South Dakota is pro-choice
If you’ve been following the saga, this news is particularly welcome. From the Daily Kos:
… there was an even bigger loser last night — the anti-choice extremists who couldn’t even support a radical anti-abortion law in South Dakota. This wasn’t California or Massachusetts or New Jersey or New York or Illinois voting. It was one of the most conservative states in the nation.
Yet the voters in South Dakota, by a double-digit margin 55-45, declared that government should not stick its nose in doctors’ offices.
It cost our side about $2 million to wage the battle, but that may been the best $2 million it has spent since Roe v. Wade was fought. Unlike Roe, this was a decision by the people, in a referendum, and the results were loud and clear. They are unambiguous.
The people of this nation believe in choice. And those who would strip those rights away?
They are out-of-touch extremists.
If only I could share your optimism, old bean.
A victory in one state - they will be back. 45% for the ban is bad enough, and they will see that as solid base to work on.
As for the results generally. The swing to the Democrats is welcome, but there are many conservatives in Democrat ranks too. There is still a NE/South divide (in fact more so now, despite some victories for Democrats in the South.)
Democrats need to be bold this upcoming session, need to claw back something for ordinary working folk, the environment and deal with Iraq. They also need to build a distinctive, bold and self confident vision.
It is the child killers such as you and those who voted against the ban that are out of touch, out of touch with both God and the innocent unborn children.
Thank God that you’re a lesbian as ‘pro-choice’ child killers do not deserve to have children of their own.
Oh Geoff, please don’t presume to tell me what I can or cannot do with my own body if I so choose. I would suggest that you are the one out of touch, with biology. An embryo is not a mini-person.
Oh yes, after your thoughful comment and insight into God’s will, i can now see how it’s possible to mistake someone who promotes a woman’s right to govern her own body with a child killer. Fool; Proved further by your belief that as a lesbian Antonia can’t have children.
This comment has been edited by the site owner as it breaks the site rules.
Is it really pro-choice, Antonia? The way I understood it, one of the big reasons that the referendum failed was because the ban proposed was a ban on pretty much any abortion - the most restrictive abortion law that would have been passed anywhere. My guess is that something not so extreme might have had a good chance of passing. It’s the problem, more broadly, with referendums - they are only useful for showing what people think of the question, not the broader issue.
Three cheers to Daniel Ortega’s new pro-life law!
Quite so Ken, I was going to say: not so fast Antonia. A not insignificant 44 % of South Dakotans voted in favour of protecting human life. Clearly Pro-Lifers have more educational work to do in South Dakota but the balance is swinging in our favour.
At the same time, some 48% of South Dakotans voted in favour of extending marriage rights to same-sex couples. This is good news for progressive Pro-Lifers, such as my good self.
Who knows, in a matter of decades we might be able to look forward to a South Dakota which values all humans, no matter their gestational age, race, ability or sexual orientation. Now *that* would be progressive. Come the day, etc etc.