Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Abortion Ban II: Where'd all these chickens come from?

An excellent guest post - which I completely agree with, by the way - by Kelsey, about the state of abortion rights in South Dakota:

In reference to the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X once said it was a case of "chickens coming home to roost." He was severely criticized for intimating that Kennedy was a victim of the violence that he was complicit in. People don't like it when you criticize their heroes.

So some people who feel like we had some giant pro-choice victory on November 7 might not like my suggestion that this newest abortion ban is chickens coming home to roost. This week, I've had a number of people tell me that they cannot believe another abortion ban has been introduced. Honestly, I would've been pretty surprised if it hadn't. For months, all we talked about was exceptions. Lawns all over South Dakota screamed, "No Exceptions! No Exceptions!" We were told we couldn't go out on a corner with signs that said "Honk for Choice." No, hold this "Honk for No Exceptions" sign instead. And now we're surprised that the other side is claiming that the election was not a mandate on a woman's right to choose, but a mandate on exceptions. Gee whiz, who saw that coming? I'll tell you who: everyone. I can't even count how many conversations I had where someone was like, "I'm sort of worried that all this talk about exceptions is going to lead to the antis introducing a ban with exceptions next session." Good call, guys.

Now, I know it seems a little counter intuitive; a ban with exceptions kind of defeats a lot of the arguments the antis trotted out during the election (weren't they moaning that you could 'drive a truck through' a health exception?). But they feel like they've got something to prove now, so they're going to go through with it, regardless. It's going to have a helluva time getting through the Senate and if did pass through some miracle, I'm sure there would be a legal challenge and an injunction before you could say Jack Robinson, but let's not get too comfortable, okay? The disbelief I'm hearing right now makes me worry that people think the fight's over and believe me, it's not. A lot could happen in the months to come and we need to stay, dare I say, vigilant. And next time (no doubt, there will be a next time), can we come up with something a little more ballsy than "No Exceptions"?


aus blog said...

Have you seen the fine print?

Kelsey said...

What are you talking about? The fine print of the bill? Our bills are all in the same size print...

belledame222 said...

well put.

Anonymous said...

With each new generation, comes the realisations of some of the mistakes of the former.

Something to do with evolution I suspect.

Many practices of the past are no longer practiced.

Abortion should soon join the practices of old.

As should female circumcision, and all types of oppression,

we need to see that all mankind has their basic human rights respected.

Kelsey said...

Just as soon as we have 100% effective birth control, available to everyone at no cost, no complicated or dangerous pregnancies, no rape or incest, no violent or unhealthy relationships, comprehensive sex ed, no poverty, and universal health care, then abortion can become a thing of the past. Until then, I doubt it's going to join the "practices of old."

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Plain(s)feminist said...

I've just removed a comment that falsely advertised Norplant as safe (in fact, it can cause ectopic pregnancies and is not generally available any longer in the U.S., to the best of my knowledge, except for poor populations that have few options and on whom shit like this is continually tested - like Native American women).

Aus Blog, I'm fairly sure this is you because I've seen you post it elsewhere. If you want to continue to post here, please remember the rules.

Anonymous said...

The ban part II may blow up in their faces. The state RTL group does not support it at all. There is a fraction of the co-signers there were last year. This version also has exceptions but if you read them they really don't except much. It is actually a bigger legal nightmare for the anti-choicers to get through the courts that the no exceptions one.
It is a big gamble. If their fail they will have lost almost all of their mojo and ticked off the state RTL group too. If they win (it is a real long shot) it could get brought to a vote or fought in court.
They people pushing the exceptions platform should have been ready for round two. Who knows maybe they are and they are just laying low to see if this thing bombs or not. Why stir up things and get these guys more attention may be their stance.
Everyone should be looking at who their reps are and if they are involved in these bills. Thank them if they didn't and give them hell if they are.