To Whom It May Concern in South Dakota:

[liz_marcs]

I'm only sorry I don't live in neighboring state so I can help your women make a running start for the state line.

One thing you can be sure about: I will go out of my way to boycott anything and everything from your fine state.

I may be in the People's Republic of Massachusetts, but if any of you South Dakotan-type females out there have a need to visit another state for a couple of days, feel free to drop me an email.

Yes. I'm pissed. Pissed enough that I can barely speak.

Here's my very short answer on the abortion issue:

I don't care about your discomfort or moral objection with regard to abortion. Unless you've got a uterus, sit down and shut the hell up. Unless you're the one who's pregnant, it ain't your damn business.

Also, hands off my body. It does not belong to you.

I will:

1) uncross my legs whenever I damn well feel like it; and

2) will not pump out babies just because you think I should

Anyone out there who doesn't like the above opinion or my offer to help the sisters in South Dakota?

Tough.

Don't bother arguing with me because you are going to get nowhere with me on that front.

Comments

[nocturnalista.livejournal.com]

The fat white man revolution continues. They won't be happy til the wimmenfolk are barefoot and pregnant, and the gays are back in the closet. The term "going to hell in a handbasket" comes to mind when I think of the good old U.S. of A.

I'm not sure getting out of South Dakota is far enough, if our fair and unbiased (like Fox News, sort of) Supreme Court gets their hands on this. I'm glad my baby bearin' years are winding down. I feel sorry for those poor girls who find out the hard way that a lump of flesh that can't survive outside of her body has more rights than she does.

And yeah, I know the info on fetus development and stuff, and I don't think personally I would choose an abortion, but I sure as hell believe that it's an individual choice, not a political one.

Sorry about the rant on your LJ, but this one really pisses me off, too.

[nocturnalista.livejournal.com]

Whoops. I forgot to say that I'm not painting all fat white men with the same brush. That's just my name for the Bush Administration and their Friends.

[aceliwen.livejournal.com]

inhale. exhale.

I'm very, very grumpy. Very grumpy. Because if it becomes law, it will undoubtedly get challenged and then it's sent up to the Roberts court and then we can all kiss our rights to make our own choices goodbye. (to be fair, Scalia, Roberts and Alito are equal-opportunity fuckers.)But I've been hearing that the Governor is unlikely to sign the bill. So maybe this assault will fail.

Of course, there's the assault after that, and the assault after that, and how long, o lord, how long do we have to keep doing over this?...

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

I'm already exhausted thinking about it.

We'll be right back to the patchwork laws that were in place prior to 1973. All that means is that the people with money will be going elsewhere to get an abortion and the poor, the young, and the victimized are going to be stuck or will be getting dangerous, illegal abortions.

I honestly wonder what the hell people think is going to happen. That every child will magically be happy, health, and wanted if they just make abortion legal? Yeah. I've got a pony made of solid gold for you.

And if people think these yo-yos are going to stop with abortion, they are so very, very wrong. You can bet your sweet bippy that birth control is next on the list.

[umino-gaara.livejournal.com]

Go Liz! You are so umbelievably right. I just wish more people had your stance on abortion.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

As for me personally, I have no idea where I stand since I've never been pregnant.

Either way, I'll be damned before I tell someone else how they should handle such a life-changing decision.

[verzoeking.livejournal.com]

I'm originally from Nebraska and now live in Iowa, and I agree with you entirely.

This law won't actually make a big difference in practice, since SD has already used every trick you can imagine to make it impossible to get an abortion. Zoning laws, building permit difficulties, and a blind eye toward death threats have helped the government keep clinics out of many counties in the state. I believe there is a mandatory waiting period of at least a day between the time you're scheduled for a checkup and counseling, and the time you actually receive an abortion. This adds a lot of cost and time when you already have to travel eight hours to a city which has a clinic. And the counseling, if we can call it that, is required to include wild misinformation - that abortion will make you crazy, make you depressed, give you breast cancer, destroy your fertility entirely, and probably won't work anyway, leaving you to give birth to a hideously damaged baby.

There is another practical thing you can do, and that is to donate money to Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa and Planned Parenthood of Minnesota. Over the past few years, they've been setting up clinics just across the state lines of South Dakota and Nebraska.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

I will make what I jokingly call my "monthly tithe to charity" to either one of those organizations. Sounds like they're going to need the financial help. Thank you for the tip.

But, my god, I've heard that sometimes women had difficulties getting access to reproductive health services in that area. In Massachusetts the clinics here are a one-stop shopping for everything in the reproductive services front, so you can't even assume why anyone is going in or going out.

Not that the Planned Parenthood clinics here don't have people behind bulletproof glass.

[faithhopetricks.livejournal.com]

Yeah. This has seriously kicked up my desire to emigrate to Canada to a new level. I don't care if people think I'm leaving the sinking ship or whatever, the idea of living in a country where I can't get access to safely aborting a pregnancy terrifies me. And that's added to all the other curtailments of civil rights that are going down.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

Don't laugh. I just got my passport. My mother thinks I'm nuts, but I want to be ready to hop on a plane if I have to.

[ad-kay.livejournal.com]

*applauds*
Crap like this is why I'm disgusted with the fools who voted NO on Alito but Yes to cloture. We're gonna remember those names.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

I'm a lucky citizen of the People's Republic of Massachusetts, so my posse is good.

Also, on a state level, almost all of the state Legislators that voted against gay marriage were voted right out of office in the last few elections. It appears we still have a majority sane people here.

Once I determine whether any of the federal House seats are in any danger (Kerry and Kennedy have never been more sure of their job security), I'll start looking at the Act Blue site to see who should be getting my monetary love.

[moire2.livejournal.com]

Glad to hear someone else is frustrated with what is going on concerning the abortion issue. How did so many people get complacent on this issue? I boggles the mind, or mine at least.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

Because I honestly don't think people saw it coming. There've been so many lies and misleading on what exactly what is in reproductive health that I think a lot of people were honestly hoodwinked to get to this point.

For example, there are an awful lot of people out there who think Plan B and RU-486 not only does the same thing, but is the same thing. Most people don't get that "late term abortions" happened because of extreme health risks to the mother or because the fetus was so deformed that it was not going to survive out of the womb anyway.

And you've got the growing contingent claiming that birth control is a form of abortion. *headdesk*

So, on the one hand, you've got an uninformed public who've been fed a pack of lies since Roe v. Wade; on the other you had complancency because no one thought it could ever even get to this point.

SD happens to be a very, very rude wake-up call and that's why people are now going bananas.

Personally, I find it very, very suspicious that the SD Legislature does not want this issue to go to the people for a vote. They want to dictate it by legistlative fiat.

[omegar.livejournal.com]

Ah yes the "Moral" "majority" speaks.

Always worries me when someone bases their arguments on two of the weakest bases possible

Morals, there is no real agreed upon moral code, i mean i eat Pig, which is Immoral for a very large portion of the world, We eat cow, which is very bad in certin relgions.

Majority, which is based on the same Fallacy as Democracy, that 100 people know more than one.

When it comes down to it, all that really matters is personal choice....

can't remember the exact quote, but Bill Hicks had it right with - "What business of yours is what i do, watch, think"

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

I'm so at a loss right now, that I feel like I've been slapped, and I live in the bluest of blue states. Yet, as certain as I am that no one is going to even try something like what happened in SD, I suddenly fell a hell of a lot less safe.

[soundingsea.livejournal.com]

I'm pissed right along with you. And since I live in Minnesota, I'm within driving distance of SD if you know anyone who needs a place to stay for a few days.

So. Much. Hating.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

So much fury. I feel so helpless because I'm half-way across the country. But I'll probably be giving donations to the state-level MN and Idaho PP organizations.

[hilleviw.livejournal.com]

Let me append my plaudits for PP of MN. About a decade ago I was living in St. Cloud, which is just about exactly in the center of the state. The one and only hospital in town was Catholic, and simply didn't do DNC procedures. Didn't matter what the reason: they didn't do "the baby killing procedure." A friend of mine miscarried in the 6th month, and was hemoraging (sorry about the spelling) terribly, so I did what you do: I took her to the emergency room. They were good enough to see her quickly, but the doctor was apologetic. "There's placental material causing a problem." Yeah, okay, so let's get rid of it. "Sorry, can't." That's right: it wasn't enough for this woman to lose a baby that she wanted, even though she was no longer pregnant the hospital would let her bleed to death rather than perform a DNC. The doctor was downright embarassed (and angry) about the stupid policy, and pointed me to the nearest place we could get the procedure done: a Planned Parenthood 40 miles away. He gave her stuff for the pain, called PP so that they were all ready for us and could also get units of the correct blood type ready (she was really bleeding profusely). When we got there they whisked her right into surgery - no questions, no paperwork: just do what needs to be done. Callie needed quite a bit of blood, and it was a long while before she was okay, but PP saved her life and I will always be grateful.

[ad-kay.livejournal.com]

*boggles*
Wouldn't the hospital have been guilty of malpractice, if, god forbid, anything should have happened to your friend?? =:0

[taerowyn.livejournal.com]

I think my brain just exploded. I'm glad you (and others) can be so eloquent on this issue. I just start to sputter and turn red in the face and...well..brain explodey things.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

I hardly call my post eloquent, but I was so pissed all day, that my fingers went 'splody all over the keyboard. I've been so concentrating on keeping gay marriage legal in Massacusetts, that I let the Alito cloture issue walk by me.

And yeah, I think the SD legislature is doing this on purpose to force a run to the Supreme Court.

Also, both Kerry and Kennedy had publicly committed to voting against cloture on Alito, so it was tough for me because I couldn't exactly call an out-of-state senator to push for it.

Stupid reason to feel guilty, I know.

[debxena.livejournal.com]

I agree with you 100%. By the by, Molly has a great article about this: For the women of South Dakota: an abortion manual (http://mollysavestheday.blogspot.com/2006/02/for-women-of-south-dakota-abortion.html).

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

Interesting link. Thanks.

I'm actually foreseeing a lot of caravans out of SD to get around this, similar to what Connecticut activists did to get around the Comstock Law to bring women across the state lines to get access to birth control.

[a2zmom.livejournal.com]

This makes me so incensed that I can hardly type.

In my opinion, this is all about not allowing women to control their own sexuality and to punish them for daring to do so.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

I think there are people who are ethically opposed to it. Sadly, I've run more into the "control the wimmens" than I have anything else.

My big issue is that this is an imposition of one religious belief on everyone else, many of whom might not share it or, if they do, don't share it to such a harsh degree. It's maddening for that alone.

[sneaker328.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure I understand this. If the State passes it (G-d, no) then it would have to go to the Supreme Court because it's a federal law and not a state law, and then Roe v. Wade might be overturned?

But if the Supreme Court upholds Roe v. Wade, can they then force South Dakota to overturn the law banning it?

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

Roe v. Wade essentially overturned state laws that outright banned abortion as too restrictive and intrusive in the right to privacy (Fourth Amendment).

In short, it ensured nationwide access for at least the first trimester of abortions because 1) abortion was ruled as a medical procedure; 2) medical procedures are private affairs between a well-informed patient and his or her physician (in theory anyway);
3) objections to abortion were overridingly based in religion and not necessarily on state interest or any other objective measurement (see the recent Intelligent Design decision for a similar reasoning on this one).

Keep in mind, the states still had the ability to legistlate abortion as much as they wanted, however, they had to take Constitutional issues as defined by the then Supreme Court into consideration when wording their laws.

That's why you have some states that impose waiting periods or require women seeking abortions to get alternative opinions or limit where physicians are allowed to provide the services or parental notification laws. They ultimately have to allow a woman to have access, but they can put up hurdles. However, place the hurdles too high, and you'll get struck down for placing an undue burden.

Overturning Roe v. Wade, in essence, allows states to go back to the earlier period where anything went. States could ban it outright, they could allow it under very limited circumstances, they could allow it with high hurdles, they can stick with the satatus quo, or they can go "anything goes" and allow it under any and all circumstances and at any time during the pregnancy. The end result is a patch quilt of laws (similar to what you're starting to see with gay marriage) where one state will criminalize the procedure, but the state next door allows first-trimester abortions.

One potential problem comes in when you have women from states where abortion is criminalized crossing state lines to go to a state where abortion is legal to undergo the procedure. When they return home, are they now criminals? And does the individual state have the right to prosecute them as such? Also, does the state have the right to prosecute a doctor in the neighboring state where the procedure is legal? If you can prosecute one, but not the other, how is that fair? Also, how do you stop it? Does a woman lose the right to travel if she's pregnant? Do you try to force other states to comply with your laws by saying that a doctor in their state can't provide health services for your residents?

Then you have the poverty issue. Women who have the money and the means and who want abortions will simply go elsewhere to get them. Women who do not have the money or means will be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.

In short, you'll have a nationwide mess on your hands between the states that criminalize it and the states that don't. Because you just now that the states that have criminalized will be trying to get the states that haven't criminalized it help them deny access.

Plus, you can bet your bippy that "state's rights" seems to translate into "state's rights until your state does something to piss me off." I saw that little truism in action when Massachusetts Legalized Gay Marriage. In fact, most of the agitation against it is still from outside of Massachusetts with relatively little actual in-state support.

In the case of SD, if the governor signs it into law, you can bet a suit will be filed. It will then have to go through the federal system courts in that state (I don't think you can sue a state in state court because of conflict of interest and that's why it defaults to federal court, but I'm not sure on that). Regardless of whether those courts will uphold or overturn it, whoever is on the opposite side will appeal to a higher court until it reaches the SC.

If the SC upholds the state of SD, they would almost have to do so based on state rights, which opens the way for patchwork laws. If they overturn SD on the grounds that it's too restrictive, SD will have to go back to the drawing board and come up with another law that'll pass the Constitutional sniff test.

I believe I got the gist right. :-)

[chriself.livejournal.com]

And how about, If you are going to ban abortion(and eventually BC), Keep your penis and your manly urges to your own self. And if you can't control yourself, be prepared to take full responibility for your offspring.(without blaming the woman)

Oh, which brings up the question, How long until vasectomies become illeagal as well?

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

The sun will go dark and the earth will go cold and lifeless before that happens.

[waleli.livejournal.com]

woohoo!!!! Go Liz!!!! I'm here in CT, so I can't do much to help right now either..but wish I could. No one has a right to tell us how or what to do with our bodies!!!

[yma2.livejournal.com]

:shakes head:
Fucking stupid. I mean, I have no problem with people having their own issues on abortion. It's a very deep and personal matter. But they have no right to make that choice for other women. Aside from anything it will mean more suffering in the long term, because a woman who really doesn't want a baby WON'T have that baby. It'll be a case of backallys and coat hangers or... well, I dread to think in some cases.
I can sort of see the abortionists point of view, and I do think it's not a proceadure that should be done without some fore-thought (if the pregnancy is latish on). and certainly I think there's an argument that, in most cases, the father should be consulted.) But in the basics I do agree with you.

[postholedigger.livejournal.com]

Not arguing, totally with you. The heartbreaking thing is all the 20 somethings who don't get what they're losing. And any sisters that want it a little warmer when they flee, California is not all Orange County.

[aceliwen.livejournal.com]

So you'll like this one:

they passed the fucking bill. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-022406abortion_lat,0,4575203.story?coll=la-home-headlines)

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

Yup. It's a showdown.

Looooooove how they won't put it on a ballot.

[iyalode.livejournal.com]

During the recent RU486 Debate one of the Greens senators turned up wearing a t-shirt directed at Health Minister Tony Abbot - it read- Mr Abbot, get your rosaries off my ovaries. Bwah!

Under a concience vote, Australian parliament voted to strip the Health Minister of his veto right to RU486. And the vote wasn't close.

Now admitedly its only RU486, but the message was overwhelming, "Piss off, Abbot. And stay out of our business."

I have extremly strong views on the abortion issue based on the difficulties I had with the twins. I'm here and they're here, but if things had turned out differently then abortion was an option we had to consider.

At least I had choice. And by god I will fight to make sure every woman has the same option.

As an admittedly somewhat pudgy white guy

[(Anonymous)]

I'd just like to say this:
I might be carrying a few extra pounds, and have to be careful on very sunny days... but at least I can content myself I'm not a cave-dwelling dolt like the SD state legislature seems to consist of.

Maybe it is just the way I was raised, but I *like* strong women who can decide their own mind. These guys who want to shove everything with 2 x-chromosomes into corsets and bhurkas make me feel sorry for my gender.

[http://users.livejournal.com/amy_star_/]

Idiot legislators who try to use religion, overtly or not, to control people make the baby Jesus cry.

Abortions of babies who could live outside momma? Like 7 months along? I'm not so fond of those, unless said baby is very ill. Like hydrocephaly. Abortions of clumps of unwanted tissue? That remind me of, say, cancer? Why the fuck should the government have ANY say in that? It's NOT their body. It's an unwanted proliferation of cells. If it were just a uterine tumour (and as someone who has endometriosis in her family tree, that DOES happen and usually they need to be lasered out or have a D&C done for them) would they tell you that you HAD to suffer from it?

From a personal standpoint, I don't think I could have an abortion. I just don't think I could do it. But I don't think anyone has the right to tell me what to do with my body.

This swing to the far right in general has me VERY worried.