South Dakota Lawmakers refuse to protect Birth Control
by Shannon
Web Correspondent
South Dakota Community Organizer
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota
So, while most people who've been doing this a lot longer than I have might not be surprised at all, I am beside myself over what happened on the floor of the South Dakota Senate Wednesday afternoon.
Senate Bill 164, otherwise known as the Birth Control Protection Act was overwhelmingly shot down by the men and women who say they represent the people of this state.
SB 164 was truly an act to protect birth control. Something the vast majority of women will end up using for decades of their lifetime. They use it to control their fertility, to plan their families, to prevent pregnancy. But they also use it to regulate their periods, ease their cramps or help with menopause.
The bill mandated nothing. The bill would not have forced a single person to do a single thing. Instead it defined birth control in state statute. It also separated birth control from the laws regulating abortion. Because, that's what the group of pro-birth extremists are after next. Our birth control pills! There are people out there who truly believe that birth control is the same thing as abortion. And, this legislation would've put it in state law that birth control is no such thing.
Currently, the pharmacists in this state are protected from penalty should they choose to not give me my pills when I drive up to my local pharmacy. They might have the belief that my pills - prescribed by my doctor - might be causing an abortion. This act would've removed that protection. A pharmacist definitely would be able to still choose not to fill a prescription for their own personal reasons, they just wouldn't be protected any longer. Why are we letting pharmacists get in the middle of my very personal and private relationship with my husband and my doctor?
I know that most of this is probably not terribly surprising to many South Dakota residents. While I'm still in shock, it's at least got to make you shake your head and wonder, "what next?"
Trackback: http://ppsd.bluestatedigital.com/trackback/274/HXhnqjCC/
I’m one of those “Extremists” but you are preventing life! I don’t think we are controlling. Take your birth control and obviously, it’s not very private or personal if your flaunting it on the ‘net! So get over yourself! As for your termilogy it’s incorrect! We’re pro-life your pro-choice. However, if you want to get into the other side...We’re pro-birth your pro-death. How’s that? It’s true.
By Amy on 07/02/2008
Obviously we don’t have enough legislative people in Pierre who understand the importance of protecting reproductive rights. We have too many legislative people who don’t understand the unintended consequences that are known to occur when such rights are not protected. It appears there are an overabundance of control freeks who refuse to protect the beliefs of other people when such beliefs deviate from their own. It reminds me of the pigs in George Orwell’s mid-twentieth century novel, “Animal Farm”—pigs who insisted on controlling all other animals and birds on the farm.
By Dave L. Wegner on 07/02/2008
I was denied birth control from my doctor at the age of 20 because of his beliefs. I did not need it for the usual reasons. I have cervical cancer and was bleeding so badly, they could not schedule the surgery that would help save my cervix so that I can one day have children. My doctor still refused to give me a prescription for it. My cervical cancer continued to invade my cervix for another 8 months, until I finally lost my patience and started seeing another doctor so I could treat my cancer. This is a little ridiculous!!!
By anonymous on 13/04/2008
