When Is an Abortion Not an Abortion?

Time ^ | 3-6-06 | NANCY GIBBS

[Delta 21]

In actuality this will only shut down ONE abortion clinic in South Dakota, thats ran by Planned Parenthood and is manned by out of state doctors from Michigan (I think I heard it right?)

But its a start!

[spikeytx86]

Me and my sister were talking about this last night, and I am hoping some of the FReepers here who are more knowledgeable about the law could help me.

What if a state made it so all abortions were legal but that someone who was preforming the abortion had to obtain the license at a fee of say $1,000,000,000.00 Annually and anyone practicing without this license would be charged with a felony. Could this fly with Roe V Wade? Because I don't even think George soros could buy a license every year at that rate thus ending abortion.

[Indy Pendance]

Repeal the 17th! There's a lot in the constitution that needs fixing....and is tied into the mess we're in right now.

[Indy Pendance]

Our insurance rates would skyrocket, the many would pay for the few. If we had a system where there was no insurance, it might work. Lawyers and Insurance are ruining this country. Imagine no health insurance where the public had to pay for services. What would happen to the costs?

[Melas]

No, it wouldn't fly legally. Legally, in all contracts and all legislation there is an implied clause of good faith whether or not it's actually there in writing.

[Delta 21]

I meant to say "Shut down the ONLY ONE clinic in SOuth Dakota....

I admire the place for having only one and taking this stand.

[RebekahT]

I appreciate what SD is trying to do but it was horribly timed. Without another "conservative" vote on the Court (and assuming CJ Roberts will vote the way we want him to), SD's plan will fail. The Supreme Court will strike down the law based on Roe & it's progeny. Then, when (if) we get another seat on the Court, the liberals will have yet another (and more importantly, a RECENT) affirmation of Roe & Casey...Bad for us because almost all of the justices believe in stare decisis (following precedent). We don't need another jewel in the crown of "abortion rights" and more stones for the libs in the Senate to throw at a conservative nominee (and another case name for Specter to add to his infamous abortion board in confirmation hearings).

However, I suppose the Court could deny cert but it only take 5 votes on the Court to grant cert to hear a case and there are 5 libs on the Court right now who are itching for ANOTHER chance to affirm "abortion rights." Nice try, South Dakota, but not very good "strategery."

[JNL]

LOL my brain kicks into gear and I see the light. Doh

[Hardastarboard]

“culture of life”

Hardly any clue as to what this woman's bias is, eh?

[irishjuggler]

I applaud South Dakota. To have a state openly reject Roe is a great thing. The message is, "The people of South Dakota reject the Supreme Court's anti-constitutional attempt to proscribe our right to regulate the practice of abortion in our state."

Shame on all the naysayers on this thread. Moderation in the defense of liberty is no vice.

[irishjuggler]

Oops... Moderation in the defense of liberty is no virtue.

[manwiththehands]

Good point. I remember years ago (when Clinton was first elected) the religious right were adamant about not electing Republicans who were not pro-life "enough". Their reasoning: "You have two choices. One wants to kill 100 babies, the other wants to kill only 10 babies. Who do you vote for? NEITHER! You're still killing babies".

That's absurd. Vote for the one who wants to kill only 10 and save the lives of 90.