Press "Enter" to skip to content

More People Attend SF Women’s March Than Noem’s Talk at Anti-Abortion Convention

Kristi Noem appears to have remained in South Dakota this past weekend. After parading through Vermillion for Dakota Days Saturday morning, our part-time Governor and quarter– (eighth-? sixty-fourth-?) First Gentleman raced up I-29 to drop in on the South Dakota “Right” to “Life” convention in Sioux Falls. (These folks believe in neither rights nor life but simply the subjugation of women.)

If anything good can come of such a theocratic confab, it may be that Kristi, Bryon, and Lt. Gov. Larry Rhoden appeared to draw a smaller crowd than the genuine women’s rights march hosted by Planned Parenthood in downtown Sioux Falls Saturday:

Gov. Kristi Noem, Twitter pic from SDRTL convention, Sioux Falls, SD, 2021.10.02, posted 2021.10.03.
Gov. Kristi Noem, Twitter pic from SDRTL convention, Sioux Falls, SD, 2021.10.02, posted 2021.10.03.
KELO-TV, Twitter pic of women's rights march, Sioux Falls, SD, 2021.10.02.
KELO-TV, Twitter pic of women’s rights march, Sioux Falls, SD, 2021.10.02.

A Twitter friend suggested that maybe the folks at the convention were simply practicing social distancing, but I get the sense that some of the people who are worst at social distancing are those who stick their noses in every woman’s privates.

But see? Planned Parenthood can get more people to show up for social action in South Dakota than Kristi Noem.

Bring all those people out to vote, and the pink-shirted picketers and true defenders of women’s rights can beat the grayer pray-ers and fetus idolatrists.


  1. grudznick 2021-10-04

    This is indeed good news. grudznick had hoped to attend an event similar to protest by was unable to get a lift because a friend backed out of the whole shindig.

  2. grudznick 2021-10-04

    And before you all go on about it, no, it was not my good friend Lar or my friend Bob or even my other friend Bill. It was a different fellow who lives over on the libbie end of the state who said he’d arrange my transportation, but one of the legislatures seems to have gotten in his ear.

  3. 96Tears 2021-10-04

    Maybe it’s time another anti-abortion bill is posted on the statewide ballot so the airheads in Pierre hear it a third time that South Dakota is a pro-choice state. Of course, the track record in Pierre is they don’t respect the people’s voice in a vote unless it helps them get elected.

  4. Porter Lansing 2021-10-04

    Just try removing Roe, you short sighted MAGA’s.

    Women’s Health and Personal Rights are favored by seventy percent of Americans.

    South of Dakota is an outlying abomination, of zero consequence, within majority America.

  5. DaveFN 2021-10-04

    Rather than “fetus idolatrists,” I’d rather indicate in light of recent rulings in at least one state in particular, “embryo idolatrists.” Not that the antiabortionists are able to distinguish an embryo from a fetus, nor fertilization from conception, nor the many truncations of life (some 99% of all species are now extinct) that have occurred from “abortion” per se. The broader definition of what constitutes “life,” is totally lost on the idolatrists, aka fetishists.

  6. Matt 2021-10-05

    Make no mistake, if pro-life women are not welcomed to be part of the ‘Women’s March,’ it has NOTHING to do with women’s issues. It is an Abortion March. Abortion is a violation of human rights.

  7. V 2021-10-05

    Matt, rape and incest are violations of human rights.

    It’s also a violation of human rights to refuse medical service for an ectopic pregnancy.

    You are violating my human rights by telling me what to do.

    So, leave my uterus alone and I won’t get near you with my pruning shears.

  8. larry kurtz 2021-10-05

    […] New Mexico is the political inverse of my home state. It’s where if the lopsided Supreme Court of the United States ultimately overturns Roe v. Wade women will still be free to exercise their reproductive rights because Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed the Respect New Mexico Women and Families Act that repealed the 1969 state statute banning abortion. In New Mexico Medicaid covers abortions and even transportation in rural areas to get to clinics in Albuquerque.

  9. Cory Allen Heidelberger Post author | 2021-10-05

    “pro-life” is a meaningless slogan. We all support life. But some of us also recognize that some decisions, like reproductive decisions, are not the proper role of government. Matt is really talking about big-goverment theocrats who enjoy imposing their misogynist will on others. And we welcome such theocrats to attend legitimate demonstrations for women’s rights, in the hopes that they will recognize the error of their ways and stand for a genuinely conservative (i.e., anti-government, pro-individual autonomy) defense of women’s rights.

  10. Donald Pay 2021-10-05

    Yeah, Cory, I think both sides have meaningless slogans. “Pro-choice” is almost equally as dumb. It might be a choice for a few, but for most it’s a gut-wrenching decision where all the “choices” are either bad choices or not choices at all. I stand right in the middle on this issue. Both sides have good points, but I come down to the idea that women have the responsibility to decide for themselves on this issue, even though I think life, if it “begins” at all, begins at conception. It certainly should not be a decision made by government. It is one of those decisions that is inalienable from being female.

  11. bearcreekbat 2021-10-05

    The argument that our government should not be granted the full power to make personal reproduction decisions certainly seems important. One would think retaining the right to either make a personal choice or a choice compelled by one’s religious beliefs, rather than being subjected to a more arbitrary choice by government officials, would be the most important consideration to self described conservatives and evangelicals, but that’s another story.

    The argument about when life begins certainly has compelling features for both sides.. Indeed, all sides value life.

    The arguments that seem the weakest, however, are those with the unstated premise that women, as a class, should be treated as breeding stock if pregnant. This is the argument that essentially concludes that an embryo has greater human rights than women, including the right to use the woman’s body against her will. When asked, typically there is no response from those who take a position that supports giving an embryo the right to use a woman’s body against her will. This suggests there is no morally defensable argument to support turning one particular class of humans into breeding stock for other.

  12. larry kurtz 2021-10-05

    Women in Texas are driving hundreds, even thousands of miles for their procedures and wait times at clinics in New Mexico have gone over four weeks. Right now Colorado is still accepting patients at normal intervals.

  13. Eve Fisher 2021-10-05

    With you, bearcreekbat.
    Between ectopic pregnancies (no, they cannot be surgically removed and medically transplanted into the womb), severe fetal abnormalities (I used to work for Medical Genetics at Emory University – “Twinings Textbook of Fetal Abnormalities” is the stuff of nightmares), fetuses that develop without a brain, fetuses that get infected or die without being passed and so give the mother blood poisoning if not removed (Savita Halappanavar died of that, because no good Catholic hospital in Ireland would take that unexpelled but septic fetus out of her), and the fact that there is almost no family willing to put their preteen daughter through an incest pregnancy (although often more because of family shame than the girl’s health), there will never be 100% abortion-free societies. There can be 100% legal abortion-free societies, briefly, but cases like that of Savita Halappanavar or the 11 year old Argentinian girl refused an abortion by the state will eventually make people say – “you know, there are times when abortion is not only the only thing to do, it’s the right thing to do.”

  14. Richard Schriever 2021-10-05

    Mark, does a potential fetus have the “right” not to be conceived How about the actual fetis – does it havce a “right” not ot be carried to term? When does it’s “right” to choose to be brought into this life begin – or does it have none?? Aren’t rights “god given”, and none of man’s business at all?

  15. Richard Schriever 2021-10-05

    Excuse me – I meant to address Matt. BTW, does Matt have a right not to be called Mark?

  16. Richard Schriever 2021-10-05

    Donald, do you recognize that ALL of the genetic coding for producing an infinite number of succeeding generation of humans is present in every existing egg? how about that EVERY succeeding generation of human eggs were already “coded for” in the FIRST homo sapiens eggs. When and where is it that “life begins”/began again? Thinking it is at conception, at the meeting between a particular homo sapiens sperm and a [particular homo sapiens egg, is simply buying into the “pro-life” movement’s semantic treachery. It is NOT scientifically sound. It carries within it the concept of the individual “soul” of the Abrahamic tradition(s).

  17. ArloBlundt 2021-10-05

    Eve-like you I have had experience with folks who were born with severe, multiple handicaps from genetic abnormalities. I worked in a “hospital” in the mid 70’s that was, in reality a warehouse of misery, abuse and neglect, severely understaffed by severely underpaid sincere people given an impossible task and unable to turn their back on these people. It was operated by the State at a perdiem expense of $8 per resident per day. I saw no Pro-Life Advocates visiting or volunteering to assist at this hospital.

  18. Cory Allen Heidelberger Post author | 2021-10-06

    Bearcreekbat’s observation about the premise that women should be subordinated to the service of other beings gets to the heart of what’s really at stake in abortion policy debates. The anti-abortion crusaders are fundamentally misogynist.

  19. mike from iowa 2021-10-15

    19 year old Oklahoma woman has already served 18 months in jail because she had a miscarriage and phony kristian prosecutor decided her unviable fetus should be autopsied. It was found to have fetal abnormalities and amphetamines in its blood. So the poor woman gets a four year jail sentence, even though amphets have not been determined to cause miscarriages.

    Another sick case of magats knowing what is best for women’s reproductive health. Disgusting and heart breaking behavior by the vilest scum on earth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.