South Dakota

Over the past weeks and months, we've seen a lot of rather callous crowing that the right-wing forced-pregnancy push is somehow "good for ______________" (fill in the blank -- liberals, Democrats, you name it). The idea is that overturning Roe will be so awful that the progressive forces will finally be heard.

Never mentioned is that this red-carpet future for (presumably) Democrats is dyed with the blood of the women who will have died as a result of forced pregnancy laws.

Last night someone sent me a link that made me want to scream. The Deceiver takes the cake when he writes:

Of course, the world is talking about the recently-signed-into-law abortion ban in South Dakota. I feel for the women of SD, I really do, but

-- and when I see that "but," I know what's coming next --

I had hoped that this move on their legislators' part would remain a tacky political badge run up the flagpole, and nothing more. However, as I was driving home tonight from the 9:30 Club, listening to whatever BBC shit they have on NPR, I heard the news that Planned Parenthood is going to challenge the new law in the courts. This caused me to beat the steering wheel and shout, "Stupid, stupid, stupid!" several times.

Again. It's not that I don't sympathize with the citizens of SD who are going to suffer the deleterious effects of a law that flies in the face of Freakonomics and imbues rapists with special legal rights.

It's just that the lives of the women who will be directly impacted by this law are not as important as the meta-agenda.

It's simply that Planned Parenthood is embarking on the EXACT course the opponents of legal abortion WANT them to. Taking this matter to court is a fine way to make a big showy pageant of deeply held principles, but it's a trap--the path inevitably leads to showdown in the SCOTUS against a panel of judges that are, in all likelihood, not predisposed to rule in favor of abortion rights. It's the one battlefield where victory is certain to be denied and it should be avoided at all costs.

All costs? Any amount of lives?

There is a reason Planned Parenthood is taking on the law. Because the law prevents Planned Parenthood from providing healthcare for women. You can't just write off women in South Dakota as martyrs to the cause. It's not our place -- anyone's place -- to do that!

Right now, with South Dakota's laws on the books, the correct course of action is to make sure no plaintiff of any sort challenges their law. I know that sounds like crazy talk. But right now, this anti-abortion buck stops at the South Dakota border (though I'm well aware that other states are considering moving in the same direction--sadly, these states will also have to be sacrificed to save abortion rights everywhere else).

I'm sorry, but that makes no sense. It's like arguing that permitting slavery in the South protected freedom in the North.

Of course they have to fight the law. It could mean an injunction against it, and that would save lives, and I'm sorry, you have to save what lives when you can. You can't just turn your back on people in some futurist gambit based on predictions and guesswork.

"I'm sorry, Jill. We can't defend your Constitutional rights because we have greater political opportunities in the future. You just don't figure in our calculus. Sorry! Have you considered the power of prayer?"

But wait -- our Deceiver isn't done:

What should Planned Parenthood do? Rather then expend money in effort in a shameless waste that will, in all likelihood, end in total defeat in one fell swoop (or, in all fairness, bring that possibility a step closer*), abortion-rights advocates should take the sensible step of making the anti-choice winners pay the price for having won. They should bring as much pressure as they can afford to bear on the legislators who gave this abortion ban its life and chase them from office. Barring that, they should simply let South Dakota twist on the withering vine of their tax base, letting the state buckle under the weight of having to care for unwanted children and all of the malicious consequences cited by Steven Levitt.

Notice no mention of the women who will pay the price. No, it's all about political power to the Deceiver. Lives don't even figure into the equation for him/her.

Sickening.

Addendum: Somehow I'm not surprised that The Deceiver buys into the child support argument against overturning Roe. "Guys, abortion saves you money!"

from Talk to Action

One can almost hear Mark Twain snorting in disgust.

(Image by Kafka/AP)
This week Governor Mike Rounds of South Dakota finally ended the suspense. After a prolonged, tantalizing and agonizing period of presumably sober deliberation, Rounds signed the Women's Health and Human Life Protection Act. The law protects human life beginning at "that point in time when a male human sperm penetrates the zona pellucida of a female human ovum." Unless, of course, the live human in question is a woman who wants an abortion – in which case she'd better be a sodomized Christian virgin.

Long time mover and shaker in the christianist war on women and girls, a war planned and fought on the mean rural roads and city streets of America, lately coming to full bloody flower in SD, is... Leslee Unruh.

Her husband, a local chiropractor, served on the Task Force that led to the recent law signed by Gov. Rounds. She has flogged every horse that the white, christian, oppressive mentality will support from an online abstinence clearinghouse, to a CPC center, to a suspicious Omega Maternity home for unwed girls...

Leslee Unruh: Oh, do please meet this woman. For she is the enemy.

The Abstinence Clearinghouse is an offshoot of the pro-life movement that refers to those who believe in comprehensive sex education as the "safe sex cartel" and "condom pushers." Its mission is "to promote the appreciation for and practice of sexual abstinence (purity)" through distribution of abstinence-only publications. Its website boasts a "medical advisory board" composed of health professionals who will not prescribe contraceptives to unmarried teens.

Abstinence Clearinghouse founder Leslee Unruh has close ties to the pro-life establishment. She spent most of the '80s protesting outside abortion clinics and encouraging people to protest outside the homes of physicians who provide abortions.

That is Ed Meese, AG under Reagan, with Leslee Unruh beside him, on his left.

She also started a "crisis pregnancy center" in Sioux Falls, S.D., about which there were so many complaints that the governor had her investigated. Unruh pleaded no contest to unlicensed adoption and foster care practices as part of a plea bargain in which 19 charges, including four felonies, were dropped.

Let's stop, and read that bit again:

She also started a "crisis pregnancy center" in Sioux Falls, S.D., about which there were so many complaints that the governor had her investigated.

Unruh pleaded no contest to unlicensed adoption and foster care practices as part of a plea bargain in which 19 charges, including four felonies, were dropped.

A promo shot of Leslee, meant to indicate she wants "you" for her abstinence games.
I say, anyone with a brain will say, her angle, long term, is federal funds. And white babies. And cash. And coercion of women and girls. It already was her game...

The charges resulted from Unruh's promises to pay teenagers if they remained pregnant so she could put their babies up for adoption. Tim Wilka, one of the state's attorneys at the time, explained,

"There were so many allegations about improper adoptions being made [against her] and how teenage girls were being pressured to give up their children," he says. "Gov. George Mickelson called me and asked me to take the case."

Well, somebody covered her ass. As she bleated out, nolo contendere...

The picture on the ground in SD, and several other states, is very bleak for women... but as I cast my mind back over a year long of online - and so very ''DLC'' it has been - demagoguery of NARAL (imo, there is a buzzing bee up Kos's ass), and, while I believe in very harsh criticism of pols, lobbyists, hacks and others, I have been around the block... and there is a difference. Demagoguery is meant to demonise.

The past 6 weeks the demagoguery starts to extend, across the board, from NARAL to PPFA. Often involving a small circle of "incestuous amplification" blogs who tie in tightly via, again!, incestuous linking to the Red Star Mother Ship....

I say: they wear pink rhinestone collars and leashes and the leashes lead straight back to the party. Yes yes yes: they are "Democratic" sites. They surely do coordinate. Rahm, Reid, Hillpac, Schumer, Rendell, others. The conservative Democrats, red states, blue states, purple states... all the same in the end.

Scratch so many Democrats and you find a "reformed" Republican, ones that have scarcely changed at all, never really left Republican mommy and daddy.... Why cultivate your base, why form coalitions, when you can just herd the new weeds?

Find the Biz Wing, the Handmaiden Wing, the Chortle Loudly but Curl Up With No Spine, No Filibuster Wing. "Bitch and capitulate". Oh they, the incestuous blogs and the wanna bees, they raise their little poodle arms in fake approbation at this, or that, that the party does... but they work for the Yankee dollar, as I put it.

And not one of them wants anyone to remember that a majority Democratic senate brought us Clarence Thomas (Jane Mayer). That Biden, chair of the Judiciary, was outwitted and blind to flank work by aides to Republicans on the committee. Danforth shepherded that nom right by the Dems. 11 Democrats crossed the aisle on the senate floor to vote for Clarence, 52/48... he would not be on the SC without senate Democrats and a Democratic chaired Judiciary Committee.

I may be, and I am in fact, uneasy with the national level at NARAL, long time Democratic office holder in MT, Nancy Keenan, til she failed at her run in '00 (lost to the R by 6 pts) for the one seat in the House (it is possible to be critical and not demagogue her). There is no real ground level history of working for reproductive rights... unlike Kim Gandy, who, in addition to a history as a Louisiana prosecutor, came up thru the ranks at NOW for 30 years and ascended thru internal vote.

However, let's take a look at REAL grassroots in SD - as opposed to what I call "greasy roots", the visible leadership of the Big Box Blogs:

The Unitarian Universalists, a tiny number in SD - all of 186 souls at three congregations spread out across those hard rural roads of SD... from within their number we find Mahala Bach, who came forward with her desperate recounting of the most brutal rape at the age of 13 and her subsequent abortion, sought with the support of her mother and her doctor.

UUs worked as the only organised religion to fight against the war against women, this siege of the SD leg. Sometimes working interfaith, but often alone... protesting out side the capital (something Kos does not like) demonstrating (ditto) ... and among their number is Unitarian Universalist member:

Thelma Underberg, who attends All Souls, is executive director of NARAL ProChoice South Dakota.

She predicted pro-choice groups would challenge the bill because it has no exceptions for the health of women. She thinks it would take a minimum of two years for the challenge to reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

South Dakota’s experience should be a warning, she said, adding, “There are a lot of other terrible pieces of legislation out there. I hope people are finally waking up to the fact that things are totally out of whack.�

And in case anyone think this SD NARAL/others (PPFA operates the single abortion clinic left) pro-choice work is anything like sitting in a house in Berkeley bitching for months on end over Langevin and RI and NARAL endorsements (I personally cannot stand Chafee, but I don't control, nor contribute to, NARAL) at a keyboard, or on the phone or fax machine to Reid's office - who is a Democrats for Life all star, see p.4 of the pdf, he voted with Pryor, Breaux, Zell Miller and Ben Nelson in the 108th congress on pro-life - if anyone thinks pro-choice work in SD is easy, think again:

South Dakota has the fewest number of UUs of any state, but they are far from shy about speaking out on issues like abortion. They know, however, that when they do raise their voices in the public square there can be a price to pay.

A year ago Justin Lena, a member of the Rapid City fellowship and chair of the local Democratic Party, wrote a letter to the newspaper advocating the availability of emergency contraception in hospital emergency rooms for women who are raped. The day the letter was published someone threw flaming liquid on his lawn.

As I said, grassroots vs greasy roots.

And it is wise to listen, from time to time, to the real political writers, the very small handful in the nation... most others are what I call "churn" writers. But then there is William Greider, among the few (Lapham, Krugman, Walter Karp - now sadly gone - it never is many)... and I can hear in Greider's words from 1992 the backing for the demagoguery carried out by the Big Box Blogs... and I can hear who yanks their pink rhinestone poodle chains:

"The DLC's main objective was an attack on the Democratic Party's core constituencies -- labor, schoolteachers, women's rights groups, peace and disarmament activists, the racial minorities and supporters of affirmative action. Its stated goal was to restore the party's appeal to disaffected white males, especially in the South."

DLC, NDN, "reform" Democrats, New Democrats, DINOs... Republicrats, Demlicans. Third Way. Party "lobbyists". Consultants vs "activists" (the Kos preferred) and, of course, the patented "important shit".

Lots of names for the mess. People really cannot defend it any longer. The pro-white, pro-male (with "women assists" at the ready), pro-Republican (lite lite lite) agenda is in its third decade.

This just in, I could not caption the online game better:

You Can DONATE to Yearly Kos!

After all, if the pro-choice single issue groups aren't going to do their jobs, we'll just have to do it for them. We will sit down with these politicians and tell them to their face how important privacy and choice are to all of us.

We can use Yearly Kos to amplify our message beyond the convention hall.

THEY WILL HEAR OUR MESSAGE, LOUD AND CLEAR.

Yes do send off a fax to Reid, the star speaker.... Who voted for every pro-life measure targeted by Democrats for Life. You do that. I call YKos busy work. And showing evidence of scant interest from the ... ranks.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

UPDATED: Wednesday, 9:08 AM PT

well I have toured B-B-Blogs, post Ciro... now, if there was real struggle to rebuild the party (outside the beleaguered Howard and I did not support this last ditch stand of going "inside") losing, as the party rebuilds, would be acceptable.

However, the mantra from the Boyos is no idealogy, no factions pulled together to form coalition and, last but not least (or so they say): win win win.

The Orellys, with Barnum in the 20s. Performed in Paris.
Likely wore pink rhinestone, Paris paste collars...

So Boyos (and Girls and Democrats) ya gotta win. More than a couple governorships that should NEVER have produced so damned much public flop sweat.

One thing that self-proclaimed "Christian" politicians like to talk about when advocating forced pregnancy laws is that they are guided by their faith. In other words, for women to be good Christians, they must submit to being wombs of the state. From their faith-based claims that "life begins at conception" to less-public declarations that women exist for making babies and that's pretty much it, these "pro-life" leaders play up their authoritarian laws as being matters of religious expression and faith.

Okay....

Mike the Mad Biologist asks a question:

Why Does the South Dakota Legislature Hate Jews?

...The South Dakota forced childbirth law that means a Jewish woman (even one just passing through who needed medical care) would have to violate Jewish religious law.

Regarding abortion, there is no debate in Jewish law whatsoever on one point: if carrying a pregnancy to term would harm the physical welfare–not the life, the welfare–of the mother, or her ability to bear future children, the fetus is termed a "pursuer" (rodef). In other words, if a pregnancy were carried to term and would cause long-term damage to the woman, the fetus is the moral equivalent of a criminal chasing after her with the intent to do harm. It is not a blessed little 'snowflake.' Under these circumstances, the moral option is to terminate the pregnancy....
Of course, talk to a Christianist off the record and he'll tell you that Christianity is the only path and atheists are damned to hell and Jews are Satan's spawn. The vision of the Founders of a secular nation with a clear separation between Church and State is anathema to the Christianist world view.

Thus we get many claims by Christianists that Christians are being oppressed by being prohibited from ruling everybody's lives, while they pass their particular religious doctrines into laws to force people to obey their particular interpretations of scriptures.

In other words, religious freedom means everyone is entitled to be ruled by Evangelical Christianist doctrine. And they will fight to the death your right to be controlled by them.

The state of South Dakota has made a decision that makes living a Jewish life incompatible with following the law of the land. So much for the vaunted 'Judeo-Christian' tradition that conservatives keep blathering about. It's clear that the 'Judeo' part was nothing more than a fig leaf to mask the 'religious' right's bigotry–although how this wasn't obvious from the get-go escapes me. For any conservative Christians reading this, you are not the 'oppressed', you are the oppressors. Stop with your 'Daniel in the lion's den' complex

And to Jewish Republicans: you were warned this madness would happen. If the South Dakota forced child birth law is not found unconstitutional, it will be passed in other states. Did your parents and grandparents come to this country so their children and grandchildren would be forced to live according to the dictates of Christian zealots? Did you learn nothing from 1,500 years of history? Shame on you.

Psst! Are you Mormons, Methodists and Episcopalians paying attention? You might be next! (Muslims, we know you already know.) Wiccans and worshippers of the Goddess might want to start shopping for asbestos clothing. Catholics, renounce the Pope and you'll probably be okay.

Welcome to Archie Bunker's America!

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Citing what they see as a more receptive or antiabortion high court, lawmakers easily approved a sweeping ban on the procedure, one that declares that life begins at conception.

South Dakota's law makes it a crime for a doctor to perform an abortion unless the mother's life is endangered. There are no exceptions for cases in which a mother's health may be threatened or cases in which the pregnancy results from rape or incest.

On the March 3, 2006, broadcast of The News Hour with Jim Lehrer we saw past the benign rhetoric about how the Supreme Court is going to stay impartial and the new Justices are not coming to the Supreme Court to grind an ax.

South Dakota has passed legislation that discriminates in favor of an embryo over the rights of a woman to control her own body.

Reproductive technology marches on. It is possible to place a fertilized egg of one woman into the womb of another woman. This is not surrogacy where the man impregnates another woman. This is the transfer of a fertilized egg of one women into that of another.

Currently, there are Third World women, and women of poverty in this nation, who are hiring out their wombs to people of means (often of different ethnicity) so that the hiring couple can have a baby that is biologically "theirs." The egg and sperm of the hiring couple are joined, and the embryo is implanted into another woman who has agreed to carry the fetus through labor. If a woman who has donated her womb has a change of heart, under South Dakota law she cannot get out of the services she has contracted to fulfill - nor does she (or so it seems) have any real legal standing once she delivers the baby.

This is not science fiction. This is the state of affairs today, and we are going down the slippery slope where the state begins to assert eminent domain over the womb.

Stay tuned. This is going to get a whole lot worse before we get away from people who are more interested in the rights of an embryo than a woman.