PDA

View Full Version : House passes bill to protect fetuses



Jolie Rouge
02-26-2004, 02:37 PM
www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/26/unborn.victims.ap/index.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House voted Thursday to subject assailants who injure or kill a pregnant woman and her fetus to two separate crimes. The bill would for the first time under federal law give victim's rights to a fetus.

The bill, championed by conservative groups, drew opposition from others concerned that conferring new rights on the fetus would undermine abortion rights.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act was approved 254-163 after the House rejected a Democratic-led alternative that would have increased penalties for those attacking a pregnant woman but continue to regard the offense as perpetrated on one victim.

"That little unborn child is intrinsically precious and valuable and deserving of standing in the law and protection," argued Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Illinois.

The legislation now must be taken up by the Senate, where abortion rights forces are stronger and passage is more uncertain.

President Bush has promoted the bill, an election-year priority for his conservative base.

Supporters said Americans were solidly behind making an attack on a pregnant woman subject to two crimes.

Criminal law, said House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, "is an expression of society's values," and anything less than making a woman and the unborn child separate victims "does not resonate with society's sense of justice."

But Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, said Republicans were opting for an election-year abortion issue instead of backing a less controversial approach that would make attacks on pregnant women a single, but more serious crime. "Real people are suffering real harm while this House has played abortion politics instead of acting to punish truly barbaric crimes."

Backers said the measure was needed to bring federal law in line with 29 states where those who attack pregnant women can be charged with two crimes when the fetus is harmed, including murder.

One of those states is California, where Scott Peterson is on trial for the murder of his wife Laci and her unborn boy Conner. The bill has also been designated Laci and Conner's Law.

The Democratic-led opposition, however, says the real aim of the legislation is to undermine abortion rights by giving the unborn the same legal rights as the born. They charged that abortion politics was taking precedence over the need to protect abused women.

Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-New York, said it would affect a woman's reproductive rights. It "is not about women and it is not about children. It's about politics."

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-California, offered an alternative that would increase penalties for attacks leading to the interruption of a pregnancy but would not confer separate legal rights to the fetus. It was defeated, 229-186.

The White House, in a statement, said it opposed such an amendment but voiced strong support for the base bill.

The House passed similar bills in 1999 and 2001. The bill again faces an uphill fight in the Senate with its stronger abortion rights forces. The Senate did not take up the two previous House bills.

The legislation would apply only to attacks on women that qualify as federal offenses. Those would include such crimes as terrorist attacks, bank robberies, drug trafficking or assaults on federal land.

The sponsors of the bill, led by Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Pennsylvania, said they were not out to undermine abortion rights and their bill specifically precludes from prosecution those who perform legal abortions.

"This bill is not about the debate over the sanctity of human life. This bill is just about justice," said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Indiana.

Groups on both sides of the abortion issue have weighed in heavily on the bill.

The National Right to Life Committee urged its supporters to lobby for the legislation and carried on its Web page a 2003 e-mail from Democratic presidential front-runner Sen. John Kerry voicing opposition to a Senate version.

NARAL Pro-Choice America said Congress must do more to protect pregnant women from violence but said the unborn victims bill was a "deceptive attempt to erode Roe v. Wade," the Supreme Court decision affirming a woman's right to end a pregnancy.

The legislation defines "unborn child" as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."

VenusA423
02-26-2004, 04:00 PM
You know, I couldn't decide whether to say something or not about this. I know it can be an emotional subject. I think the bill would be a good thing... that if a pregnant woman is murdered, then the person should be convicted for two lives. BUT, I don't think it should have anything to do with abortion. Not saying I'm all for that, but the mother should pretty much have a choice. That about sums up my thoughts, without totally getting into it. :)

Jolie Rouge
02-26-2004, 04:12 PM
I think that is the whole point of the legislation. Anyone who has ever lost a "fetus" thru miscarriage or trauma knows they have lost a child. When I miscarried at 7 1/2 months, we had to deal with the cornor and a funeral home.

Suz*e*
02-26-2004, 04:13 PM
ABOUT TIME!


It is sad when the most unsafe place for an unborn child to be is inside its own momma!!!

As I always say abortion is 99% of the time unnecessary, the 1% IF the mom will die if she don't have one. The only excuse I can think of to justify it.

THE FACTS ARE LIKE OR NOT, you can always adopt your baby out if you dont want to keep it SIMPLE as that, but women have abortions for vain reason like they dont wanna get fat with a pregnancy, or dont like the daddy etc blah-blah lots of excuses...even rape which still is NO reason to murder a baby.

Get over yourselves, so what IF it is inconvient for the poor mom? That is the coldest most evil thing on earth. Killing YOUR OWN baby to beat it all.

Or they wont adopt out because they say they dont want others raising THEIR kids, but they are fine with murdering the baby their own baby. I think that baby would rather be raised by others than killed for your convience...AND SCOTT PETERSON SHOCKS PEOPLE??? Weve bred a generation of baby-killers, this time it was the dad, not mom! Women do it all the time. Gimme a break... that's a fact....I don't create the reality, just making a point on facts...

If you dont want to get pregnant take birth control, but if you would abort if you got pregnant even on birth control keep your legs closed, why should a baby die because you cannot keep your legs closed??

Jolie Rouge
02-26-2004, 04:28 PM
Suzie -- while I apprecaite your passion -- this is not a thread about abortion. The reason that this has taken so long to get passed is because the Pro-Choice lobbyist have fought tooth and nail about fetal rights.

They tried to pass this law several years ago here when a pregnant woman was shot "accidentally" in a drive-by. She was carrying twins - one was killed instantly and the other died three days later due to the wounds caused by the bullets. The persons involved were charged with fetacide and homicide one carried a max sentance of two years and the other life imprisonment.

Suz*e*
02-26-2004, 04:48 PM
I know, but every little law helps. I really get physically sick thinking about this topic, especially partial birth abortion etc...

Fetal rights are so important, I am happy to hear this news, thanks for sharing.



Ok, I will get off of my soapbox, I got a little off-topic there Jolie! (not at all sorry for my views on this though, I dont see how anyone could think anything different on this one)

Don't worry I am not debating this, nothing to debate right is right, nothing left for me to say. PERIOD


I am not posting no more on this because I have zero tolerance for anyone who could harm a fetus, baby, child..at all...so I am using preventative thinking and making this my last post here on this topic...too controversial, and would surely turn into an argument.





Protect the innocents!

evrita
02-26-2004, 04:54 PM
ohhh where my back button

adorkablex
02-26-2004, 05:20 PM
Yanno.. I'm pretty liberal on alot of stuff..
But I'm pretty conservative when it comes to the pro-life thing.
I think there are certain circumstances (health complications, rape etc) that abortion shouldn't be illegal.
However.. I'm very against someone being able to have an abortion because they're not careful...
Sort of like how they're talking about an otc morning afterpill..
I think it's a bad idea.. I think people will think it's ok to have unprotected sex because it's so easy to rid yourself of the "complications" of sex. The morning afterpill is something that should be reserved for rape only.

I think people should have to deal with the consequences of their actions..I'm pro-life and also pro adoption.
An unborn baby has just as many rights as the mother.

sahmsfreeb
02-26-2004, 06:56 PM
i have found that in life you are liberal in your younger years and conservative in your old age... lol along with being gray haired and deaf lol..



when i was younger i was pro choice... passionatly...

after i lost a baby i became pro life..passionatly...


funny how time and age and wisdom change people...