Author: has written 5271 posts for this blog.

Jill has been blogging for Feministe since 2005.
Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

24 Responses

  1. randomliberal/Robert
    randomliberal/Robert February 22, 2006 at 10:09 am |

    Whoever is conjecturing that Justice Stevens will retire during this administration is a dumbass. He understands the implication of his stepping down, he doesn’t live in a vacuum. Mr. Justice Stevens will retire over his dead body.

    Which is kind of what I’m worried about.

  2. Sara
    Sara February 22, 2006 at 10:15 am |

    Well, Robert, I would have said the same thing about O’Connor.

  3. randomliberal/Robert
    randomliberal/Robert February 22, 2006 at 10:40 am |

    Yeah, I thought about that after I hit submit…I’m gonna stay slightly optimistic here, though…

  4. Scott Lemieux
    Scott Lemieux February 22, 2006 at 10:59 am |

    And, of course, excluding women from criminal punishment makes less than no sense if “life begins at conception.”

  5. Lauren
    Lauren February 22, 2006 at 11:41 am |

    Well, they don’t want to punish women, they just want to punish women.

  6. Stacy
    Stacy February 22, 2006 at 12:02 pm |

    It isn’t going to happen, the anti-choice crowd would be crazy to try and overturn Roe right now, it’s a bad strategy.

    They have it the way they want it right now, even more if the court decides in their favor on partial birth abortion. It’s the perfect situation. They will just keep placing restrictions on it until it is almost impossible to have access to abortion in some places, but will never attempt to overturn Roe. Why would they? The way it’s going now, it’s a win-win situation. They get to infringe on women’s rights, force them to bring forth the next generation of taxpayers, and reduce them down to property of the state, yet they still have it at the federal level to use as a trump card in election years, so they can still keep right on playing that “oppressed underdog fighting the good fight” game that they love so much.

  7. Lauren
    Lauren February 22, 2006 at 12:12 pm |

    Stacy, I agree. That and it’s an election year.

  8. Sara
    Sara February 22, 2006 at 2:40 pm |

    I found myself thinking that they might do the same thing to this ban that they did to the parental-consent law, and just send it back to be fixed. I didn’t really understand exactly what went on with that, though. Could that happen with this law? This law is a complete mess, completely unenforceable, and not really very useful to people who want to overturn Roe v. Wade, as far as I can tell. I’m guessing it’s an election-year stunt for the state legislators, mostly.

  9. Chuck
    Chuck February 22, 2006 at 6:00 pm |

    The idea of controlling uteruses state-wide, and foring all pregnant women to give birth, is just too appealling.

    I’m sure the thinking in South Dakota is just following through on the natural backlash of things. Women’s bodies have been treated how you Uterati have wanted for decades now. It’s time to give that power back where it belongs. White men.

  10. Meredith
    Meredith February 22, 2006 at 8:18 pm |

    Disgusting. My mother had a miscarriage a few years ago that required D&C to remove the baby, which was almost five months along. (I’m using baby/child terminology in this case because that’s what it was to us, a beloved and long-awaited sibling.) To say nothing of the physical risks, what about the mental and emotional pain for the woman and her loved ones with the knowledge that she had to carrry her DEAD CHILD around until it spontaneously aborted itself? God, I’m crying as I type this. It was hard enough on my poor mom, who had to wait almost a whole day (from after dinner when she started bleeding until late afternoon when the obstetrician was finally free to perform the procedure) knowing that her child was inside her, dead. I can’t imagine the anguish of someone who had to wait weeks or longer. No, it wasn’t putting my mother’s life at risk. However, it was putting her sanity and emotional health at risk.

  11. South Dakota women might as well die for fucking   at  Pandagon

    [...] en, as a law is working through the legislature that’s an absolute ban on abortion, with no exceptions for a woman’s health. As Jill says: It off [...]

  12. randomliberal/Robert
    randomliberal/Robert February 22, 2006 at 11:17 pm |

    This entire bill should have us worried; let’s hope it doesn’t pass.

    Too late

  13. Stephen
    Stephen February 22, 2006 at 11:28 pm |

    As I said on another blog, this courts will strike this down for sure. The real threat is the death by a thousand cuts: parent notification, etc. They don’t want to overturn roe, it is red meat for the base. This bill is designed to fail so they can get the base out in anger over “activist judges”

  14. randomliberal/Robert
    randomliberal/Robert February 22, 2006 at 11:45 pm |

    On this particular bill, I think Stephen is right. At the very least, there are five pro-Casey votes (Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter, and Kennedy), and I don’t think Kennedy has shifted so far as to overturn Casey.

    The one that worries me, and should worry everyone, IMO, is the case SCOTUS just granted cert for, Gonzales v. Carhart, which challenges the federal Women Are Stupid Hos Who Don’t Know What’s Good for Them Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. Kennedy voted with the minority in the 2000 case which overturned the incredibly similar Nebraska Women Are Stupid Hos Who Don’t Know What’s Good for Them Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. So unless Roberts or Alito shock the world, women can kiss late-term abortions goodbye.

  15. randomliberal/Robert
    randomliberal/Robert February 22, 2006 at 11:47 pm |

    Gack! My strikethrough tags didn’t work. That should say:

    “…federal Women Are Stupid Hos Who Don’t Know What’s Good for Them Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. Kennedy voted with the minority in the 2000 case which overturned the incredibly similar Nebraska Women Are Stupid Hos Who Don’t Know What’s Good for Them Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act.

  16. Jane
    Jane February 23, 2006 at 8:47 am |

    women can kiss late-term abortions goodbye

    Unfortunately, because there’s no such thing as “partial-birth abortion,” the wording of the ban is vague enough that abortions in the second trimester could be banned as well, depending on who’s doing the interpreting. (note: probably not the abortion provider)

  17. randomliberal/Robert
    randomliberal/Robert February 23, 2006 at 12:10 pm |

    Yeah, that’s why I included all late-term abortions (and I meant to include 2nd trimester, though that’s quite possibly a misdefinition on my part).

  18. Shades Of Grey
    Shades Of Grey February 23, 2006 at 12:15 pm |

    The reason South Dakota is getting away with it

    The problem is the people who pay lip service to women’s rights, but don’t actually follow up.

  19. Pam's House Blend
    Pam's House Blend February 23, 2006 at 12:16 pm |

    Womb control full steam ahead

    South Dakota is going full steam ahead with womb control measures…Shakes Sis, Amanda at Pandagon, and Jill at Feministe weigh in.

  20. Anne
    Anne February 23, 2006 at 12:17 pm |

    There already aren’t any doctors in SD who will perform abortions–existing laws already made them all back off. They now fly the doctors in from Minnesota, but if this law goes through, they won’t even be able to manage that.

  21. Anne (the other one)
    Anne (the other one) February 23, 2006 at 1:08 pm |

    It hasn’t been signed yet, as far as I know.

  22. Anne (the other one)
    Anne (the other one) February 23, 2006 at 3:49 pm |

    …I mean, it probably will be, but I’m just saying.

  23. Jen's Den of Iniquity
    Jen's Den of Iniquity February 24, 2006 at 6:04 pm |

    failing words, falling back on sisters

    since eloquence eludes me, i’ll let others say it better than myself:
    bitch ph.d.: not to put too fine a point on it
    Of course, women with money will just leave the state for their abortions. If they’re smart, a lot of them won’t c…

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.