Saw the latest edition of the South Dakota Right to Life newsletter. Am I the only one reading something that comes off as a bit troubling?
Because the newsletter announces the quiet part out loud, that legislators who are also board members for the organization are in Pierre to represent SDRTL, as opposed to say… voters?:
“Together we will represent SDRTL as we support, with your help, appropriate life legislation...”
If for example Sanford announced that legislators in their employ were there to represent Sanford, or any other business or special interest group said the same, there would justifiably be some public concern over that assertion.
But, apparently SDRTL thinks nothing of it?
It’s going to be a long legislative session.
To say nothing about the oath Legislators will take next Tuesday.
Just another example of the holier-than-thous deciding they are above rules and law because”JeSuS sAiD iM SpEcIaL”.
These are “elected” officials who have made no secret of being pro-life. I vote for pro-life and Christian candidates because they represent my beliefs. SDRTL has every right to put candidates forward. They are very transparent. It is up to the people to vote them in or not. This is a non-profit organization and Sanford and the proposed pipeline are not. There is a difference. An agenda to save lives and an agenda to make money are two different things. Both should be transparent.
“Rules for thee, but not for me,” correct?
Sanford Health is a registered nonprofit though. And their agenda is also saving lives. There’s an old quote that covers this lack of knowledge: “Better to remain silent and thought to be a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.” Maybe heed that next time. Or ya know, read more.
SDRTL is a nonprofit that can’t even afford to pay their President, I’d hardly compare them to the largest employer in the state. The money is in killing babies and harvesting their parts, very little money to be made saving them. We should do nothing in our power to deter our elected officials from saving human lives at no monetary gain to themselves.
I don’t think anything of this, personally. South Dakota has some simple politicians, which isn’t a bad nor great thing, but you’re occasionally going to get stuff that reads like this, or an AI generated statement etc. etc. I’ll show SDRTL a bit of grace on this one.
Literally nothing you posted is true. So Sanford aborts for profit? SDRTL had no problems paying Hansen $50k for “consulting” so that argument sinks as well. And in the eyes of the law, trying your best but being wrong is still wrong.
ok I think we are wading into the weeds of semantics here..
I doubt many voters in District 25 were unaware of Hansen and Heinemann’s involvement with SDRTL. If the newsletter had simply congratulated the board members who had been elected to the legislature, and didn’t say they will represent the organization, the point would have been made without the offense. Everybody who receives that letter will understand it to mean that they will represent their unborn constituents, and advocate for their civil rights..
So is Hansen a paid lobbyist and legislator? I’m so confused…