'the Infanticide Bill' Hb 3318

[icelandic_iceskater]

[size=4][b]Post-birth abortion[/b][/size]

[size=1]By Victor Morton Tuesday, May 5, 2009 [/size]

"Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek notes that Texas Democratic state Rep. Jessica Farrar has "quite a resume," including an award for Planned Parenthood and opposition to ultrasound legislation. But that's not what Mrs. Stanek ran with last week.

Ms. Farrar "is also sponsoring the first legislation of its kind in the nation, known as 'The Infanticide Bill,' HB 3318."

The bill passed out of a state legislative panel Thursday, a vote that Texas "Homestead Momma" blogger Susan McNiel Godfrey called "absolutely unbelievable."

Mrs. Stanek explained that the bill would "decriminalize infanticide of babies under 1 year old from being a capital murder offense, punishable by life in prison or the death penalty, to 180 days to 2 years in jail and a fine not to exceed $10,000, for mothers found to be suffering, in the court's opinion, severe post-partum depression. A defendant would be eligible for this sentence if her 'judgment was impaired as a result of the effects of giving birth or the effects of lactation following birth,' wrote Mrs. Farrar in her legislative analysis," according to Mrs. Stanek."

[url="http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/05/inside-blogotics-8033431/"]http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/0...gotics-8033431/[/url]

[Archaeology cat]

I have no words for how I feel about this.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't people given lesser sentences anyway if they are found to have been incapable of rationally deciding to commit said crime? So why can't that just apply here instead of making a separate law.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='icelandic_iceskater' post='1860700' date='May 7 2009, 12:42 PM'][size=4][b]Post-birth abortion[/b][/size]

[size=1]By Victor Morton Tuesday, May 5, 2009 [/size]

"Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek notes that Texas Democratic state Rep. Jessica Farrar has "quite a resume," including an award for Planned Parenthood and opposition to ultrasound legislation. But that's not what Mrs. Stanek ran with last week.

Ms. Farrar "is also sponsoring the first legislation of its kind in the nation, known as 'The Infanticide Bill,' HB 3318."

The bill passed out of a state legislative panel Thursday, a vote that Texas "Homestead Momma" blogger Susan McNiel Godfrey called "absolutely unbelievable."

Mrs. Stanek explained that the bill would "decriminalize infanticide of babies under 1 year old from being a capital murder offense, punishable by life in prison or the death penalty, to 180 days to 2 years in jail and a fine not to exceed $10,000, for mothers found to be suffering, in the court's opinion, severe post-partum depression. A defendant would be eligible for this sentence if her 'judgment was impaired as a result of the effects of giving birth or the effects of lactation following birth,' wrote Mrs. Farrar in her legislative analysis," according to Mrs. Stanek."

[url="http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/05/inside-blogotics-8033431/"]http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/0...gotics-8033431/[/url][/quote]
"The effects of lactation"?????? Nursing your baby makes you HAPPY, not homicidal #$%#^#$%$^&$%^*^!!!

[StColette]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1860705' date='May 7 2009, 11:49 AM']"The effects of lactation"?????? Nursing your baby makes you HAPPY, not homicidal #$%#^#$%$^&$%^*^!!![/quote]

Exactly!

[BG45]

Here is the text of the bill, which states it's for the creation of an offense of infanticide: [url="http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/pdf/HB03318I.pdf"]http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/b...df/HB03318I.pdf[/url]

This is to replace current capital murder legislation that says if you kill a child under the age of six you get life in prison or the death penalty: [url="http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.005.00.000019.00.htm"]http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/...0.000019.00.htm[/url] (See Section 22.07.08

So the statement in the newly introduced bill, which has made it through committee already, about creating a definition for infanticide is definitely misleading and horrible. Congratulations Representative Fararr, I never thought I'd live to see the day that a lawmaker in my nation would advocate a lesser sentence for the murder of a living and breathing child than of an adult.

Edited May 7, 2009 by BG45

[dominicansoul]

do you ever wonder what these politicians have against babies in the first place? it boggles the mind....

[CatherineM]

The Spartans did that kind of thing.

[eagle_eye222001]

I expect better from Texas.

----------------
Now playing: [url="http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/matchbox+twenty/track/unwell"]Matchbox Twenty - Unwell[/url]
via [url="http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/"]FoxyTunes[/url]

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1860755' date='May 7 2009, 05:24 PM']The Spartans did that kind of thing.[/quote]
So did the Romans.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1860753' date='May 7 2009, 01:23 PM']do you ever wonder what these politicians have against babies in the first place? it boggles the mind....[/quote]

Babies cost money.

[MissyP89]

This is ridiculous.

[BG45]

[quote name='Brother Adam' post='1860792' date='May 7 2009, 02:03 PM']Babies cost money.[/quote]

But grow up to pay taxes.

[Marie-Therese]

I grieve...that our marvelous country, founded on the precept that people are individuals and have God-given rights, has degraded into this Godless slum of depravity. That we should countenance a thinly-veiled attempt to give women in this country an opportunity to shield themselves behind a law that would permit them to destroy an innocent life if, after birth, they decided they didn't want the responsibility of a child, is unthinkable. In cases of legitimate mental illness, we have existing legal routes to address that situation. This is exactly what they are calling it...a specious attempt to legalize infanticide.

Christ, have mercy. They know not what they do.

[Galloglasses' Alt]

If anyone has noticed, the closer and closer the Western Roman Empire came to its ruin was also the more and more abortion and infanticide became the norm. (Which it inargueably did), and this civilisation is heading the same way altough with more resistance.

[WillT]

[quote name='icelandic_iceskater' post='1860700' date='May 7 2009, 12:42 PM'][size=4][b]Post-birth abortion[/b][/size]

[size=1]By Victor Morton Tuesday, May 5, 2009 [/size]

"Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek notes that Texas Democratic state Rep. Jessica Farrar has "quite a resume," including an award for Planned Parenthood and opposition to ultrasound legislation. But that's not what Mrs. Stanek ran with last week.

Ms. Farrar "is also sponsoring the first legislation of its kind in the nation, known as 'The Infanticide Bill,' HB 3318."

The bill passed out of a state legislative panel Thursday, a vote that Texas "Homestead Momma" blogger Susan McNiel Godfrey called "absolutely unbelievable."

Mrs. Stanek explained that the bill would "decriminalize infanticide of babies under 1 year old from being a capital murder offense, punishable by life in prison or the death penalty, to 180 days to 2 years in jail and a fine not to exceed $10,000, for mothers found to be suffering, in the court's opinion, severe post-partum depression. A defendant would be eligible for this sentence if her 'judgment was impaired as a result of the effects of giving birth or the effects of lactation following birth,' wrote Mrs. Farrar in her legislative analysis," according to Mrs. Stanek."

[url="http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/05/inside-blogotics-8033431/"]http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/0...gotics-8033431/[/url][/quote]
You know, this might end up being a good thing. The reason I say that is because this is the logical end of nearly every pro-abortion argument. Almost no one disagrees anymore that a "fetus" is both a) alive; and b) human. Where the disagreements lie is in when and where is the "fetus" also a person. To draw that line anywhere BUT at the moment of conception involves an evaluation of personhood based either on development, or on "geography" I guess you could say. In other words, either having passed through a birth canal (or a C-section incision) magicaly imparts personhood; or merely having developed to a pre-determined level magicaly imparts personhood. Either view obviously presents serious problems.

With the "geography" view you then have cases where two babies differ only in that one has passed through the birth canal and one has not; and therefore one is a person but the other is not based only on their place of residence. Being inconsistant, this can hardely be considered a good way to view personhood.

With the developmental view, you get this bill. Infants do not generally develop signs of "self-awareness" (the most common developmental stage used in these evaluations) untill well after birth. Not only that, but even adults have differing levels of development. To be consistent in the application of this rule for determining personhood, certain mentally-ill human beings would not be considered persons.

This bill, and others like it, may finally wake people up to the fact that "pro-choice" legislation is based on reasoning that leads to places very few people truly want to go. I have suggested such for years in various Philosophy/Ethics courses and was told "only nutjobs like Peter Singer embrace the arguments to that extent." Problem is we now have some of these "nutjobs" in legislative positions, a fact that has been lost on most Americans in the voting booths. There is no way to allow "pro-choice" legislation to continue using this reasoning, but at the same time stop the same reasoning from leading to these very results. There is NO possibility of being nuetral on this position, and it really is simply black and white. That is why we have to build a Culture of Life and always vote Pro-Life.