thoughts from a walking fetus-incubator
posted by molly under thinking, this and that | permalink | | leave a comment | 4 comments
No no, I’m not pregnant, I just was, you know, reading The Handmaid’s Tale a few news articles about how women should probably avoid living in Utah altogether these days, since if a woman miscarries there, she’ll likely be tried for murder. . . if the governor signs a new bill that would criminalize miscarriage if it is determined (?) the woman acted “recklessly” (?), even if she was not attempting to terminate her pregnancy. Penalties are up to life in prison! Fucking awesome! From the article linked above:
“This statute and the standards chosen leave a large number of pregnant women vulnerable to arrest even though they have no intention of ending a pregnancy,” Paltrow said. “Whether or not the legislature intended this bill to become a tool for policing and punishing all pregnant women, if enacted this law would permit prosecution of a pregnant woman who stayed with her abusive husband because she was unable to leave. Not leaving would, under the ‘reckless’ standard, constitute conduct that consciously disregarded a substantial risk,” Paltrow explained.
Well, such a provision would be just goddamn unreasonable! Especially according to the bill’s sponsor, a (big fucking surprise) Republican by the name of Margaret Dayton (source: The Salt Lake Tribune):
“I know it’s well-intentioned,” Dayton said of the attempt to lift “reckless acts” from the bill, “but I don’t think we want to go down the road of carefully defining the behavior of a woman.”
What? You mean like, defining a miscarriage as homicide and deciding to prosecute women for miscarriage when, like, drinking coffee, or horseback riding, or not knowing you are pregnant and taking a hot bath can cause a miscarriage? And something like one in four pregnancies ends in miscarriage just for whatever random reason? Well here’s something good about it. . .
The bill does exempt from prosecution fetal deaths due to failure to follow medical advice, accept treatment or refuse a cesarean section. Bird said this exemption was likely because of a 2004 case where a woman who was pregnant with twins was later charged with criminal homicide after one of the babies was stillborn, which the state deemed due to her refusal to have a cesarean section.
OK! Cool! Good thing, because if they hadn’t, then it might not have had the added bonus of protecting Quiverfull types who ignore medical advice constantly in favor of prayer and keep pumping out babies because apparently it’s God’s will and stuff for ladies to risk uterine prolapse so we can have one more potential Christian on Earth. Wouldn’t want them to be punished, they’re God-fearing.
Basically, what it comes down to is this:
Paltrow says this bill puts a lie to the idea that the pro-life movement cares about women.
“For all these years the anti-choice movement has said ‘we want to outlaw abortion, not put women in jail, but what this law says is ‘no, we really want to put women in jail.'”
Pretty fucking much.
ETA: Well! Since the Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall (Republican? Huh!) just came out and told everyone that abortion makes God punish abortion-havers by making their subsequent children disabled (!!), I wonder if he’d care to comment on if this is also the case for miscarriages? Keep it up, folks.
8:30 pm, 22 February 2010
Jesus. I love that we live in a society where, theoretically, a woman – perhaps one who had trouble conceiving – could be convicted of homicide after suffering a tragic loss.
Has it occurred to anyone that if abortion were safe, legal, and accessible to all women in all states, there would be no need for laws like this? No one would have to determine whether a woman intended to end her pregnancy “accidentally” because any woman who wanted to terminate a pregnancy could do through safe and legal channels. Gah! Keep your fucking laws off women’s bodies, Utah! How about you start doing a better job of protecting the 14-year-olds in your state who are being raped in “marriages” to 70-year-old “prophets” before you start classifying trip-and-falls as homicides?!
Sorry. End rant.
10:32 pm, 22 February 2010
Well said, Gina. This whole thing has me so angry. Hopefully the governor will not sign it. . . but still. The fact it passed.
7:11 pm, 26 May 2010
How about, “Thoughts from a woman who can have the honor of bearing children?”
Calling Anti-Abortion people “anti-choice” is like calling someone who decides not to eat arsenic anti-chemical.
Abortion is murder. Choice is neutral. I’m against murderous choices – aren’t you? Or are all “choices” sacred. By that logic, you’d call anyone against serial killing or blowing up buildings anti-choice as well? After all those are choices too.
Romans 1:28 “And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice”
5:58 am, 4 June 2010
Mr. Mahoney,
I’m sure you have better things to do than troll the blogs of the godless spouting your fundie rhetoric, just like I have better things to do than argue with extremists who have lives so empty that quoting Romans at strangers seems like a fulfilling way to spend an evening. I’m not about to waste my time arguing about bodily integrity with people who use phrases like ‘the honor of bearing children” (as if that sort of rhetoric would make wayward women like myself see the light and start popping out teh babiez).
Bye! Good luck! I sincerely hope our paths never cross again.