What’s a life worth to Anti-Choicers in the state? About $20,000.

by

Doesn’t anyone find it ironic they have only raised $20,000 to combat HB 1217 lawsuits against the state?

Bill sponsor Roger Hunt, R-Brandon, has said private donors will step forward to cover legal expenses through the Life Protection Fund, which was set up in 2006 to help the state pay to defend previous abortion laws.

“I don’t think it’s a surprise to anyone that they’ve filed a lawsuit,” Hunt said. “We’ve been expecting this and preparing for it.”

In late March, the fund had a balance of just under $20,000.

About the same amount the average single mother makes in a year in SD, if that. They of course know that the state will have to pony up the money, which is mostly from sales tax revenue, on things like food, from these same mothers. If the anti-choicers were so concerned about LIFE they would be concerned about these children after they are born and the mother’s who have to raise them by themselves, through education and worker training programs. Nope, the same clowns who vote for this crap slash education, slash medicade, and vote against ending a food tax. I’m starting to believe more and more that the neo-cons never want abortion to be illegal, because they couldn’t use it as an issue anymore.

Posted in: abortion, Roger Hunt, South Dakotans

10 Thoughts on “What’s a life worth to Anti-Choicers in the state? About $20,000.”

  1. Shelly on May 28, 2011 at 1:51 pm said:

    I’ve known for years that Republicans are using abortion as a wedge issue. They don’t actually WANT it to be made illegal; it draws in the single issue voters.

  2. l3wis on May 28, 2011 at 10:21 pm said:

    They are going to have to gear up on the abortion rhetoric in the next election since the old farts are going to be chasing them down about medicare and SS.

  3. Joan on May 29, 2011 at 7:37 pm said:

    I don’t think the state should be able to accept donations for this issue or anything else. If they couldn’t get donations, the conservatives wouldn’t keep dreaming up these rediculous laws. It seems like a few years ago somebody sent their income tax refund back to the government to help pay off something that the government owed, and the government sent it back to the person saying they weren’t allowed to accept donations.

  4. anominous on May 30, 2011 at 12:51 am said:

    God is punishing the state of South Dakota with floods for its cheap shit abortion law.

  5. l3wis on May 30, 2011 at 7:39 am said:

    I see God is punishing Pierre, too bad the floods didn’t take place during the legislative session.

  6. DDC on May 31, 2011 at 9:00 am said:

    “#3 Joan on 05.29.11 at 7:37 pm

    [I]t seems like a few years ago somebody sent their income tax refund back to the government to help pay off something that the government owed, and the government sent it back to the person saying they weren’t allowed to accept donations.”

    You can send the federal government everything you own if you want to.

    http://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/moretopics_gifts.html

    I completely agree with you on the first point. I thought the fund was a good idea at first (make the ideologues pay for the laws they push), but it obviously just gives cover to those pushing for the laws.

    The law should state that no state money can be used for the defense of abortion laws. If the fund runs out, the law doesn’t get defended in court.

  7. anominous on May 31, 2011 at 3:03 pm said:

    Perhaps they can find a back alley attorney to defend it on the cheap. Shawn?

  8. l3wis on May 31, 2011 at 3:08 pm said:

    Is Shawn Pro-Life? I thought he was Pro-Bacon and Donuts. Pathloss will be chiming in shortly . . .

  9. Randall on May 31, 2011 at 7:03 pm said:

    The Forced-Birth folks are against abortion EXACTLY as long as no one in THEIR family needs one.

  10. l3wis on May 31, 2011 at 8:33 pm said:

    Isn’t that the truth. Leslee got one.

Post Navigation