I hardly ever post in current events, mainly because I'm in Canada, and I really don't follow American politics, nor do I really care about politics in general. Heck, I can't even vote because I'm not a Canadian citizen.

This however is something that I really feel needs to be discussed.

Ga. Law Could Give Death Penalty for Miscarriages | Mother Jones (http://m.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/02/miscarriage-death-penalty-georgia)

Apparently Georgia is trying to pass a law that women that suffer miscarriages will have to prove that it was an act of nature, or they will be prosecuted and possibly receive the death penalty.

Can this be true? Is this possible?

I had a horrific miscarriage years ago. I almost died. Now Georgia is trying to pass a law that, if I lived in the states, could possibly result in my own death, simply because I was unlucky.

I'm flabbergasted. What next, are we going to reintroduce slavery, stone women to death for adultery? It seems like we're going backwards.

Any comments?

That will never pass... there are monumentally stupid bills submitted every day that die in committee without ever making it to the floor for a vote. Much less making it to the senate... or the Governors office for a state or the Prez for the federal stuff. And it would have to pass every step of the way before it ever became a law.

That will never pass......there are monumentally stupid bills submitted every day that die in committe without ever making it to the floor for a vote.

I'm sure it won't pass either Smoothy, but the fact that they even thought of it is too alarming for words.

Who are these idiots coming up with these ideas? Obviously they're not women.

Really though, what's next? Will someone try to re-implement slavery, maybe women will lose the vote, or be stoned in the streets for committing adultery.

What's next? If something this absurd can even be considered, what will they consider next?

Trust me... thats not the most bizarre thing to ever be presented. Its easy to get it presented... a lot harder to get support to bring it to a vote... and WAY harder to pass the House... and the senate by majority vote... and even then the Gov in this case could still veto it... THEN it could still be passed but only by a 2/3 supermajority vote in both Senate and House.

Considering the massive brainpower ammassed there (thats sarcasm)... I'm surprised they haven't voted on who has the most offensive flatulance yet. Or maybe they have and we never heard about it.

There are books written on the stupid things they have done in the past...

But it doesn't take much to be presented... but it does take a lot more before anything else happens, thank goodness. Wonder how much alcohol consumption preceded that one.

Who are these idiots coming up with these ideas? Obviously they're not women. Hello Alty:

The freedom loving right wing has decided that women shouldn't be free when it comes to their women parts.

excon

Psst... its a democrat that submitted that one after tying on a good one at the bar...

Psst.....its a a democrat that submitted that one Hello smoothy:

Pssst. Democrats can be right wingers too.

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

Uhhh, no he isn't (http://www1.legis.ga.gov/legis/2009_10/house/bios/franklinBobby/franklinBobby.htm). Franklin has been called "the conscience of the Republican Caucus" because he believes that civil government should return to its biblically and constitutionally defined role.

excon

There are 1000's of stupid laws presented each year in state courts. GA currently is trying to stop teaching hand writing in school, just teach to print. * that even looks like it may pass.

[QUOTE=Altenweg;2720480]Who are these idiots coming up with these ideas? QUOTE]

IDIOTS!

That's who. People who have NOTHING better to do.

I'm with Smoothy, that will NEVER pass...

Hello smoothy:

Pssst. Democrats can be right wingers too.

excon

And Republicans can be liberals as well...

And Republicans can be liberals as well....Hello again, smoothy:

Yeah, but THIS guy ISN'T a Democrat. I don't know where you get your facts. See my post above and follow the link.

excon

Hello Alty:

The freedom loving right wing has decided that women shouldn't be free when it comes to their women parts.

excon

It won't be long before they come after men Exy. ;)

[QUOTE=Altenweg;2720480]Who are these idiots coming up with these ideas? QUOTE]

IDIOTS!

That's who. People who have NOTHING better to do.

I'm with Smoothy, that will NEVER pass....


Please understand of course that this is the "spin" that was put on what they were talking about doing.

If you look at it from another view, that if the state proves that they did something ( perhaps take drugs) perhaps did self harm, that caused it, then with evidence of what they did, charges could be brought.
Consider it along the same lines of a fetus being killed in a car wreck and the other driver being charged with manslaughter.
There is no current laws in place if the mother does harmful acts that cause the death of the child.

So this idea has been twisted to say that the mother has to prove she did not do something

Hello Padre:

I believe we understand what the bill is about. But, if abortion is available and affordable, no woman would hurt herself to induce an abortion... That's what they did BEFORE abortion was legal. It's only something a woman would do if she COULDN'T get a legal abortion..

Can she get one in your state?

excon

But Chuck, they're trying to take away a woman's right to abort an unwanted pregnancy as well. Even if the woman is raped.

If a woman decides to terminate an unwanted pregnancy that's her right. I only have a problem with it if it's done after the first trimester. But it is her right.

There's so much debate about when an unborn child ceases to be just a group of cells and becomes a living being. If you read the article they're claiming that human status of an unborn child is reached at conception. If a woman suffers a miscarriage she must prove that she did nothing to provoke that miscarriage. That's sometimes impossible.

I miscarried at 3 months with my last pregnancy. The baby had died in utero 2 weeks before I started bleeding heavily. After an ultrasound to confirm that I was indeed miscarrying, they sent me home, said to call if I had complications.

I went home and started bleeding like a stuck pig. Clots the size of my fist, 5 or more an hour. I thought nothing of it. I just figured that was the baby passing.

It wasn't until the next day that I finally went to the hospital. It was the fact that I couldn't stand or remember my own name that finally prompted that decision. When I got to the hospital it was like a scene from a movie. I was rushed in, immediately received blood, doctors all around, people screaming code this and that. They had to do an emergency D & C. I almost died. Had I waited any longer to go to the hospital we wouldn't be having this conversation.

If after all that I had to defend myself, prove that I hadn't killed the child inside of me, that would be the last straw. It's horrific enough to lose a child, but to be suspected of "murder" when you did nothing wrong, is absolutely ridiculous.

Can she get one in your state?


I didn't even consider that. Call me stupid, maybe I'm having a blonde moment, but is there any state in the US where abortions are still illegal?

Call me stupid, maybe I'm having a blonde moment, but is there any state in the US where abortions are still illegal?Hello again, Alty:

There was nothing stupid about your comment.. Abortion remains legal in every state in this country. What I meant, was AVAILABLE. The anti abortion movement, having killed a few abortion providers, has WON the intimidation war. As legal as it is, there's MANY places in this great country of ours, where it's not available...

Plus, their war on Planned Parenthood will limit it even more.

excon

Hi Exy,

I love all my US friends, but I really have to say that I'm very glad I live in Canada.

An abortion here, no big deal. Not that I'd know first hand, but I have many friends that do, and it's never been an issue.

I guess my whole point is that I believe that it should be the woman's choice if she wants to abort an unwanted pregnancy.

I for one would never have an abortion at a clinic or self abort, however, if a woman chooses to do so, then that is her choice.

If a woman suffers from a miscarriage then I don't believe that she should have to justify it being legit. It's traumatic enough to have to go through that, let alone someone judging you on how or why it did happen.

Sorry if I am coming off as being rude. That's not my intention. I am very passionate about this and I think this is silly. Also someone just gave me a reddie in the adult sexuality forum for asking their age. PFFT!

I can understand where they were trying to go with this but you're right this will never pass.

Hello again,

I would love to agree with my MORE than reasonable friends in their belief that something THIS draconian, simply could NOT pass.

But, when you've got a right wing governor, a right wing senate, and a right wing assembly, draconian or not, it certainly COULD pass.

excon

I agree this bill will not pass. However there is an unwarranted hysteria being generated by rags like MJ and DU over this issue.
The text of the bill does not do what is being claimed here.


'Prenatal murder' means the intentional removal of a fetus from a woman with an intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus; provided, however, that if a physician makes a medically justified effort to save the lives of both the mother and the fetus and the fetus does not survive, such action shall not be prenatal murder. Such term does not include a naturally occurring expulsion of a fetus known medically as a 'spontaneous abortion' and popularly as a 'miscarriage' so long as there is no human involvement whatsoever in the causation of such event. (c) The act of prenatal murder is contrary to the health and well-being of the citizens of this state and to the state itself and is illegal in this state in all instances. (d) Any person committing prenatal murder in this state shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, shall be punished as provided in subsection (d) of Code Section 16-5-1.

The law protects the mother who has a natural miscarriage as miscarriages are exempt .

Hi Exy,

I love all my US friends, but I really have to say that I'm very glad I live in Canada.

An abortion here, no big deal. Not that I'd know first hand, but I have many friends that do, and it's never been an issue.

Personally as a conservative I really don't have much of an issue with early term abortions (first trimester only)... I have a HUGE issue with the people getting them expecting the taxpayers to fund them. I believe in you want to play you got to pay. They want them... they foot the bill. Don't expect me to foot the bill because a condom is too much of an inconvienience or taking a pill requires too much discipline. And yeah... most people getting them here fall into one of those two categories. The ones that took reasonible precautions are the minority.

But since Tomderr55 dug up the actual bill... and the wording is completely different, and as that is worded it does change everything. There have been cases were pregnant women have been abducted and killed and their still living baby cut out of their stomach but technically womb(sometimes they are killed first, other times they die during or shortly after). Usually by some really strange women.

As I read the bill now that it has been revealed it would subject those people to capital punishment rather than just a few years in jail. And in those cases I believe the Human race WOULD be served by taking them out of it once and for all. As should certain other offenders.

I wonder if those people originally quoted that are out grossly misrepresenting the bill ( Mother Jones in this case) are actually part of the anti death penalty crowd.

Hello again,

I, too, appreciate the information tom provided. However, after reading it, I have a different understanding of it than my right wing friends...

In tom's post, it says that ANYBODY who removes a fetus and "....makes a medically justified effort to save the lives of both the mother and the fetus and the fetus does not survive, such action shall NOT BE prenatal murder."

Presumably, should a physician remove a fetus and NOT attempt to save its life, such action SHALL BE prenatal murder.

Now, I don't know about you, but it looks like this bill outlaws abortion..

excon

Abortion unfortunately is the law of the land (Article VI, Clause 2
). Georgia cannot make laws to the contrary.

It also sounds like late term SAB (spontaneous abortion, otherwise known as miscarriage) is illegal. So, would I be held responsible if I don't try to save the life of a fetus born at 20 weeks gestation? Remember that viability only begins at 24 weeks, and even the survivability at that age is up to whatever higher power you believe in.

abortion unfortunately is the law of the land (Article VI, Clause 2
). Georgia cannot make laws to the contrary.Hello again, tom:

Of course they can't, just like Washington can't pass a law legalizing marijuana - but they're trying to. (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorials/2014324176_edit25cannabis.html) What happens if they do?

In Georgia, they can't pass a law outlawing abortion - but they're trying to. What happens if they do?

excon

You are divining an intent that is just not there. I guess the child in the womb is undeserving of any protection.

It also sounds like late term SAB (spontaneous abortion, otherwise known as miscarriage) is illegal. So, would I be held responsible if I don't try to save the life of a fetus born at 20 weeks gestation? Remember that viability only begins at 24 weeks, and even the survivability at that age is up to whatever higher power you believe in.

Why wouldn't there be an attempt to save the baby's life when there is medical justification for doing so ?

Why wouldn't there be an attempt to save the baby's life when there is medical justification for doing so ?

Prior to 24 weeks of gestation there is little to no viability of a fetus due to brain stem involvement and lung maturation.

Then there would be no medical justification for the attempt.
I see nothing in bill that puts medical practitioners at risk for making that call.

I guess the child in the womb is undeserving of any protection.Hello again, tom:

I guess the rights of the mother are undeserving of any protection. And, we're back to square one.

excon