12 Comments

1. renate  •  Feb 28, 2006 @12:47 am
   

   It shows pro life is not about life, it is all about sex. After birth they don’t care.

2. Lynne  •  Feb 28, 2006 @5:46 am
   

   There are several large Indian reservations in South Dakota, with people there existing, for the most part, in great poverty. I would say (without checking!) that South Dakota’s services for its citizens as a whole are probably not funded as well as some other states.

3. Ricky  •  Feb 28, 2006 @9:34 am
   

   Ok. Here it is. The big answer to this problem. We have the technology, surely, to take feutses and place them in prolifer wombs instead of aborting them. All costs paid for by the P.L’s because any means necessary is what they say so “Pony up” I say. Then raise the child or give it for adoption, supported financialy and parentaly until taken by a new family of course…

4. Ricky  •  Feb 28, 2006 @9:36 am
   

   ..in other words, talks cheap. Put up or butt out of my life.

5. maha  •  Feb 28, 2006 @9:44 am
   

   Lynne — I believe the large native American population in South Dakota IS a factor in the infant mortality rate, just as a large (and largely impoverished) African America population is a factor in Mississippi’s high infant mortality rate. In the U.S. nationwide racial minorities have a much higher infant mortality rate than do whites, and poor people have higher infant mortality rates than more affluent people.

   So here’s a postulation: States with a large ethnic minority “underclass” are more likely to have state legislatures that get obsessed with banning abortions than other states. Hmmm.

6. renate  •  Feb 28, 2006 @11:20 am
   

   Maha, what you say is correct, but it leaves open the question WHY.

   Whenever you ask pro-lifers are they willing to help provide for these unwanted children they go in hiding, you can’t get an answer.

   They will not help to reduce infant mortality, that would cost money.

   I can’t see it any other way: after birth life has no value.

   Why are many pro-lifers against contraception, against CONDOMS in the world of AIDS, against GAY marriage, against sex education, all for ABSTINENCE and much more?

   It all is because sex is sinful, unwanted pregnancy is punishment (if you had sex you have to be held responsible. Adoption or poverty)

   It is religion. People like Fallwell, Dobson, Roberts, Donahough and others want to force women to live by their believes.

7. Rick  •  Feb 28, 2006 @11:26 am
   

   I remember reading cartoon pamphlets in the ’80′s that were from some christian group explaining how the catholics were against birth control and their reasoning for this. They belived catholocism was not true because you confessed to a man and not to Christ. Since you were not truly saved your soul went to fight for Satan in the apocolypse. Maybe the same reasoning can be applied here. More souls for an untrue christian religion to supply fighters for the devil…

8. Lynne  •  Feb 28, 2006 @11:38 am
   

   Barbara,

   My intuition tells me that your postulation may have a base in fact. I live in Georgia – recently moved here- and there is the expected minority underclass here as well, but Georgia has lots more money than, say, Mississipi and more economic opportunity and public services across the board.

   I could be wrong, but when opportunities and services are limited, the first people to get shorted are the “other” ones – the minorities. We all know how sinful and degraded the “others”, are.:)

   I think there is a connection, but the ones I come up with don’t seem to logically follow. It could be that the minorities aren’t as politically active in these states- this is true in the states I’ve lived in which have reservations.

   Well, I’m over my head – too many maybes!

9. renate  •  Feb 28, 2006 @12:00 pm
   

   I believe religion and critical thinking don’t mix.

   States with large and poor minorities do have educational problems also.

10. joanr16  •  Feb 28, 2006 @1:23 pm
    

    I heard the news this morning that other state legislatures are eager to enact total bans on abortion, following South Dakota’s lead. Alito was the trigger, we all know that.

    I think of my beautiful young niece who will be of childbearing age in another 4 or 5 years, and the world we will have given her. The Torquemadas and fetus idolators would sacrifice her for all the reasons stated above– fear and loathing of sex, the insane need to control who is allowed to have sex, pure hypocrisy, a complete lack of critical thinking. Welcome to “The Handmaid’s Tale.”

11. Niel  •  Mar 2, 2006 @4:39 pm
    

    I have a new term I think is useful, “Neo-Christian-Con” The “con” part has a dual meaning.

12. Niel  •  Mar 2, 2006 @5:06 pm
    

    One more thought (my limit until the coffee is ready.)

    The good news is, as the mid-terms come closer, some Repugnakins in Congress are less supportive of the megalomaniac in the White House than they have been (lest they be tainted by his failures and downright wackiness.)

    The bad news is some good citizens of this country will forget these same Repugnakins are the bozo’s who got us here, 8 trillion dollar national debt, debacle in Iraq, and all. And, as a result of this forgetfulness, at least some of these great Repugnakin men and women will be reelected to Congress. All of which proves once again that there is no God watching over us. Or, if there is a God he/she has a very twisted sense of humor.