A blog dedicated to the rational discussion of politics and current events.
I'm quite surprised with you DG. I thought I read about this on Wednesday. What took so long with the post? What I'd like to know is this, how would S. Dakota's new "Personhood at Conception" law work considering the SCOTUS rulings, most importantly Roe V. Wade?I don't have the necessary "Lady parts" to be offended on the level that you may be. My nerves are struck by the fact that there are states in our Union that are this archaic.
I wrote about it earlier this week, and here, but this was the best visual I saw to add to the legislation passed on Friday. The state Senate passed everything earlier, but the state House only passed the lot of anti-abortion legislation on Friday. I will follow through with more when and if the governor signs it. In Arkansas it was vetoed. It is going to take a lot of state money to defend this, and I think no matter how much money they throw at it, it will fail. The silver lining is this could undo more legislation if the courts don't throw out Roe v. Wade. We have a very conservative very active activist judiciary on the SCOTUS, but some of them might be gone by the time court cases get that far. Meantime - best guess is the doctors will all move to Minnesota, and the patients will flood over the border for their services. No way is that kind of utter crap legislation going to pass here. You might enjoy this if you missed it:http://penigma.blogspot.com/2013/03/surrogacy-religious-fanatics-and-liberty.html