[Topgun]

The fact is this is part of the logical progression if you honestly believe fetus's are people; of course you'd kill someone before you'd let them kill your child. People will be convinced of the need for this legislation until, at the very least, people don't grant full humanity to fetus's

Except that its the mother deciding to have an abortion, so no, its not the logical conclusion.

[Nemesis6]

I need to find out how to write "The American Taliban." in Pashto.

I can't remember, and cannot bother, to check up where this happened in America, but there was a bill or whatever raised to force women to see an x-ray image of their unborn fetus before they could have an abortion, and it was of course the Republicans who backed it.

[Topgun]

I need to find out how to write "The American Taliban." in Pashto.

I can't remember, and cannot bother, to check up where this happened in America, but there was a bill or whatever raised to force women to see an x-ray image of their unborn fetus before they could have an abortion, and it was of course the Republicans who backed it.

There is way too much bull**** in america. I would move but I don't think other countries are much better.

I wish I could start my own country.

[Grizzly]

Pro life just became a contradiction in itself  .

[Mars]

The fact is this is part of the logical progression if you honestly believe fetus's are people; of course you'd kill someone before you'd let them kill your child. People will be convinced of the need for this legislation until, at the very least, people don't grant full humanity to fetus's

Except that its the mother deciding to have an abortion, so no, its not the logical conclusion.

Did you see an exclusion for mothers on there? Cause I sure didn't. Under this it would be legal to accidentaly kill your wife if she was planning on getting an abortion.

[Bobboau]

Did you see an exclusion for mothers on there? Cause I sure didn't. Under this it would be legal to accidentaly kill your wife if she was planning on getting an abortion.

[Grizzly]

UPDATE: Jensen spoke to Mother Jones on Tuesday morning, after this story was published. He says that he disagrees with this interpretation of the bill. "This simply is to bring consistency to South Dakota statute as it relates to justifiable homicide," said Jensen in an interview, repeating an argument he made in the committee hearing on the bill last week. "If you look at the code, these codes are dealing with illegal acts. Now, abortion is a legal act. So this has got nothing to do with abortion." Jensen also aggressively defended the bill in an interview with the Washington Post's Greg Sargent on Tuesday morning.

[Mars]

So when charged with being evil, he pleads incompetence?

[Nemesis6]

I need to find out how to write "The American Taliban." in Pashto.

I can't remember, and cannot bother, to check up where this happened in America, but there was a bill or whatever raised to force women to see an x-ray image of their unborn fetus before they could have an abortion, and it was of course the Republicans who backed it.

Indeed. Assuming you'd move to Canada or some European country, you'd move from a country that has free speech to one that thinks it has free speech. As odd as it sounds, that's one aspect where, even though they're chipping away at it, America is still #1, - Free speech issues.
There is way too much bull**** in america. I would move but I don't think other countries are much better.

I wish I could start my own country.

[Bobboau]

who thinks it's time to buy a few barges and form the nomadic nation of Pacifica?

[Mars]

You know, as terrible as this bill is, and as sad as it is that there are people who will support it; the fact is the bill hasn't a chance in hell of passing, and that a majority of people (even if they're pro-life) think that it's retarded.

The US has its troubles, such as wealth disparity and under-education, but this is not the biggest one. It may get the blood boiling, but the fact is it's just political posturing.

[Titan]

I think we of HLP should all get together and build a spacestation, and then all climb aboard it and blast off into space, forming our own nation.

[Klaustrophobia]

oh my GOD this is being blown out of proportion.  this is NOT a kill abortionists law.  this is a law providing legal justification for using deadly force against someone about to attack a pregnant woman.  abortion supporters convienently interpreted the admittedly poorly worded (but show me a law that isn't) meaning of the law as declaring open season on abortion providers.

[Mars]

oh my GOD this is being blown out of proportion.  this is NOT a kill abortionists law.  this is a law providing legal justification for using deadly force against someone about to attack a pregnant woman. 

Did you actually read the law?

   FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to expand the definition of justifiable homicide to provide for the protection of certain unborn children.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:
    Section 1. That § 22-16-34 be amended to read as follows:
    22-16-34. Homicide is justifiable if committed by any person while resisting any attempt to murder such person, or to harm the unborn child of such person in a manner and to a degree likely to result in the death of the unborn child, or to commit any felony upon him or her, or upon or in any dwelling house in which such person is.
    Section 2. That § 22-16-35 be amended to read as follows:
    22-16-35. Homicide is justifiable if committed by any person in the lawful defense of such person, or of his or her husband, wife, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant, or the unborn child of any such enumerated person, if there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony, or to do some great personal injury, and imminent danger of such design being
accomplished.

This actually accomplishes very little, since any conceivable situation in which the fetus is harmed would usually constitute felony assault, thus would ALREADY BE COVERED under this current law. Moreover, if abortion, say, for people under 18 became illegal, killing of a daughter planning to get an abortion would become legal.

This bill is essentially useless, but could create serious problems.

abortion supporters convienently interpreted the admittedly poorly worded (but show me a law that isn't) meaning of the law as declaring open season on abortion providers.

Almost every law you will ever see is worded very exactly, and means EXACTLY what it was intended to mean. Sometimes they are not, and that's what supreme courts are for.

[Goober5000]

When people start jumping to conclusions and wringing their hands over some perceived misinterpretation of a proposed law, it's useful to get your information from as many sources as you can, as opposed to limiting yourself to a single partisan blog.

Have a look at the Reuters article, which quotes from both the representative and the executive director of NARAL.  Furthermore, it provides an excerpt of the actual text of the bill:

If passed, it would provide protection to a family member who kills "in the lawful defense of ... his or her husband, wife, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant, or the unborn child of any such enumerated person" by defining the killing as a justifiable homicide.

Abortion is still lawful.  Therefore, the killing of an abortion provider would not qualify as justifiable homicide under this bill.

EDIT: Posted at the same time as Mars, who somehow managed to reach the opposite conclusion while reading the same text.

[Klaustrophobia]

i'm not arguing the point that this is a useful law.  i should have clarified that in my first post.  i would think that an attack on a fetus would be equally as threatening to the mother and therefore defending against such an attack would probably still be justifiable homicide (in the spirit of the law at least, god knows there's been some stupid judgements thrown at self-defense in reality).  i'm saying that the abortion related ****-slinging over this is retarded.

[SpardaSon21]

Abortion is still unlawful.  Therefore, the killing of an abortion provider would not qualify as justifiable homicide under this bill.

EDIT: Posted at the same time as Mars, who somehow managed to reach the opposite conclusion while reading the same text.

Perhaps you should fix that typo.

[Mars]

I'm saying that the abortion related ****-slinging over this is retarded.

Not really; it's not bad as long as laws remain exactly as they are. If the dominionists had their way however (if recent history is any indication) abortion would become a felony in several situations; thus the law would suddenly become much more sinister.

[Topgun]

who thinks it's time to buy a few barges and form the nomadic nation of Pacifica?

* Topgun Raises hand

[karajorma]

oh my GOD this is being blown out of proportion.  this is NOT a kill abortionists law.  this is a law providing legal justification for using deadly force against someone about to attack a pregnant woman. 

And why exactly is that needed?

Surely any attack against a pregnant woman ALREADY allows you to use deadly force in her defence.