![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Saturday to Sunday
Mar. 4th, 2006 11:46 pmWell, our congratulations to ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
wicked_wish, who has joined the ranks of the happily married by now. And will also soon be relocating, if she hasn't already started that process already. Congratulations and good fortune to you both.
As I'm sure has appeared across many parts of the Internet (it being linked in three separate places on my friendslist probably indicates a wide dispersal), Missouri is following in the steps of distinguished states such as Kansas and South Dakota and proposing a bill that Christianity be the state's official religion. I know it says "Congress shall make no law..." and that generally, interpretation means this applies to the states, too, but I wonder if there's anyhing explicity forbidding the states to adopt their own official religion.
Speaking of South Dakota, f you want to know what qualifies one for an excpetion in the law's case, look around in this report to find it. As I thought, the "life of the mother" exception can be stretched, but it can also be restricted._eric_m_ takes the state senator a little bit more literally than perhaps he was intended, saying that the qualifications of receiving an exception are what the senator envisioned in his scenario: "[1] brutally raped, [2] savaged. [3] The girl was a virgin. [4] She was religious. [5] She planned on saving her virginity until she was married ... [6] sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it [7] so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life." If all of those are required or recommended, there aren't going to be many exceptions granted. Which is just the way the state senator likes it, I'm sure. This seems to be a move designed more to make the court review the precedent behind the Roe v. Wade case and see if it will be overturned. Even so, while I may not be in favor of abortions generally, I wouldn't deny someone else the choice. They know far better than I do whether or not they can raise a healthy, loved child or not.
Anyway, tomorrow's the last day I have off before i go back to school and then re-set my mind to the work that is still to be done. That said, I think I've finally managed to relax enough that I'm not going to go crazy when I get back. I feel a little bit better. Of course, then there's that whole summer work thing... but I'll deal with that another day.
wicked_wish, who has joined the ranks of the happily married by now. And will also soon be relocating, if she hasn't already started that process already. Congratulations and good fortune to you both. As I'm sure has appeared across many parts of the Internet (it being linked in three separate places on my friendslist probably indicates a wide dispersal), Missouri is following in the steps of distinguished states such as Kansas and South Dakota and proposing a bill that Christianity be the state's official religion. I know it says "Congress shall make no law..." and that generally, interpretation means this applies to the states, too, but I wonder if there's anyhing explicity forbidding the states to adopt their own official religion.
Speaking of South Dakota, f you want to know what qualifies one for an excpetion in the law's case, look around in this report to find it. As I thought, the "life of the mother" exception can be stretched, but it can also be restricted.
_eric_m_ takes the state senator a little bit more literally than perhaps he was intended, saying that the qualifications of receiving an exception are what the senator envisioned in his scenario: "[1] brutally raped, [2] savaged. [3] The girl was a virgin. [4] She was religious. [5] She planned on saving her virginity until she was married ... [6] sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it [7] so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life." If all of those are required or recommended, there aren't going to be many exceptions granted. Which is just the way the state senator likes it, I'm sure. This seems to be a move designed more to make the court review the precedent behind the Roe v. Wade case and see if it will be overturned. Even so, while I may not be in favor of abortions generally, I wouldn't deny someone else the choice. They know far better than I do whether or not they can raise a healthy, loved child or not.Anyway, tomorrow's the last day I have off before i go back to school and then re-set my mind to the work that is still to be done. That said, I think I've finally managed to relax enough that I'm not going to go crazy when I get back. I feel a little bit better. Of course, then there's that whole summer work thing... but I'll deal with that another day.
