Skip to main content

While doctors the one doctor who performs abortions in South Dakota is safe for now, doctors in other states may not be.

The Iowa Independent reports:

Two bills sponsored by Iowa House Republicans could have significant public safety consequences, and perhaps the most unnerving of those potential outcomes would be the justifiable use of deadly force against abortion or family planning providers.

When the two pieces of legislation are combined they create a situation where a fertilized egg would be considered a person, and allow for the public execution of those who would threaten such a person.

If passed into law, the two bills — House File 7 and House File 153 — would offer an unprecedented defense opportunity to individuals who stand accused of killing such providers, according to a former prosecutor and law professor at the University of Kansas, and are something that might have very well led to a different outcome in the Kansas trial of the man who shot Dr. George Tiller in a church foyer.

H.F. 153 is basically a version of the personhood amendment in Colorado that failed to pass in November. It states:

... that life is valued and protected from the moment 14 of conception and each life is accorded the same rights and 15 protections guaranteed to all persons by the constitutions of 16 the state of Iowa and the United States, and by the laws of 17 the state.

H.F. 7, meanwhile, would add the following language to the current justifiable homicide law in Iowa:

Reasonable force, including deadly force, may be used and a person has no duty to retreat from any place at which the person has a right to be present, and has the right to stand the person’s ground, and meet force with force, if the person believes reasonable force, including deadly force, is necessary under the circumstances to prevent death or serious injury to oneself or a third party, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Taken together, these two bills could allow forced-birth terrorists to murder an abortion doctor "to prevent death or serious injury to oneself or a third party," the third party, of course, being a fetus. Which is exactly what Scott Roeder claimed after he gunned down Dr. George Tiller: he was simply acting to protect fetuses.

Meanwhile, in Nebraska, State Senator Mark Christensen, a forced-birth extremist who thinks even a rape victim should have to carry her rapist's baby to term, has introduced L.B. 232, a bill "to authorize protection of an unborn child." The bill states that the use of force is "justifiable to protect a third person"—including, specifically, an "unborn child"—if the person believes "intervention is necessary for the protection of such other person." In other words, kill the doctors to save the fetuses if you think you're doing something righteous.

Public outcry succeeded in forcing the South Dakota legislature to indefinitely postpone its "pro-life" bill to legalize murder. Hopefully, the bills in Nebraska and Iowa will suffer the same fate. But with each daily assault on women and their doctors, the message is clear: there is absolutely nothing pro-life about these "pro-lifers" who want women and their doctors to die.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:15 PM PST.

Also republished by Pro Choice and Abortion.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Explain why this is true, please. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dunvegan, Kinak
    Taken together, these two bills could allow forced-birth terrorists to murder an abortion doctor "to prevent death or serious injury to oneself or a third party," the third party, of course, being a fetus.

    I read the bill.  I am a lawyer.  I don't see it.  Parse it out for us, please?

    If you lose your disc or fail to follow commands, you will be subject to immediate de-resolution. That will be all.

    by SpamNunn on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:18:16 PM PST

    •  Jeff Sessions got his J.D. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dunvegan, CMYK

      that isn't saying much in this case.

      Typically when most folks scream "I'm a lawyer" their credibility drops about 20%

      Hang on while I look up that study... I'm sure I can find one to back up my stereotypical claims.

      This is a crisis I knew had to come, Destroying the balance I'd kept. Doubting, unsettling and turning around, Wondering what will come next.
      --Ian Curtis

      by jethrock on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:24:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  My Guess (7+ / 0-)

      You're the lawyer, so if we disagree you clearly win, but my reading was that it has the "same rights and protections" as a person by "the laws of the state."

      And one of said laws is that they can use deadly force to "prevent death or serious injury to oneself or a third party." Presumably the third party in that case is a person.

      It's kind of a stretch, but I'm forced to wonder what else they could be trying to do with the law other than making abortion equivalent to murder.

      •  So then, by extenstion... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kinak

        ...one could say it's justifiable homicide to shoot anti-choice protesters outside of abortion clinics, to "prevent death or serious injury to oneself or a third party," that third party being the abortion provider.

        After all, any one of those protesters could be armed and just waiting for the doctor to come outside.  Can't be too careful!

        Dear gods, when will this madness end.  We have due process for a reason, people!  Stop trying these end-around methods.

        Actually, wait...would that work?  Could one get these sorts of laws overturned on constitutional due process violation grounds?  It would seem that this is denying-de facto if not actually de jure-the due process rights of anyone who falls victim to this law who isn't actually comitting a crime.  It's a stretch, but might be a viable option...

        Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything. -Harry S. Truman / -8.00, -6.77

        by Shadowmage36 on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 06:45:12 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The problem with testing the law... (0+ / 0-)

          ...is that you need a test case. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like you'd need a doctor injured or dead to test the case.

          Hopefully it won't come to that.

    •  The bill asserts personhood (8+ / 0-)

      ...for fertilized eggs.  If a fertilized egg is a legal person then the justifiable homicide provisions (use of force to protect one's self or a third party) would then apply to zygotes.  In other words, murdering an abortion provider in order to protect the life of the zygote would be a legitimate legal defense.

      "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

      by Triscula on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:40:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Read it in pari materia (0+ / 0-)

        If you lose your disc or fail to follow commands, you will be subject to immediate de-resolution. That will be all.

        by SpamNunn on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:44:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Say this Law would force a return to Prohibition (4+ / 0-)

        cause with enough Alcohol such-as Whiskey,Vodka,Everclear to name a few the Zygote can be 'murdered" by "Excessive" Drinking.

      •  Cells are human beings? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HylasBrook

        With the ability to contribute to society? To feel? Are "alive"? Are "people"?

        This TalibAmerica has lost it's mind entirely.

        ---------------

        "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."

        -- Sinclair Lewis

        Arizona: Land of Ihre Papiere, Bitte.

        by Dunvegan on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 02:05:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Heckfire, so if you lose your arm... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Triscula

          ...in an industrial accident due to oligarchic poor working conditions in a factory, can the arm sue for the death penalty?

          Hey...arms are FULL of cells.

          ---------------

          "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."

          -- Sinclair Lewis

          Arizona: Land of Ihre Papiere, Bitte.

          by Dunvegan on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 02:07:31 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I agree with your sentiment but... (0+ / 0-)

          the fact is that a person doesn't have to contribute to society, or feel, to have a right of life.  If you accept that a zygote is a person, as the GOP does, then they are "alive" and "people".  Yes.  Being so gives them a right to life.
          I accept abortion in the 1st Trimester for any reason (though don't favor public funding if it's for birth-control) and only mother's life/health or rape/incest after that.  I accept legal birth-control abortions out of compassion for mom's well being (and the dad) rather than non-belief of personhood for the zygote.   If illegal they will risk their lives in back-ally offices and many will die.  That's not good for anyone so the zygote loses, in my book.  That doesn't make them less than a person...merely the person who lost.

          "Put on your high-heeled sneakers/it's Party time" - Steely Dan.

          by rainmanjr on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 02:38:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Parsing, parsing ... (8+ / 0-)

      HF 7 says someone fearing death or injury to a fetus and/or its the mother can use deadly force to prevent it. The belief - fearing death or injury - doesn't even need to be reasonable, only the force.

      It isn't much of a stretch to say that a doctor with a poised scalpel is about to inflict death or injury. If your doubt is about the place an HF 7 assailant might be standing, consider an upset husband or sibling or parent in a waiting room just outside the "OR" door.

      (One may not even need HF 153. For example, don't some states treat death or injury to a fetus as a crime already in cases where it is coupled with another offense, say, a robbery?)

      Had a Scott Roeder entered Dr. Tiller's offices, say, to ask what was happening there and was told there was a procedure in progress, and was driven by his conscience to enter the surgery, confront the doctor on the spot and kill him, mightn't this language give him a pretty solid defense?

      I read the bill. I'm a lawyer. (Though retired from practice, I can still read.)

      The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor from sleeping under the bridges of Paris. Anatole France

      by TRPChicago on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:56:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good for the goose... (7+ / 0-)

        One the other hand, any clinic employee, fearing that a felon-ious assault is about to occur in their place of business, is under this law, free to use deadly force defending themselves.

        Because this law allows (or is intended to allow) the terroristic murder of abortion providers on mere suspicion by any member of the public, it also seems to allow said providers to defend themselves or each other under the same "suspicion" rationale.

        "He walked into my clinic and I feared he was going to commit a forcible felony, so I shot and killed him," would be a legal defense under this law.

        As always, republicans spend their days thinking up ways to increase the total amount of terrorism, murder, pain, suffering and death on the world. It is their raison d'etre.

        •  Shootout at the clinic? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          irishwitch, twigg, HylasBrook

          Your very appropriate - and I think, correct - analysis reminds of the interview the other day of the legislator who has an amendment pending to further enhance the permissive gun laws of Texas. Pushed during the telecast by a pro-control advocate, the guy said guns would be allowed on campuses and bars ... but, expressly, not at football games.

          Gee, wonder why not?

          The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor from sleeping under the bridges of Paris. Anatole France

          by TRPChicago on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 08:36:14 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I agree, OK corral anyone? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          CherryTheTart

          This sort of thing is going to get someone killed, maybe several someones.  Even if the implications discussed are inaccurate, it seems more than likely that they are intended to plant notions of legality to reduce the perceived constraints on the use of deadly force.  It occurs to me that the right has historically be more willing to threaten and use terrorism and violence.  However, the old adage about becoming just like your enemy comes to mind.  Guns are not the limited to right wing nuts.  How long before this sort of 1% solution stuff spreads?  The old maps used to draw dragons at the margins because they thought going too far that way would lead to unimaginable horrors.  The same thing is true here, unimaginable horrors lie along that path.

      •  Is the pregnant woman open to being shot... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        irishwitch, HylasBrook

        for going into a clinic where abortions are performed?  Could a boyfriend or father claim justifiable homicide to preventing the mother from having an abortion?  And even though I am not a lawyer, it seems the language of this bill allows for that defense even though the fetus did not survive the death of the mother.  Just wondering about how stupid the Rethugs can be.

        •  One of the bizzare thing about this movement (0+ / 0-)

          is their anger is directed more at the abortion provider than the woman deciding to have the abortion,

          The out and out anti-abortion laws always singled out the abortion provider, not the woman.

          And while a close reading could allow them to shoot the woman, then THEY are killing the baby, so that doesn't quite work for the defense.

          It's part of the attitude that women are unable to make informed decisions for themselves, so it's the abortion providers who are targetted.

          HylasBrook @62 - fiesty, fiery, and fierce

          by HylasBrook on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 10:27:17 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Laws protecting WANTED fetuses are fine (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dunvegan

        If the mother wants to carry the fetus to term, but loses the pregnancy because her abusive boyfriend beats her up, and knocks her down a flight of stairs - yeah that should be a crime, and maybe a bigger one than doing the same thing to his not pregnant girlfriend.  If the woman's sibling walks in on her boyfriend beating her up, and shoots the boyfriend dead for beating up his/her pregnant sister, that should be justified.  As long as the "in the commission of a crime" (which intentionally harming the mother is) language stays in such laws I don't have a problem with them, as long as abortion remains legal.

        I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.

        by Futuristic Dreamer on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 09:51:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Well, the bill is problematic (6+ / 0-)

      And typical when the shoddy, ideology-driven "lawyers" of the right get involved. By trying to justify and legalize terrorism, the republicans have opened a huge can of worms. Basically, if abortion is legal and a doctor is acting within the law, then he is not committing a forcible felony. Now, while someone entering a clinic may feel they have the right to kill anyone and everyone they find within, they are not free to do so simply because they think this law says they can. What's more, barring finding a doctor "in the act" of performing an abortion, this law does not allow anyone to simply murder doctors on the street under the suspicion that they might have, or might, in future, perform an abortion. Though Im sure that's the evil intent of this un-american travesty of justice.

      On it's face this law is unconstitutional (typical of right wing "constitutionalists"). No matter what your convictions, no one is allowed to appoint themselves judge, jury and executioner, no matter what the crime. Simply claiming you were trying to save "fetuses" does not justify or legalize terrorism or murder.

      One cannot kill someone on the mere suspicion that they have committed a felony, no matter what the crime. Simply knowing that a person is an abortion provider, even under this law, is not a license to kill (though I'm sure it is being sold that way to the right wing nut-jubs, pro-terrorist wingers, and wannabe serial killers of the forced-birth movement).

      I cannot help but think of the family members of anyone murdered based on this horrible law. They will have a field day suing the living crap out of anyone who voted for this abortion of law and any official who treated it as legal. It is a RICO action and class action lawsuit just waiting to happen. Too bad someone is going to have to die to put these scumbags and terrorists out of business and in jail.

      •  I commented upthread on the constitutionality bit. (0+ / 0-)

        The bill simply SCREAMS "due process violation."

        But I hadn't thought about the RICO aspect.  That would be interesting...probably wouldn't get too far in court out there, but still.  The publicity would only help.  Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

        Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything. -Harry S. Truman / -8.00, -6.77

        by Shadowmage36 on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 06:54:24 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Of good gawd, does this shit never end? (14+ / 0-)

    I guess not.

    This is a crisis I knew had to come, Destroying the balance I'd kept. Doubting, unsettling and turning around, Wondering what will come next.
    --Ian Curtis

    by jethrock on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:18:17 PM PST

    •  never, ever. it's so depressing. n/t (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      irishwitch, Pandoras Box, jethrock, CMYK

      big badda boom : GRB 080913

      by squarewheel on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:40:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I feel like that scene in 'Wild At Heart' (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        irishwitch, CMYK

        where Lula is flipping through the radio and finally flips:

        Radio: Come in, San Antonio, Texas.
        What's on your mind this evening?

        I just had triple bypass,
        open-heart surgery, and it's people like you who make me
        wanna get out of the hospital...

        Lula: How can anyone listen to this crap

        Radio: ...for her recent divorce, shot her three children, aged seven...

        A judge praised defendant John Roy, but was dismayed to learn that he'd had sex with the corpse.

        Lula: What?

        Radio: State authorities, last October
        released turtles ino the Ganges, to try and reduce human pollution, and will now use crocodiles to eat corpses dumped by poor Hindus...

        Lula: Holy shit! It's Night of the Living Fuckin' Dead!

        Sailor: What's that, Peanut?

        Lula: I can't take any more of this radio. I've never heard so much shit in all my life!

        Sailor Ripley, you get me
        some music now! I mean it!

        Radio: ...victim of a sexual assault...
        ...mutilated... raped...


        This is a crisis I knew had to come, Destroying the balance I'd kept. Doubting, unsettling and turning around, Wondering what will come next.
        --Ian Curtis

        by jethrock on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:58:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  We could regret Roe, but even if that (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HylasBrook

        had not happened, the anti-choice people would make life hell for the states that do not ban abortion and they would try to pass Federal bans and so no, this crap will never end.

    •  WE have to end it. Full stop. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HylasBrook

      ---------------

      "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."

      -- Sinclair Lewis

      Arizona: Land of Ihre Papiere, Bitte.

      by Dunvegan on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 02:12:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  as has been stated over and over (12+ / 0-)

    they're pro-fetus.  Once you're out, well, then you're on your own.

  •  They are posturing (9+ / 0-)

    I'll believe them when they pass the law that tries women for murder after an abortion.  That's what they want to do, but they know that's a bridge too far.  Meantime they will go after providers.

    •  Well Bobby Franklin here in GA (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dunvegan, Eric Nelson

      wants to treat an abortion as a homicide--I wrote about this last week. It won't pass but it's still ana ttempt.

      The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

      by irishwitch on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 08:56:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Excepting the "Lone Wolf" Hands of Gaud. (0+ / 0-)

      They have their own philosophy on who they can murder.

      ---------------

      "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."

      -- Sinclair Lewis

      Arizona: Land of Ihre Papiere, Bitte.

      by Dunvegan on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 02:14:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Goin after providers (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sngmama, HylasBrook, meralda

      ...is more than just posturing.  Such laws are designed to reduce the availability of services to women through intimidation of providers.  The end result is abortion services (along with other family planning services) become unavailable to whole communities of women.  Anyone old enough to remember life before Roe v. Wade can tell us what that means for women: increased suffering and death.

      "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

      by Triscula on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 02:25:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  In many ways it IS going back to before (0+ / 0-)

        Roe v. Wade - middle class women then were generally able to get abortions from sympathetic doctors. Poor women had to use the 'homemade' remedies.

        All these laws to restrict abortion means that again, middle class women can have abortions - fly to Canada or Europe were the laws are reasonable - and not have to deal with needing clinic escorts & sonograms to she what she is aborting.

        (And trust me, a percentage of legislators that are anti-abortion has had someone in their family terminate their pregnancies -- there are too many abortions in this country to be only had by pro choice women.)

        Of course, Republican hypocracy is not a new thing.

        HylasBrook @62 - fiesty, fiery, and fierce

        by HylasBrook on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 10:36:26 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you, Thank you, Thank you n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Meteor Blades

    Skepticism of all the elite institutions, not trust, is what required for successful leadership in this era. Digby

    by coral on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:21:26 PM PST

  •  No more adumbration: stop using "pro-life" (14+ / 0-)

    forever when referring to these idiots: they're "anti-abortionists" or "fetus-freaks" or simply ignorant haters.

    Präsidentenelf-maßschach; Warning-Some Snark Above "Nous sommes un groupuscule" join the DAILY KOS UNIVERSITY "makes Beck U. and the Limbaugh Institute look like Romper Room"

    by annieli on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:25:08 PM PST

  •  We are at war. (5+ / 0-)

    Accept that the majority is at war for every aspect of societal and personal freedom.

    Right now it is a war of ideologies and words. But such situations have escalated elsewhere in the world, and the manifestations of malcontent are rising all around us.

    The overlords should take note and loosen the reins, or risk the loss of their reign.

    Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. - Abraham Lincoln

    by 4Freedom on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:26:05 PM PST

    •  More importantly: If you don't have one.... (0+ / 0-)

      SHUT THE HELL UP AND SIT THE F*CK BACK DOWN.

      Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything. -Harry S. Truman / -8.00, -6.77

      by Shadowmage36 on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 06:58:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  red meat for the base (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    defluxion10

    they don't actually have to govern, just yell " abortion!" and "the gay!" as they continue to take money out of everybody's pocket to give it to people who already have too much.

    can't wait to watch democrats resolve fail on these bills.

    big badda boom : GRB 080913

    by squarewheel on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:40:22 PM PST

  •  So would any child conceived in Iowa... (11+ / 0-)

    automatically be an American citizen??

  •  allow for the public execution...... (6+ / 0-)

    like stoning women in a sports arena? Why don't all these people just move to Kabul?

  •  force unwanted children adoptions (6+ / 0-)

    if you support this anti-choice bill you think is ok to force people to do things so they should have no problem self identifying themselves to be forced to adopt unwanted children.

  •  By the same logic (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    irishwitch, Shadowmage36

    If someone were to kill an anti-abortionist, an then claim they did it to "prevent death or serious injury to" an abortion provider...would they walk?

  •  How would a woman know to use deadly force to (5+ / 0-)

    prevent an attack that was about to occur on her fetus? Why does it have to be the fetus that is being protected instead of the whole woman? Is this law saying that if someone only punches a pregnant woman in the face, but not the stomach, then it doesn't apply? Actually, self defense laws already give people the right to defend against attacks, and if they feel their lives are threatened, they can certainly use any reasonable means to defend themselves. If a pregnant woman is being violently attacked, it seems pretty clear that this might put her life at risk. Can you imagine a jury telling a pregnant woman who got the shit beat out of her that she shouldn't have tried to defend herself? So, this law seem redundant at best.

    But, I am surprised that Republicans are not afraid of this law, because it has some serious potential for a malicious woman to abuse it, and I know Republicans often think there are a lot of malicious women out there. For instance, say a woman want to get rid of her husband and get a new boyfriend. So, she blows him away, and then get her boyfriend to give her a few cosmetic scraps and bruises. Then he gets her pregnant. She could claim it was the husband who beat her and it would be impossible to tell the exact instant she got pregnant. So, she could say she was defending her pregnancy from her jealous husband. That seems like the kind of Republican nightmare every wingnut out there would be afraid of.

    When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in Glenn Beck and carrying Sarah Palin.

    by tekno2600 on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:52:34 PM PST

    •  Time for a lot more carry permits and bodyguards. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tekno2600

      (love your sig, tekno2600...and the reference to 2600 mhz, also.)

      ---------------

      "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."

      -- Sinclair Lewis

      Arizona: Land of Ihre Papiere, Bitte.

      by Dunvegan on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 02:20:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thx. Few people get the 2600 reference (0+ / 0-)

        I wonder what would happen if all the concealed carry people in the country stood in a big circle and someone shouted: "Look, Obama bin Laden is right there in the middle."

        When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in Glenn Beck and carrying Sarah Palin.

        by tekno2600 on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 10:12:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Biotechnology research? (6+ / 0-)

    What would this mean for biotechnology research, in-vitro fertilization in the affected states?

    •  I was wondering the same thing (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dunvegan, irishwitch, HylasBrook, CMYK

      Fertility procedures can result in the creation of many embryos that are never used by patients.  They are stored for a period of time and then, if the patient never uses them, they are destroyed.  How would legislation that asserts personhood for embryos affect physicians who perform invitro fertilization?  My guess would be that most doctors wouldn't care to find out.  They'll just stop performing that service or move their practice to another state.  Obviously this angle of the issue hasn't been given much (any?) consideration at all.

      "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

      by Triscula on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 08:16:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It means science in the US is under attack. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HylasBrook, meralda

      While Europe forges ahead, these TeaTards are dragging the US back into the Dark Ages.

      So much for America as a leader in science if they get their way.

      ---------------

      "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."

      -- Sinclair Lewis

      Arizona: Land of Ihre Papiere, Bitte.

      by Dunvegan on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 02:22:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The forced birthers are also against this - (0+ / 0-)

        it's why Bush would not allow experiments done on fertilized eggs.    The main difference that forced-birthers aren't demonstrating in fron of teaching hospitals is this concept is harder for people to grasp.

        HylasBrook @62 - fiesty, fiery, and fierce

        by HylasBrook on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 10:42:40 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  My husband said SCOTUS would laugh this bullshit (8+ / 0-)

    right out of court. However, with the SCOTUS we have currently, I'm honestly not so sure... :(

    "How screwed up are we as a society when providing access to health care brings on murderous rage?" - Susan S

    by boofdah on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 07:53:02 PM PST

  •  Repubs please move to Somalia - I cannot take it (5+ / 0-)

    anymore

  •  Of course they're pro-life. (6+ / 0-)

    But only until birth. After that, you're on your own.

    Yes we can! Yes we did! Yes we will!

    by Sister Havana on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 08:03:42 PM PST

  •  IN SD there are way more Doctors that (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    karenc13, HylasBrook

    provide Abortions they just go under the Classification known as "The Old "Trusted" Family Doc" in fact they are all over the place in Red States especially in the South where in the past they would even make housecalls to help "The Right Side Of The Tracks" Family's little Betty-Sue with her sudden "Medical Emergency".

  •  Those who dispose of unwanted (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    irishwitch, HylasBrook

    fertilized embryos at Fertility Clinics would also be Targeted.

  •  Say does this mean that if someone (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    karenc13, HylasBrook

    finds out that a Rightwing Republican Family member was on their way to get an Abortion from"The Old Trusted Family Doctor" they could "Justifibly Homicide" said "The Old Trusted Family Doctor".

  •  Toss in Bobby Franklin's bill (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dunvegan, Pandoras Box

    in GA (not a chance in hell of passing, thank Goddess; even our nuts aren't that crazy) which defines a fetus as an unborn human person fromt he moment of conception, and  would build on reporting statutes for miscarriages by requiring an investigation of every spontaneous abortion, to make certain no human was involved in the miscarriage--if there is, it would be judged a homicide and treated as such.S ince he mentions doctors losing their licenses, I guess it's the woman who'd face murder charges.

    The ntus are out in force.

    But if youdefine a fetus as a human person, than I think the next step is jsutifiable homicide in defense of that third party, the fetus.

    The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

    by irishwitch on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 08:50:39 PM PST

  •  so, if my wife has a serious complication (4+ / 0-)

    and an abortion is the only way it will save her life, can I kill this guy for stopping abortions?

    •  Angle and her "Second Amendment Solutions" (0+ / 0-)

      ...sounds like she should be prosecuted under this law, eh?

      ---------------

      "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."

      -- Sinclair Lewis

      Arizona: Land of Ihre Papiere, Bitte.

      by Dunvegan on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 02:09:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Edging ever closer to an uncivil war... (0+ / 0-)

    We are increasingly divided into smaller and smaller groups each believing something and believing that the beliefs of other groups are wrong to the degree that they should be eliminated by whatever means necessary and available.

    This is incipient tribal warfare.  Just what the big corporations want.  They will sell to all sides and retreat to their private, armed compounds while the various "Army's of the Truth" kill each other in the streets.

    What a glorious way to end a noble experiment......

    •  I think the country is too big to govern centrally (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HylasBrook

      I think the split in this country means that states should be much more autonomous so I am no longer at the mercy of backwards Southern states.

      •  An editorialist soon after Bush's "election," (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        karenc13

        pointed out that the concept of  "State's Rights" might not be as bad as it's always been thought to be.

        With State's Rights, liberal, blue states can eliminate all the cultural warfare laws - gay marriage, gay adoption, abortion on demand, no 10 commandments posted all over the place, intelligent sex education, and none of this 'Creationist' crap they teach in Texas.

        Since the original 'state rights' states are welfare states, blue states like NY and CA can keep the dollars they send to the government that goes to the welfare states.  This means they could balance their budgets and lower the tax rate for working Americans.

        HylasBrook @62 - fiesty, fiery, and fierce

        by HylasBrook on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 10:51:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  I can take that "person" out of state or (0+ / 0-)

    out of the country to end the pregnancy though, right? How do they keep me from doing that?

    They don't care, they are just assholes finding new ways to be assholes.

  •  On the other hand... (0+ / 0-)

    The pro-life forces really are playing with fire here. What they fail to realize is that all those protesters outside abortion clinics can be viewed as presenting an imminent threat to persons engaging in lawful activities, and thereby converting all of those protestors into targets for the very angry pro-choice people. If the pro-life folks actually start to use these kinds of laws to enforce their views, how long do you think it will take before pro-choice people start to get angry?

    Life is hard, it's harder if you're stupid. - John Wayne

    by gilacliff on Fri Feb 25, 2011 at 06:50:40 AM PST

  •  Stupid, but not legal... (0+ / 0-)

    Everyone who abhors these potential laws fails to note one very important thing:  the use of deadly force is only ok if the one using it is trying to prevent the commission of a felony...and like it or not, in Iowa, South Dakota, and all other states in this country, abortion is LEGAL. Thus, trying to use one of these hideous laws to justify killing an abortion provider, pregnant mother, protesters outside an abortion clinic, etc., would NOT be legal under the provisions of these laws. As long as abortion is legal under our Constitution, the use of deadly force to "protect" the life of a fetus would still be the commission of a felony and prosecutable because none of these laws make using deadly force legal if there is no illegal act taking place.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site