|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Feb 10, 2006 14:39:51 GMT -5
I haven't read the text of this statute, but this law will undoubtably draw a constitutional challenge, and if past decisions are any guide, it will be struck down. Link |
|
TigerHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,808
|
Post by TigerHoya on Feb 11, 2006 16:21:44 GMT -5
Not a law yet... just passed the House and headed to the Senate, as the link says.
Having trouble finding the bill itself on the SD legislative page.
|
|
|
|
Post by Howie on Feb 12, 2006 15:27:34 GMT -5
What a collossal waste of taxpayer dollars.
|
|
|
|
Post by joehoya07 on Feb 13, 2006 2:09:34 GMT -5
As supportive as I am of the state protecting innocent life, this bill would appear to be a waste of time. It contains a provision that the law becomes unenforceable immediately when it is struck down by any court. Obviously, that'll happen faster than you can say Planned Parenthood. With a 5-4 majority on the Court still in favor of preserving Roe, there's no chance that this law will be upheld.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frank Black on Feb 18, 2006 15:09:14 GMT -5
As supportive as I am of the state protecting innocent life, this bill would appear to be a waste of time. It contains a provision that the law becomes unenforceable immediately when it is struck down by any court. Obviously, that'll happen faster than you can say Planned Parenthood. With a 5-4 majority on the Court still in favor of preserving Roe, there's no chance that this law will be upheld. Unless Kennedy decides to start paying attention in Church. |
|
TigerHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,808
|
Post by TigerHoya on Feb 23, 2006 16:44:10 GMT -5
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,301
|
Post by Cambridge on Feb 26, 2006 23:59:07 GMT -5
Without exceptions for incest and rape...this bill doesn't stand much of a chance, if any, of passing muster before any supreme court in the future. Seems like a real lazy attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade...almost sloppy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frank Black on Feb 28, 2006 0:21:23 GMT -5
Without exceptions for incest and rape...this bill doesn't stand much of a chance, if any, of passing muster before any supreme court in the future. Seems like a real lazy attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade...almost sloppy. One may believe that banning abortion in cases of rape and incest is bad policy, but that obviously doesn't make such a law unconstitutional. Unless you happen to believe that interpreting the constitution is essentially based on policy outcome. |
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,301
|
Post by Cambridge on Feb 28, 2006 3:14:21 GMT -5
I said nothing of constitutionality...that is a question that could be debated for hours.
Failure to ban abortion in cases of rape and incest would mean the rapist/incestor would have parental rights on par with the mother/victim in the eyes of the law.
Even the most conservative members of the court would hesitate before making such a troubling (administratively; ethically; morally; etc.) ruling that ran in the face of stare decisis.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Feb 28, 2006 9:53:41 GMT -5
What about the child/victim?
|
|
|
|
Post by showcase on Mar 1, 2006 21:58:02 GMT -5
Good point, easyed; a child rape or incest victim should be allowed an abortion should the need arise.
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Mar 10, 2006 11:58:42 GMT -5
As supportive as I am of the state protecting innocent life, this bill would appear to be a waste of time. It contains a provision that the law becomes unenforceable immediately when it is struck down by any court. Obviously, that'll happen faster than you can say Planned Parenthood. With a 5-4 majority on the Court still in favor of preserving Roe, there's no chance that this law will be upheld. Unless Kennedy decides to start paying attention in Church. Well, in that case, Scalia might also have to pay attention and strike down the death penalty. |
|
HoyaNCCT
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
We will remind them.
Posts: 685
|
Post by HoyaNCCT on Mar 20, 2006 21:01:17 GMT -5
i thought the Constitution left decisions up to the states if they were not specifically enumerated in the Constitution...
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,301
|
Post by Cambridge on Mar 22, 2006 12:18:34 GMT -5
It also created and protected inalienable rights in the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments. It's from those Amendments that this authority--whether you agree or not--is drawn for such a holding.
While I have trouble with the concept of abortion, I have trouble finding a clear line, constitutionally, that would allow any government to take sovereignty over the body from the individual. If you allow a state to legislate how you treat your body, where does it end? Obviously, I'm oversimplifying the issue, as supporters of the legislature will point to the rights of the fetus.
However, giving a fetus rights creates even more legal knots. If a fetus has rights, can a woman choose medical treatment that will save her life at the cost of the fetus'? What if the medical treatment is only slightly more effective but much more affordable? What if that medical treatment is only slightly more effective but much more comfortable? What if that medical treatment isn't more effective but t allows her to continue functioning and not miss work? My point is, as soon as you establish legal rights for the fetus, you open up a whole series of issues that should only be decided by a patient and her doctor--not a male-dominated legislature using a complex ethical question for political gain.
Basically, I just don't think this is an arena that the govt should become involved in. Of course, I don't think the govt should get involved in many issues. Legislation like this will only create more trouble than it will solve. The best means to prevent abortion is through education, objective counseling, proper medical care, sex ed, and a much less hypocrital social consiousness about sex. It is the mystery and the shame that leads to abortions. Making them illegal without addressing those two factors will only lead to illegal abortions--causing young women from the bleakest backgrounds to risk death rather than suffer the shame and stigma of teenage pregnanacy in our society.
|
|
