Faith and Politics Michael Pauley

South Dakota’s 2023 legislative session marked the first time that state lawmakers had gathered since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its June 24, 2022 decision in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade and restored to the states the ability to set their own public policy on abortion. Host Michael Pauley is joined by Dale Bartscher, the Executive Director of South Dakota Right to Life, for a discussion on how state lawmakers responded to the Dobbs decision, and how South Dakota’s pro-life community is responding to a citizen-initiated amendment that proposes to create an unlimited right to abortion in the state constitution.

During the 2023 legislative session, South Dakota lawmakers introduced five different bills that sought to regulate the spread of obscenity, especially by limiting the access of minors to harmful materials. Despite a growing public awareness of the harms caused by obscene material and programs, not one of the anti-obscenity bills made it through the legislature. Michael Pauley is joined by Norman Woods of the South Dakota Family Heritage Alliance to discuss the debate surrounding obscenity laws, the role of the courts and their interpretation of the First Amendment, and the surprising involvement of South Dakota’s public-school establishment in opposing anti-obscenity legislation.

In the year 2000 the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the drug mifepristone (also known
as RU-486 or Mifeprex) as part of a regimen for chemically induced abortions.
But on April 7, 2023—late on Good Friday—a federal judge in Texas issued a
preliminary injunction that suspended the FDA’s approval of mifepristone,
pending a trial on the merits of the case. The preliminary injunction was
partially reversed on appeal, but the judge’s opinion in Alliance for
Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA casts a spotlight on the damage that
mifepristone has caused to women and their preborn children. Host Michael
Pauley is joined by Adam Schwend of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America to
discuss the implications of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine case,
regarded by many legal experts as the most important abortion-related
litigation since the Dobbs decision.

In 2022 voters rejected a measure to legalize recreational marijuana in South
Dakota. Yet in the 2023 session of the state legislature, a dozen bills were
introduced related to marijuana, and in 2024 yet another ballot measure on
marijuana is likely to come before voters. Why is this issue still so unsettled? To
answer this question, host Michael Pauley is joined by Jim Kinyon, the Chairman
of Protecting South Dakota Kids, and the Executive Director of Catholic Social
Services in Rapid City. Jim and Mike discuss the ambitions of the marijuana
industry in South Dakota, some troubling aspects of the state’s “medical
marijuana” program, and why Catholics should care deeply about the effects that
marijuana has on our society.

Host Michael Pauley is joined by Dr. Alfonso Oliva, a physician specializing in plastic and
reconstructive surgery, and a member of the Executive Board of the Catholic Medical
Association. Dr. Oliva and Michael discuss the various controversies surrounding the use of
drugs and surgeries as “treatment” for persons experiencing gender dysphoria. What are the
purported benefits of such procedures, and what are the known complications? Dr. Oliva shares
his thoughts concerning the rapid rise in cases of reported gender dysphoria among adolescent
females, and the growing trend of administering drugs and performing so-called “gender
reassignment” surgeries upon minors in the United States.

Michael Pauley is joined by Jon Hansen for a discussion of a proposed amendment that would create a right to abortion in the South Dakota state constitution. Hansen is the Speaker Pro Tempore of the South Dakota House of Representatives and also serves as Vice President of South Dakota Right to Life. Hansen and Pauley discuss the implications of the proposed constitutional amendment, which would be placed on the ballot for the November 5, 2024 election, if sponsors are able to gather the legally required number of signatures. Supporters of the amendment describe it as an initiative to put Roe v. Wade into the state constitution, but Hansen explains the amendment would impose a legal regime of unrestricted abortion-on-demand that is far more radical than the policy under Roe.