Scary new Bill in Indiana
|
|
Neehai Zapata
Unofficial Parent
Join date: 8 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,970
|
10-05-2005 04:20
Yes, this is a proposed law in the United States of America. http://www.in.gov/legislative/interim/committee/prelim/HFCO04.pdfBasically, this would make it illegal for a woman to get pregnant by artificial means unless she was married. From: someone Republican lawmakers are drafting new legislation that will make
marriage a requirement for motherhood in the state of Indiana,
including specific criminal penalties for unmarried women who do
become pregnant "by means other than sexual intercourse."
According to a draft of the recommended change in state law, every
woman in Indiana seeking to become a mother throu gh assisted
reproduction therapy such as in vitro fertilization, sperm donation,
and egg donation, must first file for a "petition for parentage" in
their local county probate court.
Only women who are married will be considered for the "gestational
certificate" that must be presented to any doctor who facilitates the
pregnancy. Further, the "gestational certificate" will only be given
to married couples that successfully complete the same screening
process currently required by law of adoptive parents.
As it the draft of the new law reads now, an intended parent "who
knowingly or willingly participates in an artificial reproduction
procedure" without court approval, "commits unauthorized
reproduction, a Class B misdemeanor." The criminal charges will be
the same for physicians who commit "unauthorized practice of
artificial reproduction."
_____________________
Unofficial moderator and proud dysfunctional parent to over 1000 bastard children.
|
|
Mike Westerburg
Who, What, Where?
Join date: 2 May 2004
Posts: 317
|
10-05-2005 06:29
1984 anyone????
Also, what jackarse would target women specifically? Would it not also stand to reason that donors of the material required to perform this would also be breaking the law? it takes 2 to tango. Also, by reading the text, only artificial means are being banned, so if the baby batter is delivered the old fashioned way then it is all good.
_____________________
"Life throws you a lemon, you make lemonade and then plant the seeds"
|
|
Cocoanut Koala
Coco's Cottages
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 7,903
|
10-05-2005 08:12
It won't fly.
coco
|
|
Kendra Bancroft
Rhine Maiden
Join date: 17 Jun 2004
Posts: 5,813
|
10-05-2005 08:15
From: Mike Westerburg 1984 anyone????
Also, what jackarse would target women specifically? Would it not also stand to reason that donors of the material required to perform this would also be breaking the law? it takes 2 to tango. Also, by reading the text, only artificial means are being banned, so if the baby batter is delivered the old fashioned way then it is all good. More like "Handmaid's Tale", but point taken. |
|
Juro Kothari
Like a dog on a bone
Join date: 4 Sep 2003
Posts: 4,418
|
10-05-2005 08:26
From: Kendra Bancroft More like "Handmaid's Tale", but point taken.
Hopefully this will fail - I can't imagine it becoming law. I really can't imagine what they were thinking when coming up with this bill. |
|
Mike Westerburg
Who, What, Where?
Join date: 2 May 2004
Posts: 317
|
10-05-2005 09:38
From: Kendra Bancroft More like "Handmaid's Tale", but point taken. hehe  I have never read that book, I may go look it up then It just burns me up to see "Big Brother" making all the rules for us to live by, whilst we go happily on our way paying their salaries. Kinda like me paying the neigborhood bully to kick me in the nards. (BTW, that is not an offer, I will not be paying anyone to kick me in the nards, sorry for the inconvience). IMHO this looks to be a sidestep technique (I know, conspiracy theory) into stopping same-sex marriages, at least the same-sex as for female ones. Another thin that boils me is what gives one human being (or groups of) the right to dictate what another human being does? I do enough of that at work...... oh wait, I get paid to put up with it, I think.....
_____________________
"Life throws you a lemon, you make lemonade and then plant the seeds"
|
|
Malachi Petunia
Gentle Miscreant
Join date: 21 Sep 2003
Posts: 3,414
|
10-05-2005 09:52
I cannot see this law making it past even our current Supreme court for violating the "equal protection" clause of the Consitiution. Insofar as Gastner's Cartograms can be used as a proxy measure of conservatism, Indiana appears a bit too urbane to let this one pass. Any legislator, no matter how misguided, can introduce a bill, getting it passed is harder. Even Indiana failed to pass the Pi = 3.0 bill in 1897 that was motivated by a biblical rounding error. |
|
JackBurton Faulkland
PorkChop Express
Join date: 3 Sep 2005
Posts: 478
|
10-05-2005 09:55
Well there is more than corn in Indiana. There are also Nutz. |
|
Digi Vox
Registered User
Join date: 10 Apr 2005
Posts: 25
|
10-05-2005 09:56
As this bill could only have come from the Religious Right, I must point out that the bill would outlaw immaculate conception. Should God, in His infinite wisdom, decide to bestow the Earth with another off His offspring and choose a mother from Indiana, then both the mother and God would face criminal charges.
|
|
Dianne Mechanique
Back from the Dead
Join date: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 2,648
|
10-05-2005 10:21
From: Digi Vox As this bill could only have come from the Religious Right, I must point out that the bill would outlaw immaculate conception. Should God, in His infinite wisdom, decide to bestow the Earth with another off His offspring and choose a mother from Indiana, then both the mother and God would face criminal charges. Hahaha! Best point of the thread. |
|
Buster Peel
Spat the dummy.
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 1,242
|
10-05-2005 10:36
I read it, and I don't think it goes anywhere near as far as is implied. It does not "make marriage a requirement for motherhood".
If I read it correctly, a woman (married or not) can have the child of a particular man (married or not) using any means she wants, artificial or otherwise. The man and the woman would be the legal parents of the child.
The only thing that seems to be outlawed is a medical procedure that would impregnate an unmarried woman using sperm without the sperm doner's intent to become a parent (such as sperm from an anonymous sperm bank). It doesn't outlaw unmarried women getting pregnant, artificially or otherwise. It only prevents them from doing so without the genetic father's (and/or mother's) consent and intent.
It would create a severe problem for a lesbian who was infertile, or a lesbian couple that wanted to have a child without the possibility of the genetic father asserting his rights after the fact.
Any law that has the words "unauthorized reproduction" is a start down a slippery slope that I would NEVER want to get anywhere near. Even the concept is abhorant.
Buster
|
|
Juro Kothari
Like a dog on a bone
Join date: 4 Sep 2003
Posts: 4,418
|
10-05-2005 11:18
From: Buster Peel
It would create a severe problem for a lesbian who was infertile, or a lesbian couple that wanted to have a child without the possibility of the genetic father asserting his rights after the fact.
|
|
Buster Peel
Spat the dummy.
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 1,242
|
10-05-2005 21:50
From: Juro Kothari Not just lesbians, but for all women who want to use anonymous sperm donors. All unmarried women. A married man and woman can file a document to be "the intended parents" and use anonymous sperm and/or eggs. That is specifically what the bill prevents an unmarried woman from doing. I don't mean to say "only" lesbians would have a problem, it just seems to me that's who this is targeting. Its actually more about gay parenthood than anything else. Buster |
|
Lo Jacobs
Awesome Possum
Join date: 28 May 2004
Posts: 2,734
|
10-05-2005 21:56
I really liked Handmaid's Tale.
What a fucking appalling law.
I wonder what Kiamat Dusk will say?
_____________________
http://churchofluxe.com/Luster 
|
|
Memory Harker
Girl Anachronism
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 393
|
And if there are any among us ...
10-05-2005 22:10
... who don't care to read? I mean, is that even POSSIBLE? But anyway, the movie version of The Handmaid's Tale was not such a bad thing at all. And, I think, should be required viewing in high school. Mmmmm ... that Aidan Quinn ... |
