What I suggest is that if we want to "understand" others we discuss whether they have considered how they would want the law to be written if it effected one of their loved ones. It seems to me that the South Dakota law, is stronger then they would want if they, their wife, or daughter were in a effected by it and still has some "holes" that if they were completely pro life they might like to fill. The following some un-structured thoughs as to things that are not or are considered.
Links:
- Village Voice -- South Dakota's Genius Scheme to Outlaw Abortion -- The trick? Privately fund a public initiative overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision
a) Condition of the pregnacy
- Rape
- Incest
- Child Disabled, possibly severely
- Permanent disability?
- Death (YES)
- impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman
- 5 years for Doctor (YES), why not stronger for murder
- No punishment for mother
- No punishment for out of state
- Certainty of death -- What percent is "Necessary" -- Death of mother 100% if not?
- Control on Doctor's judgement -- How does Dr. PROVE that it was necessary.
- In Vitro (ovum - sperm)
- Plan-B, Emergency contraceptive pill "or the subsequent implantation of a fertilized egg (zygote).", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraception
- Does exempt Contriseption methods, if applied before furtilization is testable.
==============================================
South Dakota law "thoughts"
- Life begins at fertilization, therefor the Morning after pill may be abortion
- It does have an exemption for the "impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman"
- It does not, currently, apply to the mother or to out of state abortions.
- Preserve unborn human life
- Begins at fertilization
- Abortion harms the mother's relationship with the child
- Abortion is dangerous
- Unborn has a right to life
