Kansas House OKs protection for fetuses

[Doondoo]

The debate was civil but pointed on Thursday as the House gave tentative approval to Alexa's Law, a bill that aims to protect women and their fetuses. The measure, which passed on a voice vote, would bestow "human" status to an unborn child and allow prosecutors to charge people for two crimes if they attack a pregnant woman.

"When the criminal conduct of a third party causes the death or injury of an unborn child the law should say affirmatively and strongly that we recognize that as a separate and distinct criminal act that should be punishable," said Rep. Lance Kinzer, R-Olathe.

Proponents, such as Kinzer, say the legislation is an issue of justice, but abortion-rights supporters say it is an attempt to nibble at abortion law.

"This underlying bill declares a woman's fertilized egg to have all the rights and protections of a human being, and that would have many other consequences," said Rep. Cindy Neighbor, D-Shawnee.



http://www.cjonline.com/stories/021607/sta_148540635.shtml

[no_hypocrisy]

1. There's already a federal law on the books for that purpose.

It's disingenuous for its true purpose: to erode abortion rights.

[slackmaster]

2. I'm not familiar with the federal one - Can you provide a cite?

Also I'd like to see the full text of the bill as it stands now, but from the cited article it appears to have been watered down considerably from the original:

...The original bill had labeled a fetus as a "human being" for all legal purposes. Under scrutiny from abortion-rights supporters, the bill was recrafted to make that classification only for crimes against the pregnant woman.

The amended bill states offenders could be charged with murder, manslaughter, vehicular homicide or battery if they injure or kill a fetus....

That sounds quite a bit like what we've had in place in California since the early 1970s - The "fetal homicide" statute under which Scott Peters was charged with a double murder for killing his wife Laci Peterson a few years ago.

No doubt the authors original intent was to gut abortion rights, but if they end up with a law that allows someone in a case like Peters' to be charged with a double homicide, would that really be a bad thing?

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Laci and Connors' Law. Doesn't call a fetus a human being explicitly.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/T?&report=hr420p1&dbname=108&

[slackmaster]

4. That's not a federal law - it's a report on a bill (HR1997)

Thanks, I didn't recall there being a federal law to that effect.

California's fetal murder statute also avoids calling a fetus a human being.

PENAL CODE
SECTION 187-199

187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law....

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199

And here is a link to what appears to be the full text of Kansas House Bill 2006, which I believe is the subject of this thread:

http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/2006.pdf

I tried posting the full text but the striken-out portions are over my head and I have to go to work now.

It's a little different than California's approach, but it still explicitly exempts lawful elective and theraputic abortions.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. It was a Bill. Now it's a federal law.

http://groups.msn.com/AFireInsideUs/debating.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=11644&LastModified=4675514004308092030

[slackmaster]

7. Thanks, I must have missed it

So, what's the problem (if any) with a state passing a similar law? States do prosecute most criminal cases. Federal criminal prosecutions usually happen only when things fall through cracks in a state's justice system.

[Judi Lynn]

6. Why stop with TWO CRIMES? Oh, just take some responsibility, and charge THREE crimes,

at the very least, as the fetus, if it is born to become a healthy baby and child, grows to adulthood, there's a chance it might want to have one or more children of its own. They EXIST in possibility! They WILL materialize if things work out!

Aw, pull out all the stops. Think BIG. Think of all the succeeding generations beyond that. Charge the guy with mass murder! That makes him a terrorist, a major threat to life as we know it, over time.

Execute him and his family.

[slackmaster]

8. Your slippery slope argument doesn't hold water

California's fetal murder statute has been in place for decades, and has caused no problems except for criminals.

[Solly Mack]

9. You get the feeling some people pray over tampons and kotexes

before disposing of them? Just bring the whole family in and send the refuse off with a prayer or two before trashing?

"Dear Lord, please take this egg into the bosom of your love and give it sanctuary in your kingdom"

[Judi Lynn]

10. One shudders to think of what might have been!

Maybe some heroic right-wing "scientist" will find a way to reclaim every one before it suffers that tragic end.

On edit:

TWELVE every year per female. Just IMAGINE the fabulous future we could all have: all the soldiers to fight any war a war profiteer could dream of, and all the cheap labor forever, with the leftovers!

[Solly Mack]

11. Can you imagine laundry day at such a house?

"Don't you put those sheets into the washer until we've prayed over them!"

[Judi Lynn]

12. Don't give them any ideas! I think there are probably some who could easily

be lead to incorporate this in their own lives.

They might see it as a breakthrough to a higher plain of religious devotion!

[HockeyMom]

13. Bury your late heavy periods?

Surely, you cannot just flush that "baby" down the toilet bowl, either?

[Solly Mack]

14. Say - there's a money making idea!

[Judi Lynn]

15. Wouldn't be respectful!

Wonder if we should criminalize future offenders. Hmmmmmmm.

Extra bodies in the prisons could beef up the prison construction industry, and they could contribute in prison industries.

What's wrong with making some money, while they do time?