More from South Dakota.
The mother of a dear friend of mine lives in South Dakota, and she just emailed this to me. (I'm going to cut it up a little bit.)
And then in a letter to the governor she writes:
Just think about that for a minute. Under current South Dakota law, taking into account the total abortion ban signed today by the governor, it is completely realistic that a woman who has been raped will have to carry the baby to term, and then potentially come into repeated contact with her rapist in court hearings and, at the very least, child visitation.
And even if the whole thing is managed through social services somehow, imagine how it would feel when you're child comes home from his "visit" and tells you how great his dad is.
Just how sick are these South Dakota politicians?
(Thanks a ton, Ginny. There's no way to know about things like this unless I were local to S.D. and active. Keep at it.)
(And, other bloggers, please feel free to repost this and propagate it like crazy. I haven't seen anything about this anywhere else, and I think it needs to be out there growing. - Mike)
Mike, prior to passing HB1086 discussed below, the legislators killed in committee, by 11 to 0, a bill to automatically terminate, at the time of sentencing for a convicted rapist or incest perpetrator all parental rights to the child conceived as the result of the rape or incest. ...
And then in a letter to the governor she writes:
If HB1215 becomes a law, South Dakota government first forces women, when a delay prohibits their use of emergency contraception, to carry to term children conceived as the result of rape or incest.
Then, the forcibly or illegally impregnated woman may, through HB1086, be forced to co-parent with her aggressor if she chooses to keep the child or if the rapist/incest perpetrator refuses consent for her to place the child for adoption. The only other option available to the victim of the crime is to place the child in foster care, where the criminal can reclaim the child upon release from prison. Surely, such possibilities are unconscionable to you.
Just think about that for a minute. Under current South Dakota law, taking into account the total abortion ban signed today by the governor, it is completely realistic that a woman who has been raped will have to carry the baby to term, and then potentially come into repeated contact with her rapist in court hearings and, at the very least, child visitation.
And even if the whole thing is managed through social services somehow, imagine how it would feel when you're child comes home from his "visit" and tells you how great his dad is.
Just how sick are these South Dakota politicians?
(Thanks a ton, Ginny. There's no way to know about things like this unless I were local to S.D. and active. Keep at it.)
(And, other bloggers, please feel free to repost this and propagate it like crazy. I haven't seen anything about this anywhere else, and I think it needs to be out there growing. - Mike)