Republicans want life in prison over miscarriages

DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
edited February 2011 in Spurious Generalities
A Georgia state representative has reintroduced an anti-abortion bill that would make miscarriages a felony if the mother cannot prove there was no "human involvement."
The legislation from Rep. Bobby Franklin, a Republican, would make all abortions, described as "prenatal murder," illegal based on the belief that all life begins at conception. The bill's definition of "prenatal murder" excludes miscarriages "so long as there is no human involvement whatsoever" in causing them. Anyone convicted would face the death penalty or life behind bars.
Miscarriages, defined as pregnancies that end on their own within the first 20 weeks, are quite common. As many as 40 percent of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, often before a woman misses a menstrual period or even knows she is pregnant, according to the March of Dimes. About 10 to 15 percent of recognized pregnancies end in a miscarriage, the group found.
It is still unclear what causes miscarriages, but in most cases, it is a sign that the pregnancy is not developing normally.
Franklin's legislation does not clarify what defines human involvement or how this would be enforced.
Franklin did not return a message seeking comment. His voicemail greeting thanks callers for "calling to give me encouragement about sponsorship of HB 1 that recognizes prenatal murder is murder. I'm not able to take that encouragement right now."
His office told FoxNews.com that the "right-to-life" bill is "not as stab at people who miscarriages." Franklin has introduced the bill each session since 2002 but it has never made it out of committee, his office said, adding that it likely never will.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/26/georgia-lawmakers-anti-abortion-proposal-punish-women-miscarriages/

I can understand being against abortion. For example I believe late term abortions are wrong and it's also wrong to use them as a form of birth control.although I do believe it should be encouraged in the inner cities or in cases where the child is going to be retarded. But even or the most staunch pro lifers this is fucking ridiculous. How will it be enforced and what will determine what "human involvement" is? This is reactionary politics at it's worst.

Comments

  • buddhabuddha Regular
    edited February 2011
    I am all for anything that helps control the population.

    ABORT THEM ALL!!!
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited February 2011
    buddha wrote: »
    I am all for anything that helps control the population.

    ABORT THEM ALL!!!

    I agree with you when it comes to blacks and spics that breed like rabbits. But other than that I can't justify partial birth abortion. If you dont want a kid then use a fucking condom or abort it in the early stages.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited February 2011
    This law would never pass constitutional scrutiny as it assumes guilt until proven innocent. Also to say that a party wants something because one member of the party at the state level introduced legislation would be the same as saying that because James Earl Ray shot Martin Luther King that white people want black people dead.

    P.S. Can you please post a link to the source of your quote?
  • buddhabuddha Regular
    edited February 2011
    white people want black people dead.

    What's the problem?
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited February 2011
    This law would never pass constitutional scrutiny as it assumes guilt until proven innocent. Also to say that a party wants something because one member of the party at the state level introduced legislation would be the same as saying that because James Earl Ray shot Martin Luther King that white people want black people dead.

    P.S. Can you please post a link to the source of your quote?

    Shit my bad. Link added
  • buddhabuddha Regular
    edited February 2011
    Shit my bad. Link added

    Fox News? That's really your source? :facepalm:
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited February 2011
    buddha wrote: »
    Fox News? That's really your source? :facepalm:

    Yes.
  • buddhabuddha Regular
    edited February 2011
    Yes.

    [/thread]
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited February 2011
    buddha wrote: »
    Fox News? That's really your source? :facepalm:

    So you have been brainwashed by the other side of the same coin?
  • buddhabuddha Regular
    edited February 2011
    So you have been brainwashed by the other side of the same coin?

    I don't believe shit none of these fuckers say.
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited February 2011
    buddha wrote: »
    I don't believe shit none of these fuckers say.

    Neither do I but Fox isn't any worse than CNN or MSNBC. But here are some more sources if it will make you happy:rolleyes:.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/antiabortion-georgia-lawm_n_827340.html

    http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2011/02/24/miscarriage-is-murder/

    http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/23/bobby-franklin-miscarriage-naturally/
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited February 2011
    Neither do I but Fox isn't any worse than CNN or MSNBC. But here are some more sources if it will make you happy:rolleyes:

    Ya know, that's one thing which nearly makes me knock myself the fuck out by slapping my palm into my face so hard; people who simply dismiss something because of a particular news source. People in the UK often scoff at the Daily Mail; but this is mainly because it touches on politically incorrect topics such as race, immigration, pointing out the rise in matriarchy and the horrors of feminism, and is seen as "homophobic". Also because they used to support the British Union of Fascists. Hardly bad things, in my opinion; they'll do articles that other newspapers and media won't do as well.

    The news on fox really isn't all that bad; O'Reilly and his ignorant bullshit is just that, bullshit, just like Glenn Beck says a lot of stupid stuff (although from what I've seen, he has his moments as well as being entertaining); the actual news on FOX isn't too bad though.
  • StephenPBarrettStephenPBarrett Adviser
    edited February 2011
    The actual news isn't that bad but why give these stupid fuckers like Glenn Beck a show to spout his garbage if unless you are making your broadcasting biased? News shouldn't b biased butno matter where you turn for it there is a certainty that it will be. I use BBC news and Al Jezeera.
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited February 2011
    Negrophobe wrote: »
    Ya know, that's one thing which nearly makes me knock myself the fuck out by slapping my palm into my face so hard; people who simply dismiss something because of a particular news source. People in the UK often scoff at the Daily Mail; but this is mainly because it touches on politically incorrect topics such as race, immigration, pointing out the rise in matriarchy and the horrors of feminism, and is seen as "homophobic". Also because they used to support the British Union of Fascists. Hardly bad things, in my opinion; they'll do articles that other newspapers and media won't do as well.

    The news on fox really isn't all that bad; O'Reilly and his ignorant bullshit is just that, bullshit, just like Glenn Beck says a lot of stupid stuff (although from what I've seen, he has his moments as well as being entertaining); the actual news on FOX isn't too bad though.

    The problem is so many people seem to confuse the news and the commentary even though they are completely different things.
  • MayberryMayberry Regular
    edited February 2011
    trololololol
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited February 2011
    The actual news isn't that bad but why give these stupid fuckers like Glenn Beck a show to spout his garbage if unless you are making your broadcasting biased? News shouldn't b biased butno matter where you turn for it there is a certainty that it will be. I use BBC news and Al Jezeera.

    The BBC really isn't that great either, infac there's a saying here in regards to fakeness "About as British as the BBC"; it actually DOES have an anti-white bias. I personally think Russia Today is as good as you're going to get.
    Newspapers have to sell in order to live; so does commercial TV. That leaves the BBC as the only truly public service medium in this country disseminating information, entertainment and, in the case of race relations, propaganda. We are unashamed to admit it is what we are doing.
    - Gerry Hines, BBC Programme Organizer quoted in Race Today

    http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/138268/BBC-diversity-trainee-scheme-accused-of-anti-white-bias-/

    There's a few more cases as well I can remember, but I'll post them later as and when I find them.
Sign In or Register to comment.