Should South Dakota Legalize Killing of Abortion Providers?

News 2011/02/16 23:00:00
Related Topics: The Bible, Abortion, GOP
Add Photos & Videos
The Bible tells us it’s “an eye for an eye.” And in South Dakota, where the majority of the Republican state legislature is adamantly opposed to abortion rights, that Biblical truism may soon become law.

Mother Jones magazine reports that a new law that would legalize murdering abortion providers is one of several measures under consideration in the state that would erect further barriers to women seeking an abortion.

The law that’s being considered by the legislature would expand the definition of “justifiable homicide” to include killings that are intended to prevent harm to a fetus. Reading between the lines, that means that someone who killed an abortion doctor could technically evade prosecution for the crime.

The Republican-backed House Bill 1171, moved out of committee on a 9-3 party line vote and will move on to the state’s GOP-dominated House of Representatives soon.

According to the magazine, “if the bill passes, it could in theory allow a woman's father, mother, son, daughter, or husband to kill anyone who tried to provide that woman an abortion—even if she wanted one.”

A day after the magazine posted its first article on the bill, co-sponsor Rep. Phil Jensen responded to the piece, saying he disagreed with its interpretation of the proposed law’s language.

"This simply is to bring consistency to South Dakota statute as it relates to justifiable homicide," explained Jensen. "If you look at the code, these codes are dealing with illegal acts. Now, abortion is a legal act. So this has got nothing to do with abortion."

After some backlash, Jensen said he would be willing to consider changing some of the bill’s language.

Jensen said the original bill was pitched as a clarification of the state’s justifiable homicide law, which already allows prosecutors to charge people with manslaughter or murder for crimes that result in the death of fetuses. It did not include language related to an “unborn child,” but in a little-noticed hearing an amendment was added that included that wording after a number of right-wing groups testified in favor of the amended version.

The difference, detractors say, is between counting the murder of a pregnant woman as two crimes – which is already permissible in several states – and making the protection of a fetus an affirmative defense against a murder charge.

Vicki Saporta, the president of the National Abortion Federation, the professional association of abortion providers, described the bill as “an invitation to murder abortion providers.” She noted that since 1993, eight doctors have been assassinated at the hands of anti-abortion extremists, and another 17 have been the victims of murder attempts.

Should South Dakota consider making the murder of abortion doctors legal?
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Jake M 2011/02/16 23:16:31
    Jake M
    So apparently in South Dakota, pro-life means you can kill anything EXCEPT a fetus.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest

  • tncdel Primo 2011/02/19 00:11:08
    No one in South Dakota is promoting murder. It's the other 49 states promoting murder. How can it be murder to kill a mass-murdering doctor to save the lives of babies before birth?

    So if you were on an airplane that was hijacked by an Islamic terrorist who intended to force it to crash into the Washington Monument, from your statement, I take it then that you would be very opposed to a hero shooting the terrorist to save the lives of the passengers.
  • uyen tncdel 2011/02/19 15:22:24
    If the moms don't want to, do the doctors force her?
  • Primo tncdel 2011/02/21 22:38:21 (edited)
    The question at the top of the page is this: "Should South Dakota Legalize Killing of Abortion Providers?" Taking the life of another is always murder unless the Ten Commandments are wrong. If killing another is okay, then why didn't Jesus kill his enemies?

    I simply answered the question. I have no idea where you came up with the rest. There are many decafinated brands on the market that are just as tasty as the real thing. :-)
  • myfoxmystere 2011/02/18 23:33:29
    I only say yes under some conditions: First of all, Abortion Providers must be convicted of capital murder, then be given the death penalty. Only then will it be a justifiable death. Abortion needs to be classified as murder in South Dakota first.
  • BigBear myfoxmy... 2011/02/19 02:12:25
    Your a douchebag.....Prochoice is the only way....wake up!!
  • NathanP... myfoxmy... 2011/02/19 05:02:58
    Abortion providers have been working within the law for decades, the law would have to change making abortion illegal, and the doctors would have to keep providing them for there even to have been a crime committed. The supreme court is unlikely to change its mind on the matter.
  • sensibl... myfoxmy... 2011/02/19 06:35:45
    So YOU are advocating killing doctors? Maybe you should be tried as an accomplice?
  • Sarah 2011/02/18 23:27:12
    What part of killing people is wrong do people not get? It amazes me to this day the number of so-called "pro-lifers" are in favor of the death penalty. So I've decided to start calling the death penalty 90th trimester abortion.
  • tncdel Sarah 2011/02/19 00:11:50
    So if you were on an airplane that was hijacked by an Islamic terrorist who intended to force it to crash into the Washington Monument, from your statement, I take it then that you would be very opposed to a hero shooting the terrorist to save the lives of the passengers.
  • exitmould tncdel 2011/02/19 00:43:32
    stop copy/pasting the same stupid and irrelevant argument.
  • ☆Ed☆ tncdel 2011/02/19 02:04:16
    Your scenario would be SELF DEFENSE. On the other hand, with DNA proving many legally CONVICTED criminals of their innocence, I definitely have changed my stand on capital punishment. I have come to the belief that killing another human is wrong, unless in self defense.
  • Sarah tncdel 2011/02/23 01:54:46
    well aside frome the fact that fireing a gun in a pressurised jumbo jet is very dangerous, you are talking apples and oranges here. Terrorism is illegal, the hero would be shooting a terrorist in the process of committing a crime. An abortion doctor is a licenced professional, doing a requested, and legal medical procedure. if you want to stop him change the law. If I saw a criminal threatening to kill someones unborn baby against the will of the mother then I say feel free to shoot. Of course this answer is a waste of typing because either you are just yanking my chain, or you really are so stupid you don't see the idiocy of your arguement
  • MattPajor 2011/02/18 22:37:00
    It would be killing mass murders.
  • NathanP... MattPajor 2011/02/19 05:05:06
    The actions of these doctors is not considered murder under the law. Some consider killing people in wartime murder. Do you support murdering veterans?
  • MattPajor NathanP... 2011/02/19 22:18:32
    That's SOOOOO different here you got an innocent child that gets killed because his stupid mother let herself off (unless she was raped, then that does not apply) and then the kid gets the death penalty. Soldiers are protecting innocent people FROM people that want to kill them. Yeah, the other side might have some good people, but if you're fighting the United States, you are fighting probably for a side that isn't the exactly innocent.

    Innocent child vs. Terrorists and other crazies.
    See the difference?? Oh and don't give me that bull that a fetus isn't a child at conception, by your definition a fetus isn't a human even if he's a minute from being born.
  • NathanP... MattPajor 2011/02/21 14:58:26
    You don't know my definitions, and I doubt that you are knowledgeable about your own. Does a single cell have the ability to think? Does a blastocyte have the ability to reason? Is there anything about a fetus below six months that separates it from the rest of the animal kingdom? Oh, yeah, there is. It can't survive outside the womb. It can neither think, feel nor survive. There is a reason why the line was set at six months, and no, it isn't a perfect line. Do you have religious reasons for your views I wonder?
  • MattPajor NathanP... 2011/02/21 16:47:14
    Listen, I get your point of view. But think about it this way, is there any other thing in the world that can develop INTO a human. There isn't. That's why it needs to be protected. No it can't survive outside the womb, but that doesn't mean we can go a abort and kill them like mosquitoes and bugs. Only 8% of abortions are because of rape, incest, or health complications. As determined by Health Department. The rest it "inconvenience" and prostitution. So if you were to stop the last 92%, one people like me would be happy cause you stopped the majority of abortion. Most likely you would be happy because of all the whores that would be stopped. And when it comes to choice, there is a reason why people give babies up for adoption. So is abortion really needed for "inconvenience" ?
  • NathanP... MattPajor 2011/03/27 18:08:19
    Actually, although it's illegal to do on humans and it hasn't been perfected yet, cloning has shown that pretty much any cell of the body could be used to clone someone. It's true that mammary cells from females are the easiest, but it gives a strong hint that classically conceived embryos are not the only way to produce humans. It is incredibly difficult to adopt American children. Children languish in the care of the state for a long time before they find homes. You assume that I'm against prostitution. Hey, I'd be happy if there were more legalized prostitution and decreased abortion, but I don't think that abortion should be illegal. Also to go into the extremes on this. Are you against contraception? Killing sperm is killing nearly half of the DNA needed to make a person per sperm. Since there is something like five million sperm per ejaculate, masturbation and condom use should get capital punishment under this view.
  • MattPajor NathanP... 2011/03/28 00:57:52
    I'm not against all contraception. But some of it is WAY to far.
    e.g. Sterilization
  • decrepittex 2011/02/18 21:54:45
    But only if it becomes legal to kill the stupid a$$holes who came up with this idea. Maybe we could have a season with a four Republican limit. Kinda like deer season. I'm so sick of some of the stupid
    $hit this new crop of idiots in Washington are coming up with that I feel like puking. Now we have the state government trying to one up Washington. It has become painfully obvious to me that higher education does not make a person smart. Some of these elected government officials with degrees are dumber than f*&king; stumps.
  • tncdel decrepi... 2011/02/19 00:12:21
    So if you were on an airplane that was hijacked by an Islamic terrorist who intended to force it to crash into the Washington Monument, from your statement, I take it then that you would be very opposed to a hero shooting the terrorist to save the lives of the passengers.
  • decrepi... tncdel 2011/02/24 03:06:33
    Are you f(*king nuts? We're talking about killing a person for doing something that is legal according to the Supreme Court of the United States verus a nut hijacking an airplane (which I understand is
    illegal just about anywhere in the world) full of people. How are the two things related? You're going to have to come up with something better than that. But to answer your stupid frigging question, no, I wouldn't be opposed to a hero shooting the terrorist, (by the way, how did the hero get HIS gun through security? I hope the air marshall on board don't see the gun and shoot the hero full of holes)
  • John 2011/02/18 21:04:52
    I thought republicans all over the country were elected in November to spur job growth and grow the economy an not trying to redefine rape, abortions, and take away the rights of unions to collectively bargain.
  • tncdel John 2011/02/19 00:12:48
    So if you were on an airplane that was hijacked by an Islamic terrorist who intended to force it to crash into the Washington Monument, from your statement, I take it then that you would be very opposed to a hero shooting the terrorist to save the lives of the passengers.
  • decrepi... tncdel 2011/02/24 02:53:57
    Did you get this question from Glen Beck and figure it was an argument for anything posted?
  • captkirk999 2011/02/18 20:54:19
    If everyone lived by eye for an eye we would be blind. Ghandi
  • tncdel captkir... 2011/02/19 00:13:20
  • captkir... tncdel 2011/02/19 00:18:03
    killing Abortion doctors is going by Eye for an Eye
  • dannybaby 2011/02/18 20:15:16
    I understand y people r rlly mad at these doc. Nut u jst can't run around and kill people
  • tncdel dannybaby 2011/02/19 00:20:12
    See what this abortion doctor has to say:
  • NathanP... tncdel 2011/02/19 05:09:39
    Wait, you mean that someone who converted to Catholicism would start thinking that abortion was wrong and might want to stop others from doing so as well? Blimey. I wonder if he has any conflicting views on contraception.
  • r2hats@... dannybaby 2011/02/19 00:20:53
    hahaha, you know this silly bill is just to make a point. But think about this, should a real law like this pass, the doctor in question would know about it and take off for parts unknown. How many babies fated for death have that option?
  • NathanP... r2hats@... 2011/02/19 15:44:58
    A fetus has all kinds of options, they are just not smart enough to take advantage of them.
  • Bullmoose 2011/02/18 19:42:21 (edited)
    I suppose the same logic could be applied to tobacco & liquor sellers. "My kid died in a DUI crash so now I am going to go kill the person who sold him the liquor" or "My dad died from lung cancer so now I can go after the tobacco companies"

    Religious freedom and rights to free speech mean you have the right to try and convince people of your point of view not force your point of view on them through intimidation or violence.
  • tncdel Bullmoose 2011/02/19 00:22:14
  • decrepi... Bullmoose 2011/02/24 03:13:56
    It refreshing to read a sane post on this site. There are so few. A big thumbs up to you!
  • Marie-Jacqueline 2011/02/18 19:25:37 (edited)
    Can somebody tell me why some Americans think that killing a doctor who perfroms abortions, bombing abortion clinics (hurting bystanders) , posting at abortion clinics insulting the woman that come to the clicnic is a good thing?

    Who are they to judge somebody else?

    In the Bible you also find this:
    "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

    I ask this because people that are against abortion in The Netherlands don't resort to this kind of violence.
    I also didn't here of it from other countries in Europe.

    Did go to the site of your link.
    It seems that there are some updates on this matter.
  • tncdel Marie-J... 2011/02/19 00:23:23
    So if you were on an airplane that was hijacked by an Islamic terrorist who intended to force it to crash into the Washington Monument, from your statement, I take it then that you would be very opposed to a hero shooting the terrorist to save the lives of the passengers.
  • Marie-J... tncdel 2011/02/19 15:02:50
    Taking a live is never a light decision or easy to do.

    In both cases, your exemple hijack, or abortion, those decisions are not made lightly or are easy to do.
    It may be the right decision on that moment in time, but feelings of guilt can stay a livetime.

    Your aswer, making this comparison with a hijacking a plane, makes clear to me where your position on this is.
    However the way you try to prove a point is an opinion, made only from your emotion, no reason in sight.
    A good opinion is made from both reason and emotion.

    In order to answer you comment, I played along with it.

    Have you ever thought about the fact that talking with a doctor working in a abortionclinic, or a woman deciding for an abortion, would be a better road to go.
    The same for that hijacking of yours.
  • decrepi... tncdel 2011/02/24 03:16:44
    After reading this same $ hit from you for the third time- if I was on the plane with you and had the gun, it would be a toss up between you and the hijacker.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2016/02/14 08:10:19

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals