I must say that at first, I was vehemently disturbed at South Dakota's attempt to bait the Supreme Court by outlawing almost all abortions, but the strictness of their law may actually work against them. I had a discussion with a pro-lifer today, and asked him how would he tell a rape or incest victim that once again, her body did not belong to her; that society views her the same as her rapist: a soulless object. Naturally, he could not give me an answer, but back to the subject.
In a way, though, I am glad that SD took this risk. The restrictions are so intense that it could prove to be a backlash, setting Roe v Wade a little deeper in stone.
I wish pro-lifers would invest energy into protecting children after they are born. In my state, a pro-life arena, a child rapist or abuser gets less than a decade in prison, but a robbery can get life. The pro-life movement forgets that their are other victims that need to be rescued.
2 comments:
Sheri
I hope SD's law doesn't become standard in the US because Australia pretty much copies US laws and other trends.
We already have a Health Minister, Tony Abbott, who trained as a Jesuit - he just can't wait to impose Vatican morality on women.
Pete
I'm glad you mentioned "protecting children after they are born," because that was my first comment when I heard that Alabama was planning to draft similar legislation. We can be all holier than thou when it comes to the religious aspect of abortion, but we let our Christian responsibilities completely escape us once they are born. It's really, really sad.
Post a Comment