Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Skip to search.

South Dakota governor's abortion ban statement

Expand Messages
  • Greg Cannon
    http://www.state.sd.us/news/showDoc.aspx?i=7096 Statement of Gov. Mike Rounds on the Signing Of House Bill 1215 “I have signed House Bill 1215 into law.
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 6, 2006

      Statement of Gov. Mike Rounds on the Signing Of House
      Bill 1215

      “I have signed House Bill 1215 into law. It is An
      Act to establish certain legislative findings, to
      reinstate the prohibition against certain acts causing
      the termination of an unborn human life, to prescribe
      a penalty therefore, and to provide for the
      implementation of such provisions under certain

      HB 1215 passed South Dakota’s legislature with
      bi-partisan sponsorship and strong bi-partisan support
      in both houses. Its purpose is to eliminate most
      abortions in South Dakota. It does allow doctors to
      perform abortions in order to save the life of the
      mother. It does not prohibit the taking of
      contraceptive drugs before a pregnancy is determined,
      such as in the case of rape or incest.

      In the history of the world, the true test of a
      civilization is how well people treat the most
      vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The
      sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that
      abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most
      vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I
      agree with them.

      Because this new law is a direct challenge to the Roe
      versus Wade interpretation of the Constitution, I
      expect this law will be taken to court and prevented
      from going into effect this July. That challenge will
      likely take years to be settled and it may ultimately
      be decided by the United States Supreme Court. Our
      existing laws regulating abortions will remain in

      The reversal of a Supreme Court opinion is possible.
      For example, in 1896, the United States Supreme Court
      ruled in the Plessy versus Fergusoncase that a state
      could require racial segregation in public facilities
      if the facilities offered to different races were
      equal. However, fifty-eight years later, the Supreme
      Court reconsidered that opinion and reversed itself in
      Brown versus Board of Education. It proclaimed that
      separate could not produce equal. The 1954 Court
      realized that the earlier interpretation of our
      Constitution was wrong.

      HB 1215 will give the United States Supreme Court a
      similar opportunity to reconsider an earlier opinion.

      While this is a state and national issue, I want to
      emphasize that whatever the courts decide, South
      Dakotans will continue to care about both the unborn
      child and mother. If we are pro-life, we must
      recognize the need to take care of women who are faced
      with a difficult pregnancy. Regardless of the
      circumstances surrounding the pregnancy, we cannot
      protect the innocent child, unless we protect and care
      for the mother. We must help each mother to see the
      value of the gift that is a child, and nurture the
      mother for her own sake and for the sake of her child.

      Our state is committed to helping greater numbers of
      pregnant woman who will allow their babies to grow
      inside them and be born. In both the private and
      public sector in South Dakota, we have healthcare
      options, economic assistance before and after birth,
      adoption services, and, most importantly, people who
      want to help pregnant women, young mothers and their

      There are also many people in South Dakota who will
      continue to help those women who have had abortions in
      the past. We want those women to know that we care
      about them, too.”
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.