Skip to main content

View Diary: The 'pro-life' bill to legalize murder (124 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Ok. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    The "lawful" distinction then applies to interpreting when "non-viable fetus" turns into "unborn child" that would be covered by the proposed amendment.

    That, at least, survives the straight-face test when saying the horrors warned of in the amendment were not intended.  

    But as you say, what it would open up in the minds of the public, especially those segments trained and eager to exploit any vagueness in the law to sow fear amongst those providing or seeking abortions, would still be a problem.  

    More exact  drafting (within the existing problematic structure) would then have provided:

    or to unlawfully harm the unborn child of such person in a manner and to a degree likely to result in the death of the unborn child,
    or to do some great and unlawful personal injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished.

    Thanks.  Others lacked the skill or patience to explain why they thought the alarm was excessive.  I appreciate your excercise of both.

    If health care is not basic necessity, try living without it.

    by Into The Woods on Thu Feb 17, 2011 at 12:20:56 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Thank you too - and I agree that the drafting was (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Into The Woods, Clem Yeobright

      poor, even aside from my disagreement with its substance.  Asking for it to be fixed might help separate those who are sincerebut misguided from those who are happy to seethis used as an instrument of terror.

      They tortured people
      to get false confessions
      to fraudulently justify
      invasion of Iraq!

      Never let people forget this.

      by Seneca Doane on Thu Feb 17, 2011 at 03:14:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I've Been There, Done That (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Clem Yeobright

        In slighty different circumstances.  

        Had a client that was being drawn in unnecessarily to an anti-abortion bill.  Talked with the author and supporters offering language that would correct and clarify the issue.

        They basically admitted to me that it was language from their national organization, they knew it was overly broad and ambiguous, and that's exactly how they wanted it.

        Since then I've seen the same tactic used over and over to the point where I no longer look at it as 'sloppy', but intentional.  

        In some ways the black/white statements that this will legali ze the murder of Drs who provide abortions end up being the counter-weight to that intentional mis-drafting.  

        Not an easy ground on which to have rational discussion.

        If health care is not basic necessity, try living without it.

        by Into The Woods on Thu Feb 17, 2011 at 07:38:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (145)
  • Community (55)
  • Baltimore (38)
  • Civil Rights (36)
  • Bernie Sanders (32)
  • Economy (28)
  • Culture (28)
  • Elections (28)
  • Law (24)
  • Texas (23)
  • 2016 (20)
  • Environment (19)
  • Labor (19)
  • Rescued (19)
  • Hillary Clinton (18)
  • Education (18)
  • Media (16)
  • Racism (16)
  • Politics (16)
  • Barack Obama (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site