watch the video
email to a friend
printable version
discuss in the forums
upload new photos for this story
save this article / add to your favorites list
re: ND House Passes Abortion Ban
Health Care
View Photo Slideshow
Health News
Faith and Religion
KX Member Tools
Upload Your Photos 
Upload Your Videos 
Submit Calendar Events 
Get Mobile Text Alerts
Contact KXNet.com
Part of the KXNet.com North Dakota News Network
NEW! - Try the DakotaPolitics.com BETA site!
KXNet is part of the Midkota Media Network
Free Classified Ads
Bismarck Classifieds
|
Minot Classifieds
|
Williston Classifieds
|
Dickinson Classifieds
|
Jamestown Classifieds
|
Devils Lake Classifieds
|
Fargo Classifieds
Total Outdoor Network
North Dakota Outdoors
|
South Dakota Outdoors
|
Minnesota Outdoors
|
Nebraska Outdoors
|
Alaska Outdoors
Fun and Entertainment
Designed and Programmed By Midkota Solutions
I find it interesting that this House refers specifically to the rights of a fertilized egg. My question is: If a fertilized egg has the same rights as a living person, can you claim your unborn child, from the time of inception, as a dependent, thereby making the parents eligible for child care tax rebates?
This bill would allow for zygotes to have human rights, but it would also allow 8 1/2 month old unborn babies to have rights, which they do not have right now. Why aren't the stories titled, North Dakota seeks to protect the right to not be wantonly murdered right before birth? I'll tell you why, because journalists are overwhelmingly pro-abortion, not pro-choice, pro-abortion, and their biased reporting is proof.
Killing the most innocent among us will cause our downfall.
Personal choice should tell us that the unborn must be protected.
If we do not protect them who will protect us?
We have become a totally selfish society.
We will be held accountable for our choices.
Thank you for having a back bone and standing up for what is right no matter how many voices are raised against you.
Killing the most innocent among us will cause our downfall.
Personal choice should tell us that the unborn must be protected.
If we do not protect them who will protect us?
We have become a totally selfish society.
We will be held accountable for our choices.
Thank you for having a back bone and standing up for what is right no matter how many voices are raised against you.
Abortion is wrong because once a woman becomes pregnant that "fetus" zygote" baby" whatever you want to call it , should be allowed its own decisions.
If taking a life via abortion is ok , then taking someones life in general should be just fine...I mean its your choice right !??
And what the heck happened to adoption ? someone out there who cant have kids Im sure would love to have one thats not wanted.
Keep in mind I think this bill goes too far but when you have the right to abortion crowd so far to one side you have to expect that the other side of the pendulum will swing just as far back.
Instead of common sense ruling you have extremists making the laws the rest of us have to follow. Instead of common sense determining that life begins when neurons fire or at some point and time in the first trimester we have horrific laws which determine life beginning at the first breath.. Which makes abortion legal up to and including full term babies. Which gives us stories like the recent Florida article where a 23 week fetus had the nerve to be born and draw breath before the abortion doctor could arrive to smash it's skull, killing it before it could clear the birth canal.. Of course the wriggling, squirming "collection of cells" was bagged and tossed into a bio-hazard collection can to asphyxiate.. and the Abortion Doctor was charged and suspended(I can't image why.. what he was doing is perfectly legal)
So here we are.. With a state declaring the moment of conception the beginning of life because the other radical side says that abortion needs to be held inviolate up to, and including a time when a fetus is viable.
So instead of saying that a woman has the first 10 weeks or so to get her act together and make a "choice" we have this dance back and forth where nobody but the extremists win.
Okay, all you whiners, what makes you think that you are right and that abortion should be legal? Why do you automatically use the tired "separation of church and state" argument? Take religion out of it and think about what is truly right and truly wrong and you will find your answers. Valuing life at any stage is NOT "morally backwards"!
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are CREATED EQUAL, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are LIFE, Liberty and the PURSUIT of Happiness."
What I'm wondering is, how did this most simple and basic right get taken away from the people in our country??
Another solid reason why I'll never move back to the state I grew up in. How embarrassing to North Dakota. Ever wonder why the state population never rises? Because they're trapped in the dark ages. People deserve rights. Especially the right to choose!
A giant step back for ND.
Life is precious, a gift from God. You talk about choice? Didn't she have a CHOICE when she spread her legs? No sorry, put the child up fpr adoption....You are murderers and will pay
I believe that you are well-intentioned. Look further into what you think our founding fathers wanted. While I agree that this law may go too far personally, the real issue is, what is the state's right in this matter? Our founding fathers set our government up as independent states, with independent governments, joined by a federal government that served to "protect and defend". It is the state's right to govern its people. Right or wrong, the state should be able to decide...not the federal government!
Second, it violates the US 13th amendment: involuntary servitude. Cannot pass a law that forces a woman to provide food and shelter for another "human".
Second, abortion for instances of rape, incest, and life of the mother were NEVER ILLEGAL IN THE UNITED STATES. NEVER. Only ABORTION ON DEMAND was illegal, so that whole "boohoo, what if she were raped and had to look at the baby every day and be reminded of that incident" is a bogus argument - its just not accurate.
This country has GOT to stop making laws based on feelings. There MUST be some reason, foresight, and logic before we rush to the floor of our state and federal senates and push through some ill-thought out bill that does more damage than good. That's an infantile approach to life! GROW UP.
Kat in Colorado
The only folks who don't want these CHILDREN are their MOTHERS! Check the numbers of folks going overseas to adopt. This "these children are unwanted so it's better to get rid of them" argument is bogus and inaccurate as well.
Of course, Nanci Pelosi does agree with you - remember? She defends funds in the stiumulus package for Planned Parenthood as stimulating the economy because there will be less mouths to feed. Wow - Eugenists like Margaret Sanger would be proud.
Oh, did you know Margaret Sanger founded what is now called Planned Parenthood? She wrote to one of her coroporate sponsors in 1939 expressing her support for his new program: "Sanger answered Gamble on Dec. 10. 1939, agreeing with the assessment. She wrote: "We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html
Guess Margaret Sanger thought those black children were unwanted as well.
'Pro-choice' is not 'pro-abortion'. Abortion is a horrible choice. Many of us may someday face a situation that requires us to choose between two unfortunate outcomes. But as of yet, we still have the right to make that choice for ourselves.
I know that's drastic - the problem is nobody ever, EVER, talks about the long-term psychological effects of abortion. I'm living it - having been involved in more than one abortion in my life. Not a day goes by I don't think about those kids that I helped to murder. Nobody told my girlfriend or I that there are long-term issues that will haunt you. I cope but hope I never forget!
As for risk to a mother's health, there are stories of women who have knowingly risked their lives, AND DIED, to bring those children that God placed in their wombs into this world. Many call them saints. Here's the story of one of them: http://www.savior.org/saints/molla.htm
Remember - John 15:13 No one has greater love than this, to lay down one's life for one's friends.
I know that's drastic - the problem is nobody ever, EVER, talks about the long-term psychological effects of abortion. I'm living it - having been involved in more than one abortion in my life. Not a day goes by I don't think about those kids that I helped to murder. Nobody told my girlfriend or I that there are long-term issues that will haunt you. I was with a group of men last week and when I told my story 4 other's spoke up and talked about how it still haunts them.
As for risk to a mother's health, there are stories of women who have knowingly risked their lives, AND DIED, to bring those children that God placed in their wombs into this world. Many call them saints. Here's the story of one of them: http://www.savior.org/saints/molla.htm
Remember - John 15:13 No one has greater love than this, to lay down one's life for one's friends.
Finally - I think if both the men and women who are consdierign an abortion were properly counselled as the all of the effects: physical, spritual and emotional, that alot fewer men and women would make the decision to abort. Unfortunately the Planned Parenthoods of the world don't do that. Instead they prey on inner- city minority women. It's a fact, look it up.
I'm actually pro-choice: you have the choice (in most cases) to get pregnant or not get pregnant. Like everyhting else in lour choices have consequences.
This isn't even about religion, really - it's about whether we have the right to end a life for convenience. And whether or not that baby would be viable outside of the womb really doesn't determine whether the baby is alive, of course the baby is alive. Many people have children who will never be able to function independently. Are those children alive? Of course! Are they protected by the constitution? Absolutely!
As far as the "Choice" issue 99% of the abortions performed are not due to incest related or rape related pregnancies, but for convenience. The choice occurs when you decide to have sex, not when you want to kill your baby.
I know that's drastic - the problem is nobody ever, EVER, talks about the long-term psychological effects of abortion. I'm living it - having been involved in more than one abortion in my life. Not a day goes by I don't think about those kids that I helped to murder. Nobody told my girlfriend or I that there are long-term issues that will haunt you. I cope but hope I never forget!
As for risk to a mother's health, there are stories of women who have knowingly risked their lives, AND DIED, to bring those children that God placed in their wombs into this world. Many call them saints. Here's the story of one of them: http://www.savior.org/saints/molla.htm
Remember - John 15:13 No one has greater love than this, to lay down one's life for one's friends.
You say that it is living off the host and can't live on it's own...How about all the generational welfare trash that is LIVING OFF THE GOVERNMENT AND CAN'T LIVE ON IT'S OWN. Maybe we should terminate them...
Next you say: "How would you feel if you daughter came home at 8 or 9 years old from being raped'. Biologically, most 8 or 9 year old girls aren't able to conceive as they have not yet "matured" As far as the rapist, I would prosecute him with "prejudice".
Now tell me honestly, how many women have you known that were in danger of DYING if they were to go through with childbirth? If the mother's life is in danger, then a JUDGE should be brought in to decide the best course. Let him/her live with the consequences.
The bottom line in this argument is this: that unborn child had no CHOICE in the matter of being conceived, and yet permiscuous behavior is heralded. Be responsible! Take responsibility for yourself and if you perform the act, be prepared to take the responsibility. After all, it's not the baby's fault!
And I still say it violates the US 13th amendment: involuntary servitude. If that little clump of cells "is a person" then they need to be paying rent, food costs, taxes, etc or Mom gets to evict.
The opening of the legs isn't the problem, babies don't just happen like magic, there are penises involved - maybe some men who are the producers of sperm, the 23 chromosomes of the 46 needed to create a human life, could perhaps take some responsibility as well? Teach men how to use contraception, as well as a woman.
UNITED STATES
Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700
Who's having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.
Who's having abortions (race)?
While white women obtain 60% of all abortions, their abortion rate is well below that of minority women. Black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are roughly 2 times as likely.
Who's having abortions (marital status)?
64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; Married women account for 18.4% of all abortions and divorced women obtain 9.4%.
Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).
Likelihood of abortion:
An estimated 43% of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old. 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.
Now Crystal116 let's put two and two together, follow me if you can...93% of 3,700 abortions a day =3,441 babies murdered a day for convienence...Sleep well crystal116.
A father hasa moral and civil right to say no to an abortion.
John DiBiase
central Connecticut Divorce Education Center
It is so patently obvious that this law is all about the controll and disenfranchisemsment of poor women and their unborn children,
Unborn Children whose interests they purport to defend and who they will denounce as bastards and a drain on the taxpayers once they are born. More importantly the mothers they have forced into indentured sevtitude [in violation of the thirteenth and fourteenth amendment's equal protection and due process clauses] denies her the right to her own self determination and to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Forcing an unwanted child on a woman takes
her most fundamental libertys away by saddeling her with 18 years of unending responsibility and hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt. Not to mention the approbation of the community and her family should she fail to comply with this hideous parody of so called "justice". However, useing poor Mother's as scapegoats is so easy in a state full of Christians who believe in the right to life of the unborn in detriment to all of the living. The "irresponsible Mothers" find themselves "solely responsible" for the predicament they are in simply by living in a self righteous, unenlightened, compassionless, gender biased State. The whole point was to scape goat her for the economic problems that besets a state when greed & corruption, meet & Church and State conspire to reap unethical profits and entaglements in violation of "The Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. God forbid these churches and their leaders should have their tax sheild immunity be rescinded even if the price for all this meddeling in politics is "by law" supposed to be denial of tax immunity."
The inability to admit and act upon the undisputed fact that it takes two to get pregnant
goes to the very heart of the underlying mysoginy in this law.
It's not about responsibility for what you have forced upon innocent citizens such as these children and the further victimization
of these women who may have been raped or who were defrauded by the men who impregneted them and later deny any responsibility for their offspring or their actions. Today the Congress of the State of North Dakota seeks to prosecute the "victim" for giving her heart and her trust to a scoundrel.
What if anything will you do with these Father's who you have also forced into unplanned and unwanted parenthood. Probably not much since you promote insurance coverage of viagra and all forms of impotence which further engenders masculine irresponsibility to everything except his own selfish gratification, while denying women the inherent right to coverage of even basic Family Planning! Therefore, especially poor women are discriminated against then blamed because the didn't lock their legs!!! It is absolutely hideous to hear that attitude in this country and in this century from a citizen who says they speak for Jesus
in the most base and misoginistic way. The one thing that seems to keep women from outright rebellion is the con job of Prince Charming and true love and a twisted vindictive veiw of religion that undermines the will to resist through coersion and terror alerts which keeps reminding them that hell awaits women who get angry.
I'd like to know which hell you mean this one or some other one.
I just want all of you pro-life men in your South Dakota state congress who have daughters, to think about a reasonable explanation for attempting to high jack their future, or the future of your sister, or your wife, or your girlfriend or your Mother.
Even while trying to deny a man's greater responsibility because of his physical strength, his sexual drive , and his enhanced cultural and social positon, simply by virtue of his gender. The only way for the male gender to justify this ongoing inequality, which in the 20th century still treats women as virtual slaves with the miniscule award for their collective toil of less then 1% of the world's asetts, is to apply the archaic concept of "divine right". This Patriarchical and insultingly harmful concept is fully promoted by the religious right and the overwhelmingly biased press. The congress, who will likely owe their jobs to the payment of illegally witheld tax dollars converted to campaign fund contributions are all to ready to endorse and enforce this abomination. . To ask for the kind of Justice thus proposed is an anethma to every Democratic value of fairness, Equal Protection, Justice and the Concept of ordered Liberty embodied in our Constitution. I hope your Senate will come to it's senses before
it becomes a real and fundamental challenge to the rest of us who oppose this insufferable attempt to ruin the lives of women and children because they don't fit in to your narrow, unjust, and un realistic veiw of the world. Your attitude of of moral and fiscal irresponsibility for that which you seek and promote makes it that much more repugnant. It's not because those of us who oppose you do not understand and cherish life, on the contrary! It's because we [do] cherish life, that we don't take it lightly, or treat it like a mistake so that we can use it as leverage to motivate the lowest common denominator. We understand that living creatures require nurturing, great selflessness, shared responsibility, & unconditional love. Without those trade offs there cant' be a life that is honored or cherished or many times, even worth living.
Are the taxpayers of the state of North Dakota ready to be saddled with children who are much more likely to become wards of the state in Foster care as children, Incarcerated as adults and put to death by a State that is supposed to hold life sacred but does not oppose the death penalty. I doub't very much that the social misfits sitting on death row absent a valid case of true insanity
were children who were wanted by either of their parents.
Finally, I believe the only way to protect an unborn child is to provide them with the absolute and inalienable right not to be born into a unwelcome world where their parents are unable to care for them or welcome them, cherish them or nurture them with all the love and understanding and basic necessities that they deserve.
In this case, promoted by the religious right they would rather use a hypothetical life to further unethical goals because their hypothetical responsibility for that life either before or after birth is nonexistent.
D. Hood