tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556657.post8609207127861411572..comments2023-10-08T05:44:25.657-06:00Comments on Dakota Voice: VoteYesForLife.com Announces Legal Action Over False TV AdvertisingDakota Voicehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01386070103210525597noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556657.post-42799668339470882472008-10-20T17:20:00.000-06:002008-10-20T17:20:00.000-06:00When pro-abortionists bellyached that they wouldn'...When pro-abortionists bellyached that they wouldn't be able to use Plan B "morning after" contraceptives, the pro-life community pointed out that this was false (funny how history is repeating itself, isn't it?). <BR/> <BR/>Section 3 of Referred Law 6 aka <A HREF="http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2006/bills/HB1215enr.htm" REL="nofollow">HB 1215</A> said<BR/><BR/><EM>Nothing in section 2 of thisBob Ellishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10413354616356999953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556657.post-22244567848544806512008-10-20T14:28:00.000-06:002008-10-20T14:28:00.000-06:00Quite the potty mouth, Bob. :)Remember back in 200...Quite the potty mouth, Bob. :)<BR/><BR/>Remember back in 2006? VoteYes was proud that the ban had no expections. And then a poll came out saying more South Dakotans would've supported it if it had exceptions, so then VoteYes tried to lie saying it actually did have exceptions. Did the Campaign for Healthy Families take legal action against that? No. They just refuted the claim and a majorityHaggshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14166561705752864879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556657.post-77175343941171941252008-10-20T12:13:00.000-06:002008-10-20T12:13:00.000-06:00McCain's ads don't lie. There should be room for d...McCain's ads don't lie.<BR/> <BR/>There should be room for disagreement, and perhaps there should even be room for "different interpretations." But when demonstrably false information is being presented, that's clearly wrong and should be stopped. <BR/> <BR/>We heard the lies in 2006 that Referred Law 6 wasn't acceptable because, darn it, it just doesn't have exceptions. <BR/> <BR/>Now that Bob Ellishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10413354616356999953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556657.post-63405637582922147062008-10-20T09:33:00.000-06:002008-10-20T09:33:00.000-06:00What legal action? I don't see what would be open ...What legal action? I don't see what would be open to them, except to do something frivolous to get media attention.<BR/><BR/>This is merely a publicity stunt to try to mobilize the base that doesn't think this law will ever take anything from them. <BR/><BR/>The base is wrong about that.cphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13163860831438587167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556657.post-22113957495911703922008-10-20T08:35:00.000-06:002008-10-20T08:35:00.000-06:00This is silly. You don't take legal action when y...This is silly. You don't take legal action when you think the other side's ads are lying. You create your own ads to refute that claim. The pro-choice groups don't seek legal action when the pro-life ads lie. Obama doesn't take legal action when McCain's ads lie.<BR/><BR/>This just reeks of desperation on their part.Haggshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14166561705752864879noreply@blogger.com