(2/11/2006)

Amendment E, Abortion, Marriage Amendment Lead Crackerbarrel Discussion

Intellectual diversity bill also a hot topic

By Bob Ellis

Dakota Voice

Saturday morning’s crackerbarrel in Rapid City was once again well-attended and host to a variety of lively discussion.

Rep. Elizabeth Kraus (R-Rapid City), one of the featured speakers, discussed Amendment C, which will be on the ballot in November. Amendment C would amend the South Dakota Constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. Kraus said that the amendment was merely taking what we already have in state law and moving it to the state constitution so that activist judges could not redefine marriage.

During the question and answer session, Marla Murphy, once known as the former Rapid City Councilman Tom Murphy, asked how the state marriage amendment would affect members of a heterosexual married couple who have had sex changes. Kraus said she wasn’t an attorney and didn’t know what the outcome of such a situation might be, that it would be something to be decided in court. She reiterated that the amendment would merely take what is already South Dakota law, that marriage is between one man and one woman, and put it into our state constitution.

Senator J.P. Duniphan (R-Rapid City) was asked how she planned to vote on HB 1215 to ban all abortions in South Dakota. Duniphan stated “I’ve been a pro-life candidate my whole life.” However, she said she believed there should be an exception in the bill for rape and incest. She said she has been struggling with the question of how she will vote, but will make that determination after it comes out of committee.

Kraus said that not many children are conceived through rape. Further, she asked rhetorically that when you look at the ultrasound of a child conceived of rape and a child conceived in a loving relationship, can you tell the difference in those two children?

Kraus addressed another question which dealt with the accusation of “legislating morality.” She said, “Virtually every bill before the legislature is a matter of morality. There are laws against pedophilia, murder, theft, drugs. They’re all moral judgments. Does that mean we should not have laws against them?

Kraus also said that the woman behind Roe v. Wade, Norma McCorvey, had lied in court about being raped and that in fact McCorvey never did abort her baby, instead giving it up for adoption. “So our whole abortion law for the past 33 years has been based upon her lie,” Kraus said. Kraus also said that McCorvey is now petitioning the court to reverse the Roe v. Wade decision which legalized abortion in the United States.

“Why can’t the child be carried to term and then adopted by a loving family?” Kraus asked rhetorically. She said that while the issue of carrying a child as a product of rape was an emotional issue, we had to think of the child.

Rep. Kraus was asked about the $1 million which has been offered by an anonymous donor to the general fund to help pay for the expected legal battle to defend HB 1215. Kraus said the donation is completely legal, but that she and even Rep. Roger Hunt (R-Brandon), the sponsor of the bill, did not know the identity of the donor. She did say, however, that she understands the offer is legitimate.

Kraus was also asked why a minority report had not been allowed to be included in the official report of the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion. Kraus said that all task forces are run by majority rule and never have minority reports included. She said the task force proceedings are handled democratically and a vote is taken. Kraus said they spent six days and several evenings listening to testimony from both sides of the issue, and then they presented the facts as the majority found them.

One audience member said that since he felt HB 1215 “interfere[d] with a woman’s right to choose,” if a bill was offered to castrate the male participants in an unwanted pregnancy “to take that choice away from the males,” would any of the legislators support that bill. The question was greeted by laughter from most of the legislators and the audience, but none responded to the question.

Rep. Tom Hennies (R-Rapid City) was asked about Amendment E, to which he replied, “All it’s about is anarchy.” Hennies said the JAIL amendment was sold as a petition to hold judges accountable, but said that it affects all public officeholders. Hennies said JAIL ignores the avenues of redress which already exist, such as courts of appeal and the very right of appeal itself. Hennies said another problem with the measure is that it would allow anyone the right to file a complaint at any time, even if the incident of their complaint was 20 years old.

Hennies said that Bill Stegmeier of Tea, SD, who headed up the petition drive in South Dakota, read a statement before the Senate State Affairs committee, but refused to answer any questions about the amendment. Hennies concluded his statement about Amendment E by urging voters to support HCR 1004 which urges voters to reject the JAIL amendment.

Rep. Mike Buckingham (R-Rapid City) was asked about HB 1194, which was sent “to the hoghouse,” removing penalties for violation; 1194 would prohibit the distribution of contraceptives to public school students. Buckingham said that Rep. Keri Weems (R-Sioux Falls), who had sponsored the bill, saw that chances for passage weren’t good, so she removed the penalties from the bill in order to give it a better chance. Rep. Gordon Howe (R-Rapid City) said that in most cases, violations of law were automatically a class 2 misdemeanor.

Kraus said 1194 was proposed because sometimes students have been referred to centers that counsel on abortion and this was considered inappropriate. She also said that sometimes condoms have been given out in school, which many parents also consider inappropriate.

Senator Bill Napoli (R-Rapid City) said the state Department of Health had applied for a grant to distribute condoms in school with no legislative input. Napoli also said schools could refer students to be treated for sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) without their parent’s knowledge.

Rep. Buckingham said that some sex education assignments have included situations asking students to determine some prices for condoms, call various clinics and such, and that this kind of “education” is inappropriate.

Rep. Jim Lintz (R-Hermosa) said that if he had children in public school now, he’d take them out due to some of the sex education materials he’s seen used in some schools. He said that newspapers probably couldn’t even print some of the material. Lintz said that when he was on the school board, he had been told that he couldn’t put morality into a sex education course. Lintz said that the exclusion of morality in sexual education makes it a course on “how to do it.”

A question was asked about HB 1234 mandating kindergarten for all children, and why it was considered necessary by some when 95% of South Dakota children already attend. Rep. Howe said that he voted against it for a number of reasons, and that we shouldn’t mandate kindergarten in South Dakota. Howe’s statement was widely applauded.

Several questions were asked about HB 1222, the intellectual diversity bill. Supporters Howe and Kraus stressed that there was no administrative requirement in 1222, that it only mandates an annual report on what institutions of higher learning are doing to ensure intellectual diversity. Howe said this was reasonable since we spend approx. $500 million each year in this area.

This was the last of four crackerbarrels held in Rapid City this year. The crackerbarrels in Rapid City have been sponsored by the Rapid City Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs Committee.