Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

''Infanticide'' bill new tactic for abortion foes in House (freep this poll)
The Virginian Pilot ^ | January 28, 2003 | Robert MCCabe

Posted on 01/28/2003 11:00:40 AM PST by LadyShallott



''Infanticide'' bill new tactic for abortion foes in House

RICHMOND -- The abortion debate in Virginia shifted course on Monday when a House panel passed a bill based on a strict definition of when a birth has occurred -- instead of when a life has begun.

The passage of HB1541 marks a strategic change for socially conservative legislators who are hoping to outlaw so-called ``partial-birth'' abortions. Those efforts have been frustrated by constitutionally protected rights to abortion.

The legislation -- unprecedented in Virginia -- never mentions the word ``abortion.'' Instead, it would establish that a child, in most cases, is born when the entire head is outside the body of the mother. It would make it a felony, punishable by a maximum of 10 years in prison, for anyone to deliberately take the life of the infant from that point on.

In the case of a breech baby, birth would occur when any part of the infant's trunk past the navel is outside the mother.

The legislation passed the House Courts of Justice Committee on an 18-4 vote and now advances to the full House. Similar legislation is being considered in the Senate.

The sponsor of the House legislation -- Del. Robert G. Marshall, R-Prince William -- said he believes the legislation can pass constitutional muster. It was endorsed by Attorney General Jerry W. Kilgore, a Republican who is expected to run for governor in 2005.

``This bill does not ban any abortion procedure,'' Marshall said. ``It prevents the killing of a partially born child -- it is an infanticide bill. It resolves the question of when abortion ends and infanticide begins.''

The bill was one of four approved Monday by the House panel that would restrict abortion rights in Virginia. The others were the following:

- HB1741, sponsored by Del. Kathy J. Byron, R-Campbell, which would let pharmacists refuse to fill prescriptions such as high doses of birth-control pills, which can be used to cause abortions, on the grounds of personal conscience.

- HB1580, sponsored by Del. Mark L. Cole, R-Spotsylvania, which would exclude the mental health of the mother as grounds for allowing a late-term abortion.

- HB1402, sponsored by Del. Richard H. Black, R-Loudoun, which would require parental consent before a physician could perform an abortion on a minor.

The votes seemed to point to a breakthrough year for abortion opponents, who increased their ranks during special elections last year and now may have a veto-proof majority in the General Assembly.

Abortion-rights advocates were dismayed.

``This was really a dark day for women,'' said Bennet Greenberg of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia.

``I think what's being done here is to establish a new category of life,'' said Marjorie Signer of the Virginia National Organization for Women. ``The real purpose is to shut down all clinics that provide abortion.''

Marshall said his bill changes the definition of birth from the ``complete expulsion or extraction'' from the mother of a product of human conception, regardless of the duration of pregnancy, to include the ``partial expulsion or extraction.''

Del. Brian J. Moran, D-Alexandria, a member of the committee, asked Marshall how his bill differs from a partial-birth abortion bill debated last year. The bill was approved by the House and Senate but vetoed by Gov. Mark Warner.

``That was an abortion bill; this is an infanticide bill,'' Marshall said.

Bernard L. McNamee, chief counsel to the attorney general's office, said the proposed law takes a very different tack from cases dealing with a woman's right to choose.

While most abortion-related discussions start from the perspective of the woman ``from the inside out,'' Marshall's bill ``looks at this child from the outside in,'' McNamee said.

He said it was the attorney general's position that the legislation is constitutional.

Greenberg said the most recent statistics available from state health officials -- for 2001 -- show that there were only four third-trimester abortions performed in Virginia that year.

He said no evidence was presented that late-term abortions in the state are common and that a law is needed to prevent them.

``In this General Assembly session, you don't have to have a need to pass legislation; you just need to have an ideology,'' Greenberg said.

Signer said the abortion bills passed by the House panel Monday are important.

``They're all bills intended to chip away,'' she said. ``It's all a smoke screen.''


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: abortion; abortionlist; government; prolife; vageneralassembly
``This was really a dark day for women,'' said Bennet Greenberg of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia.

Just think of all the dark days that these BABIES face because of their mothers. Its mind blowing.......

Do you agree with the new ''infanticide'' bill passed in the House?

Yes
47.48%

No
48.26%

Undecided
4.26%

1 posted on 01/28/2003 11:00:41 AM PST by LadyShallott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *Abortion_list; *Pro_Life
Ping
2 posted on 01/28/2003 11:01:54 AM PST by LadyShallott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
The pro-choice folks can really be amazing. Let it stand that a lot of people would like to see all abortion clinics shut down by force of law. The bill as passed comes nowhere near that; it merely confers legal protection on a partially born infant. But to the PPA, NOW and NARAL flacksters, there is no difference between protecting the life of a baby already in the process of leaving the womb and banning all abortions from conception onward.

Their "logic" will eventually be put to use against them. I wonder if they'll appreciate the irony?

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason:
http://palaceofreason.com

3 posted on 01/28/2003 11:07:35 AM PST by fporretto (Curmudgeon Emeritus, Palace of Reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
Now we just need someone to pick up this torch at a national level and run with it. There's no reason to go into punishments either. Simply define, at the federal level, that a person is born, and therfore a "person" when any part of its body is exposed from its mother and open to the outside world (even if its just the hair on the crown of its head). That simple definition would change so much. Once the baby is legally a "person", anyone aborting it would be guilty of murder under existing laws.
4 posted on 01/28/2003 11:09:21 AM PST by Arthalion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
Now we just need someone to pick up this torch at a national level and run with it. There's no reason to go into punishments either. Simply define, at the federal level, that a person is born, and therfore a "person" when any part of its body is exposed from its mother and open to the outside world (even if its just the hair on the crown of its head). That simple definition would change so much. Once the baby is legally a "person", anyone aborting it would be guilty of murder under existing laws.
5 posted on 01/28/2003 11:09:33 AM PST by Arthalion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
Yes -- 50.09%
6 posted on 01/28/2003 11:10:28 AM PST by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastsider
Do you agree with the new ''infanticide'' bill passed in the House?

Yes
54.09%
No
42.24%
Undecided
3.67%

Total Votes: 599
7 posted on 01/28/2003 11:18:14 AM PST by acnielsen guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
Freeped and Bump
8 posted on 01/28/2003 11:22:20 AM PST by devnull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
``This was really a dark day for women,'' said Bennet Greenberg of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia.
``... this is an infanticide bill,'' Marshall said.

So, to the planned parenthood ghouls, taking away the rite of infanticide is 'a dark day for women.' It is astonish that the American people have been so numbed to the reality of child slaughter that these juxtaposed passages will not awaken such a large percentage of US.

9 posted on 01/28/2003 11:28:01 AM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chance33_98
husband ping!!!
10 posted on 01/28/2003 11:41:00 AM PST by LadyShallott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
Freeped and bumped.
11 posted on 01/28/2003 11:41:51 AM PST by chance33_98 (Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
56/39
12 posted on 01/28/2003 11:44:19 AM PST by gnarledmaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
``This was really a dark day for women,'' said Bennet Greenberg of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia.

At least no one is sticking a scissors in their heads...

13 posted on 01/28/2003 11:53:03 AM PST by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LadyShallott
Yes 57.12%
No 39.47
Undecided 3.41%
14 posted on 01/28/2003 11:53:57 AM PST by Devereaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
"This was really a dark day for women,'' said Bennet Greenberg of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia."

And the election of Abe Lincoln was a "dark day for economy of the South." However, at the time slavery was protected by the US Constitution and was perfectly legal, yet it was immoral and unjust from any religious or ethical perspective.

The pro-aborts are disintegrating and I don't let the idiots and murderers from Planned Parenthood get my dander up anymore. But I think our nation is headed toward another denoument about abortion that will be as equally gut-wrenching as the battle over slavery was. I can't imagine another Civil War but I can envision widespread violence and bloodshed.

15 posted on 01/28/2003 12:24:28 PM PST by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: tom h
Astute speculation, Tom. I seek no less than a paradigm shift in our nations perspective, from tacit acceptance of what is now touted as a right to slaughter and exploit individual human life from conception through partial birth, to focusing on life support for all individual human life, repudiating in vitro manipulations of any individual human life. There's more posted now on my profile page, if you would like to read the current essay there. [May I add you to my pro-life ping list?]
16 posted on 01/28/2003 12:36:30 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson