http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4780522.stm

Yes it's the state of South Dakota in the good ol' US of A.
I appreciate it's a very christian country but I wondered what people's views were about this?

Specifically the article states:

The South Dakota law - approved by the governor on Monday - makes it a crime for doctors to perform terminations.

Exceptions will be made if a woman's life is at risk, but not in cases of rape or incest.
Note the bit in bold. What do our forum females think of this piece of US legislation?

Quite backwards in my opinion. Surely all this is gonna do is drive women to go to other states to have one or bring a return of the backstreet abortionists?!

Would'nt expect anything less ,from a bunch of backwood hicks.
Christian i don't think so , otherwise they would never have come up with this barmy law .

It's due to Christianity that thus barmy law came about.

Dreadfully predictable, unfortunately, and I predict more changes to come.

I second rooty's comments.

Yep , and i am saying there not very christian for introducing it.

Never mind just the forum females! This forum male has quite a bit to say on the matter. The abortion issue has always been one of those who need the choice and those who want to deny them that choice. Invariably those who choose to deny people that right are white, middle class men who have no experience of how an unwanted/traumatic pregnancy affects the mother.

Granted I speak as a man, who will never know the rigours of child bearing/birth but as one who has seen the progeny of incest and rape I can comment on how it affects the mother of the child. The child is essentially a product of a hate crime although blameless nonetheless.

This is why abortion should be available to those who need it.

Excellent post, Swan_Vesta.

Excellent post, Swan_Vesta.
Agreed!............

Hang on guys, Rape and incest aside for the moment, most abortions are actually carried out because the mother views the baby as an 'inconvenience'.
What do you think to illegalising those abortions where this is the only reason?

Totaly agree. Just imagin the young girl that was reported to have been raped
at a Sainsbury Store recently ,the girl is about 11/12yr .
If it had happend over there she would have to have the baby if she was pregnant .She is suffering enough without the responsabilty of carrying her attackers child how sick is that.

Hang on guys, Rape and incest aside for the moment, most abortions are actually carried out because the mother views the baby as an 'inconvenience'.
What do you think to illegalising those abortions where this is the only reason?

Some, but not most. Having an abortion is a huge undertaking for most women and not a decision that is taken lightly. Some women just do not feel that they could provide an adequate level of care to a child at a certain point in their lives. I think the current upper limit is far too high as some 'optional' (because legally they still have to be done for medical reasons) abortions are viable babies, but that is another issue.

First off. This is a step back to the dark ages and I don't know what has possessed those folks in South Dakota.

However, I have my own ideas about why this was allowed to happen.

http://www.educationamerica.net/facts/index.phtml?sid=sd

Look at the population. 735,000. Not for one big city. For the ENTIRE state. And I bet they count the tourists who come to see Mt. Rushmore, too. :hihi:

Know what the population of California is? 33 million.

North and South Dakota were only granted statehood in 1889. There is no money in the Dakotas. In any fight like this, to get laws passed or repealed, follow the money.

THAT'S why this happened. Nobody lives there. There weren't enough people and there wasn't enough money to stop them. Wyoming is even more sparsely populated. I'm an American, I live here. If you don't want to believe me, then I don't know what to tell you.

There is NOTHING in South Dakota. There are 735,000 people in 76,000 square miles. Talk about wide open spaces. I'm betting that anyone who wanted to have an abortion even before this insane law was passed had to leave the state to do it anyway.

This will have no effect on any other states. It's been legal to make a right turn on a red light in California for many years. That hasn't spread, (much to the dismay of drivers in other states) and neither will this.

This is a tempest in a teapot, and I'm betting it's not going to be permanent.

:) Sierra

Oh this is always such a touchy subject....but here it goes.

I believe that life is about choice. Choice about what food you eat, choice about what music you listen to and the choice about what you do to your body (both men and women). What any man or woman does with their body should be a matter of choice.

Saying that, whether I'm forced to make that decision to have an abortion, I certainly don't know if I could go through with it. BUT, at least I hope that I would have the legal choice to make it instead of having to visit Vera.

Our "backwards cousins" (as I see here said quite often) do scare me and unfortunately my newly elected government in Canada is eager to move in that same direction - in many cases actually. Such a scary world we live in sometimes.

I protest Sierra!
You can turn right on a red light in Massachusetts!

just remember in future to stay away from south dakota, with all that incest and rape going on its deffinatley not the sunshine city now is it..

Its difficult for Europeans to understand that abortion is still very much a live issue in American politics and society. In most parts of Europe, the issue has been largely settled and it seldom figures prominently in European elections. This is very definitely not the case in the USA, where the battles between 'pro-choice' and 'pro-life' groups are still being waged. For example, staff at abortion clinics have been routinely harrassed and at least one doctor has been murdered.

In many cases, it would be political suicide for a politician to come out strongly in favour of 'pro-choice'. Abolition is a matter of key concern for the religious right and it is no wonder that, for example, presidential hopefuls have to tread very carefully when speaking about the issue. If you remember, there was a big controversy recently about a nominee for membership of the Supreme Court. The guy's views on abortion seemed to be the main focus of scrutiny. This is because it is the supreme court which will ultimately decide this issue not Dakota. The Supreme Court is undoubtedly more conservative than it used to be, but I would be very surprised if they overturned the famous Wade decision, which basically legalised abortion under stringent conditions.