannot just go out and buy a handgun to slaughter people after the incident.

Note, I am not comparing abortion to murder. IMO, in the early stages, it is not a baby, as we approach birth time, it is, we just have not figured out a way to clearly define when the transition occurs.
Click to expand...
To be just a cold-hearted bastard . . .

Do we really want to encourage breeding in people who only think about major life (and death!) choices if others enforce a three day thinking period?
 
MotF Bane said:
On what grounds?
Click to expand...

The state only has one abortion clinic, so it will be quite a trip for most. The patient would have to make the trip more than once if they had to wait 3 days. They'll have to take additional time off from work and otherwise arrange their schedule. They must also make appointments at counseling centers in the meantime before the abortion. SD is a rural place so getting around takes time, it's not like the counseling center is down the street from the one abortion clinic in the state (or I don't think so anyway). And the pregnancy centers all try to convince the woman to give birth instead, not simply inform them of options.

I think it overreaches. What exactly would constitute undue burden? How many hoops?
 
Matt1970 said:
So let me get this straight. It's ok to kill an innocent unborn child but not ok to kill a death row inmate?
Click to expand...

It should be ok to kill both, given that a fetus is neither an intelligent being nor legally a person, and that a death row inmate is someone condemned to death via due process of law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top