This column by Mark Morford was my first alert to the latest terrifying step the right wingers are taking on my back.

I read an interesting article somewheres (I forget where) that points out that while the bill states that life begins at conception, it allows the morning-after pill. So, basically you have a five-day window to commit what they say is a crime.

Nothing in section 2 of this Act may be construed to prohibit the sale, use, prescription, or administration of a contraceptive measure, drug or chemical, if it is administered prior to the time when a pregnancy could be determined through conventional medical testing.

Nice catch Marcia. $50 bucks says there’s a pharmaceutical company behind that exception.

Did this post disappear at some point during the day? I posted at lunch, and then just checked it to make a spelling correction and noticed I’d set it to “private.” Strange.

Another interesting thing noted by someone on some forum somewhere (I swear i read too much online): the bill prohibits doctors from performing abortions, but doesn’t seem to lay out any penalties for the woman involved.

If they REALLY believe that this is murder, should the female in question be held responsible as well as the doctor? My .02 says that the lawmakers didn’t want their daughters potentially going to jail…

Jason, you’re exactly right, the text of the bill reads:

Nothing in this Act may be construed to subject the pregnant mother upon whom any abortion is performed or attempted to any criminal conviction and penalty.

I actually did contribute to Planned Parenthood this year because of a delightful combination of factors:
wanting my checkbook to reflect my values,
being able to as I am now a working professional not just a po’ grad student (even with mountains of debt),
and getting a perverse sense of glee at having my contribution come through Georgetown University (a Jesuit school). Catholic institutions will support Planned Parenthood!
Hoya Saxa, rah, rah, rah!

What a freaky and effective image! That coat hangar made me gasp!

I am trying to figure this out correctly, but maybe I don’t understand it fully. My question is this: If the bill states that life begins at conception and conception is the point when the blastocyst finds it’s way to the uterus, why would one be committing a crime by using EC? From my understanding and training, EC prevents the fusing of a sperm with an egg, thus preventing the creation of the blastocyst. I think EC is a useful form of contraception, not an abortion or what SD now considers a crime.

Thank you.

Plus that image? Too much — love it.

I do not think using emergency contraception is an abortion. I also don’t have a complete mastery of medical/reproductive terminology. So if there’s some faulty logic going on on my part, help me out.

The way I understand it:
The bill says an “unborn human being” is at any point from “fertilization to full gestation.”
With emergency contraception, if fertilization takes place then the EC can prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb. In other words, it can do its thing *after* fertilization.

The state says it’s an unborn human being starting at fertilization and that taking an action that resuts in”terminating the life” of “an unborn human being” is a felony. Therefore, emergency contraception can result in what the state has defined as a crime.

Thanks, Marcia, for explaining!

I was going to make a joke about life beginning when that little blastocyst is able to crawl around outside the womb, but then a counter argument popped up in my head that a newborn would probably have just as hard a time living for very long if we left it all alone in a forest.

Truth is that evolution has played a dirty little trick on us by allowing humans to give birth to such immature, practically helpless babies. I’m not sure of the statistics but I believe it’s the case that very few other animals produce such unfit offspring. So no matter how we cut it, be it a fetus, an “unborn baby,” or a newborn, this creature we beget depends heavily on its mother for life.

Of course I’m of the mind that so great a responsibility requires an exceptional latitude allowed in terms of a women’s rights. Given that baby’s dependence on the mother, we should be celebrating the mother who is cognizant that for whatever reason she cannot provide the attention, nurturing, feeding, cleaning, healing which a baby requires in order to live.

A woman who chooses to have an abortion is clearly a woman who values life. A culture that allows women to make that choice is a culture that values the quality of life of its future generations.

Justin, you run a righteously sound, fabulous blog! How odd today, and good, to come across your site once again in a gay.com news story - right on about that, by the way - having first encountered this lovely place when I was installing WordPress and having some, shall we say, import issues? You were helpful then and you’re helpful now in highlighting some of the bollocks that goes on in the world. Keep up the good fight with the same intelligence and humour that’s always evident on your site. And thank you! x

Justin, you’re the bomb for providing a quick and easy way of contacting all the SD Senators and Representatives with just a simple click. I sent every damn one of them an e-mail stating my disapproval of their decision to pass HB 1215. Even some Democrats voted for it. Unbelievable. This country is going to the shits.