South Dakota abortion doctors now required to spout right wing religious ideology to patients.

[madfloridian]

(I am reposting this with a corrected subject line. It is an important topic, and I put the wrong state.)

I was really surprised to see how effective the anti-choice crowd has been. I know that in Florida they have succeeded in closing many women's clinics, and forcing long travel and long waits with long lectures.

In South Dakota there is only one clinic in the state, and abortions are performed only once a week with only one of three doctors rotating weekly.

This law was okayed last week by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The 8th Circuit Court Okays South Dakota’s Political Interference in Women’s Personal Medical Decision-Making

The 700 or so women each year who have an abortion in South Dakota go to the only abortion clinic in the state, where one doctor performs abortions once a week (three different doctors rotate that shift). After last Friday’s 8th Circuit Court decision in Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Rounds (PDF), those three doctors are now forced, by law, to tell each of these women that “An abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.” This restriction is just one more tactic that anti-choice forces have used to chip away at the constitutional right to abortion in what is already one of the most restricted states.

The ACLU believes that a woman needs medically accurate information to make the best choices for herself and her circumstances, without undue pressure. She should be able to trust that the advice she receives from her physician reflects what her physician believes is in her best interest, not something that her physician has been forced to say by the government.

Clearly those in the South Dakota legislature who voted to pass the law,and the 8th Circuit judges who voted to uphold it, disagree.

The law also forces a doctor to tell his or her patient that she “has an existing relationship with that unborn human being” and if she has an abortion, “her existing relationship and her existing constitutional rights with regards to that relationship will be terminated.”

Who wrote the law? An anti-choice activist.

If the law’s language sounds like anti-choice rhetoric, it’s because it was written by an anti-choice activist — the lawyer Harold J. Cassidy. He tried a similar tactic in New Jersey a few years ago by bringing a medical malpractice lawsuit against a physician who performed an abortion and who didn’t tell his patients what those three rotating doctors in South Dakota are now forced to tell theirs: that abortion terminates the life of a separate, unique human being.

It truly alarms me when the courts get involved in telling doctors what to say to their patients. There are so many dangers when religious views are turned into law. We have already forgotten how outraged we were when late-term abortions were banned. Doctors who performed them could be given up to two years in jail, even to save the life of the mother.

How it was easy to get the ban on late term abortions...our party went along.

Yes votes in the Senate:

John Breaux, Harry Byrd, Kent Conrad, Tom Daschle, Byron Dorgan, Fritz Hollings, Tim Johnson, Mary Landrieu, Patrick Leahy, Blanche Lincoln, Miller (GA), Ben Nelson, Pryor AK, Harry Reid.

There were 63 yes votes in the House.

The bill from 2003 read like this:

Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003: Vote to pass a bill banning a medical procedure, which is commonly known as "partial-birth" abortion. The procedure would be allowed only in cases in which a women's life is in danger, not for cases where a women's health is in danger. Those who performed this procedure, would face fines and up to two years in prison, the women to whom this procedure is performed on are not held criminally liable.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Santorum, R-PA; Bill S.3 ; vote number 2003-530 on Oct 2, 2003

The Supreme Court last year took it further. They removed the part about saving the life of the woman.

Supreme Court allows late term abortion ban

In a 5-to-4 decision announ-ced Wednesday, the high court upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. The move comes nearly seven years after the Supreme Court declared a similar Nebraska law unconstitutional because it lacked an exception to protect a woman's health.

This time a different lineup of justices upheld a federal version of essentially the same law, even though it does not contain a so-called health exception that would permit the banned abortion procedure when a physician deemed it necessary to safeguard a woman's health.

The decision marks the first time since the landmark abortion precedent Roe v. Wade in 1973 that the nation's highest court has ruled in a way that places considerations of a woman's health as secondary to efforts by the government to restrict abortion procedures performed prior to fetal viability. That shift could embolden antiabortion forces to try to enact more restrictions at the state level.

Writing for the majority in Wednesday's decision, Justice Anthony Kennedy said the lack of a health exception does not automatically render the statute unconstitutional. "Whether the act creates significant health risks for women has been a contested factual question," he writes. "Both sides have medical support for their position."

Whether the act has risks for the mother? Of course it does.

The court placed the woman's life as secondary. A two party system really does matter, and standing up against the inclusion of religious dogma into our laws....really does matter. We forget so quickly the dangers of not standing up for what we believe.

And the fight continues.

[flvegan]

1. What idiot shit court handed that decsion down?

Could we PLEASE just have that Rapture thing so these douchebag fundies will go the fuck away?

[KamaAina]

8. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

must be packed with Reagan/Bush sock puppets, much like the Fifth.

[fudge stripe cookays]

2. They should pull something similar to Lysistrata...

only every woman in SD should either stop having sex or find greener pastures in another state until this crap gets rescinded.

With no new population growth, and no sex for the hard-working farmers, the tax base would be completely eroded, and SD would dry up to nothing.

[madfloridian]

3. Same bill was thrown out in NJ

http://www.aclu.org/reproductiverights/abortion/31650pr...

"In its unanimous decision, the court noted, "we know of no common law duty requiring a physician to instruct the woman that the embryo is an 'existing human being,' and suggesting that an abortion is tantamount to murder. There is not even remotely a consensus among New Jersey's medical community or citizenry that plaintiff's assertions are medical facts, as opposed to firmly held, moral philosophical, and religious beliefs."

Acuna's lawsuit is one of three instances where anti-choice foes have insisted that doctors must read a similar script to their patients prior to performing an abortion. A class-action medical malpractice lawsuit with similar claims was recently brought in Illinois, and in South Dakota, reproductive rights advocates are currently challenging a law that may require doctors to read language identical to that found in this case. "

[DesertFlower]

4. OMG. nt

[LWolf]

5. Holy shit. n/t

[jmowreader]

6. Yeah, that sounds about right...

Doctor: "An abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being."

Patient: "Yup. Sure will. And next week I have to go testify, because its father is going on trial for raping me. You go right ahead and terminate its life, and then put it in a jar so I can enter it as evidence."

I have a WONDERFUL idea: Let's move flvegan and the other sane people out of the Sunshine State, send all the anti-choice wackos down there, and allow it to secede.

[madfloridian]

7. Did you use "Florida" and "secede" in the same sentence?

Good for you.

[LeftyMom]

11. Yeah, but making an armed, ignorant third world nation of Florida is redundant.

I do like this evacuating flvegan idea though. I'll save some pizza, somebody honk when you get to my driveway.

[KamaAina]

9. Does it say that the script must be read *in English*?

I'd be memorizing it in Urdu right about now...

[That Is Quite Enough]

10. Hey, anybody want some Christofascists? We have a surplus here in SD, so they're going on sale.

[bertman]

12. Since these people are so concerned about terminating the relationship and constitutional

rights of the unborn fetus from those of the mother why don't they make a law making it illegal for the President of the United States to terminate the relationship and constitutional rights of a full-grown person that the mother has nurtured and raised since birth (aka a military service member) from that of his/her mother?

[LauraW]

13. This is what happens

when vital questions are returned to the states. The states come up with different answers.

[defendandprotect]

14. Right . . . women now have no right to self-defense . . . if a fetus is involved . ..!!!

As long as we have patriarchy, we will have male violence and especially male violence against
females --

Women now have a right to abortion without being able to get one ---

“An abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.”

Of course all of that is a lie and intended to intimidate women and I guess especially young
women.

If this were anywhere near true, the pregnant female would not be the primary host --
there is a female involved and a procless of gestation which religious authoritarians
do not want acknowledged.

Bless the ACLU ...

There are also a lot of Catholic anti-abortion reps in the USHR --
Gephardt, for one, if I recall correctly voted for the partial truth abortion.

And, if you put more Catholics in office chances are you are going to be adding to the
anti-abortion votes . . .

Look where we are with religious weirdos in the Supreme Court . . . !

The Supreme Court last year took it further. They removed the part about saving the life of the woman.

Supreme Court allows late term abortion ban

Now women --- only women --- have no right to self-defense -- !!!

And who is it here who wants more religion in government . . . ???

Yep, line 'em up and give 'em more money ---

Forget what the FOUNDERS said about Separation of Church & State --
what did they know!!



Btw, this is exactly what Catholic hospitals used to do ---
save the baby, let the female die.
Didn't matter if she had ten kids to take care of --- they saved the baby.
Didn't matter that she was a wife, a daughter, a mother -- an established life --
they let her die to save the baby.

Whether the act has risks for the mother? Of course it does.

The court placed the woman's life as secondary. A two party system really does matter, and standing up against the inclusion of religious dogma into our laws....really does matter. We forget so quickly the dangers of not standing up for what we believe.

Disgusting . . .

but this is patriarchy -- and its natural end is suicidal --

and they will take us all with them.

[bertman]

15. defendandprotect, that just about covers it. Thanks to you and the angry one from Florida.

[madfloridian]

18. That is righteous anger...It is ridiculous.

[and-justice-for-all]

16. Those anti-choice folks make me ill...

I would love to take their religious ideology and shove it up their ass!

[madfloridian]

17. It was a SD Democratic lawmaker, a woman, who proposed an anti-abortion bill

I don't know if it is same one with changes...but a Democrat who is a woman? Didn't the same thing happen in Louisiana?

South Dakota Democratic woman lawmaker will introduce new abortion ban bill.


JOE KAFKA | THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Rep. Mary Glenski, a Democrat from Sioux Falls, and other legislators announced last month that they were introducing a bill that would ban most abortions in South Dakota.

PIERRE, S.D. | Lawmakers who watched as a near-total ban on abortions failed in South Dakota voting booths last year have revived the legislation.

They hope the changes that they made will make the difference in public acceptance. But the bill’s success is far from assured. None of the Legislature’s leaders, notably sponsors of last year’s bill, are joining the effort this year because waging last year’s fight was so exhausting.

“It’s far too soon to put our state through something of such a difficult nature again,” said Sen. Julie Bartling, a Democratic and prime sponsor of last year’s abortion bill.

“The state needs to heal, and I just don’t feel that we need to take this up in this legislative session again,” she said. “The people have spoken

She did not wait very long.

From March of this year:

Mary Glenski Endorses Pro-Life Initiative!

Mary Glenski, Charter Board Member, Democrats for Life of South Dakota

Democrats for Life of South Dakota support this pro-life petition drive. It’s a non-partisan effort to let the people of South Dakota vote on a law restricting abortion to those specific situations of rape, incest and threat to the physical health of the Mother. Democrats for Life of South Dakota is the state chapter of a national organization that advocates respect for life from fertilization to natural death. We recognize the importance of working for what is politically possible in South Dakota in protecting unborn human life.

[jgraz]

19. Once again, proof of Carlin's Law.

"Anyone who's against abortion is somebody you wouldn't want to fuck in the first place."

[nxylas]

20. Adriana Lima disproves that law

She's pro-life, and I wouldn't climb over her to get to Hillary Clinton.

[cap]

21. so what...

it's more than just about looks... If I were a man, I'd climb over her to get to Hillary Clinton (even at age 60).

[nxylas]

22. Each to their own

It's purely hypothetical anyway, since a)I'm married and b)even if I wasn't, it's highly unlikely that I would ever be in a position to choose between them.

[Vickers]

24. I wonder how she'd feel if she were raped by an escaped syphylitic

mental patient.

[nxylas]

25. Let's hope she never finds out

That's not the sort of scenario I would wish on anybody.

[Vickers]

27. Especially a victim with limited options.

[nxylas]

28. She probably has more options than most victims

I'm sure she could easily afford to take 9 months off work, have the baby, farm it off to an orphanage somewhere, and then hire a cosmetic surgeon to cover up any stretch marks or other after-effects of childbirth that may impede her modelling career.

[Vickers]

29. I doubt it would play out like that.

Just a hunch.

[nxylas]

30. Depends if she has the courage of her convictions

I'm sure there would be a lot of pressure on her, but she is probably in a better position to resist it than somebody working at McDonalds for minimum wage.

[Vickers]

31. Agreed.

I'm only going from my personal observations, where almost all of the anti-choice people I've met have either (a) had an abortion (that they regret TERRIBLY!!!), or (b) one of their kids had one.

Not saying this is true all over the place, but where I grew up (Georgia) the hypocrisy on this issue is almost overwhelming.

[cap]

34. yes on hypocricy

One of the Catholic pro-life demonstrators at the local Planned Parenthood wears an IUD. Planned Parenthood has actually seen a demonstrator bring in her own daughter for an abortion and then go back to demonstrating.

[jgraz]

39. No one is more pro-abortion than a Catholic with an unplanned pregnancy.

[cap]

35. Giving a baby up for adoption is not an easy decision

My MIL was a nurse in the bad old days. The procedure to hand the baby over was as follows:

She would come in with the social worker and hand the baby to its mother. The mother would hand that baby over to the social worker. The mother was always weeping bitterly.

The hospital had to do it this way to make sure that the choice for surrendering the baby was the mother's, not the hospital's. It was always a nasty, heart-rending business.

MIL says these scenes made her fervently pro-choice.

[jgraz]

33. Check back when she's 40. She won't be pro-life then (or even Catholic)

The Catholic church is like the fucking iron curtain down in South America. Once people get outside their country and realize the world doesn't work the way the pope says it does, they give up on Catholicism pretty quickly.

(Yes, this is just my own anecdotal experience, but the pattern is pretty striking)

[nxylas]

36. Uh-uh, no fair cheating

Carlin's Law doesn't make exceptions for people of a particular age and/or national origin.

(edit: though admittedly, "People...fuck anyway, apart from hot Brazilian Catholic chicks" wouldn't have been as funny a line)

[jgraz]

37. I submit he's still correct

Personal experience with a hot Brazilian Catholic girlfriend. YIKES.

[nxylas]

38. No answer to that without getting personal

So I'll shut up.

[lukasahero]

23. This shouldn't really surprise - lots of people here

support anti-choice Dems. Those of us who argue against them are called "single issue voters". We invited anti-choicers into our party and now we're surprised that they're enacting law to restrict choice.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

26. OK, what if the doctor starts by saying, "This idiotic law forces me to say this to you..."

Then say the claptrap, then say, "of course, al of that was claptrap." With an optional "because" followed by real science.

Would the law FORBID him to say that?

[jgraz]

32. Or just: "Could you please put your fingers in your ears and hum the Star Spangled Banner?"

[madfloridian]

40. Now there's a good thought.