(POL) Indiana State Senator wants to make unwed mothers into criminals

[SirFozzie]

http://www.in.gov/legislative/interi...lim/HFCO04.pdf

The Crime of "Unauthorized Reproduction"
New law will require marriage as a legal condition of motherhood

By Laura McPhee

Republican lawmakers are drafting new legislation that will make
marriage a requirement for motherhood in the state of Indiana,
including specific criminal penalties for unmarried women who do
become pregnant "by means other than sexual intercourse."

According to a draft of the recommended change in state law, every
woman in Indiana seeking to become a mother throu gh assisted
reproduction therapy such as in vitro fertilization, sperm donation,
and egg donation, must first file for a "petition for parentage" in
their local county probate court.

Only women who are married will be considered for the "gestational
certificate" that must be presented to any doctor who facilitates the
pregnancy. Further, the "gestational certificate" will only be given
to married couples that successfully complete the same screening
process currently required by law of adoptive parents.

As it the draft of the new law reads now, an intended parent "who
knowingly or willingly participates in an artificial reproduction
procedure" without court approval, "commits unauthorized
reproduction, a Class B misdemeanor." The criminal charges will be
the same for physicians who commit "unauthorized practice of
artificial reproduction."

The change in Indiana law to require marriage as a condition for
motherhood and criminalizing "unauthorized reproduction" was
introduced at a summer meeting of the Indiana General Assembly's
Health Finance Commission on September 29 and a final version of the
bill will come up for a vote at the next meeting at the end of this
month.

Republican Senator Patricia Miller is both the Health Finance
Commission Chair and the sponsor of the bill. She believes the new
law will protect children in the state of Indiana and make parenting
laws more explicit.

According to Sen. Miller, the laws prohibiting surrogacy in the
state of Indiana are currently too vague and unenforceable, and that
is the purpose of the new legislation.

"But it's not just surrogacy," Miller told NUVO. " The law is vague
on all types of extraordinary types of infertility treatment, and we
wanted to address that as well."

"Ordinary treatment would be the mother's egg and the father's
sperm. But now there are a lot of extraordinary thing s that raise
issues of who has legal rights as parents," she explained when asked
what she considers "extraordinary" infertility treatment.

Sen. Miller believes the requirement of marriage for parenting is
for the benefit of the children that result from infertility
treatments.

"We did want to address the issue of whether or not the law should
allow single people to be parents. Studies have shown that a child
raised by both parents - a mother and a father - do better. So, we
do want to have laws that protect the children," she explained.

When asked specifically if she believes marriage should be a
requirement for motherhood, and if that is part of the bill's
intention, Sen. Miller responded, "Yes. Yes, I do."

A draft of the legislation is available on the Health Finance
Commission website

[NoMyths]

Meh.

[Klinglerware]

The thread title is slightly misleading--the legislation seems to be aimed at gay and lesbian couples. But, yes--people who fall under the traditional perception of the unwed mother (teenage girl in trouble) look like they are affected by this too...

[flere-imsaho]

"The Republican Party: Out of your Pocketbook and into your Vagina"

[SackAttack]

Wow.

I guess you can legislate morality.

[MrBigglesworth]

I thought Republicans were anti-Communist? What's with the state owned uteruses?

[SackAttack]

On further reflection, this is an interesting approach.

It goes like this: the law says you must be married in order to be a parent. The law (disclaimer: I don't know if Indiana is one of the states to have passed this particular state constitutional amendment) says gay and lesbian couples may not marry. Therefore, gay and lesbian couples may not legally raise children.

That's gotta be violating the equal protection clause of the Constitution. I can see where they're trying to go with this, but I can't see what legal limbo would be required to actually achieve that.

[Icy]

Is there a new wave of extreme puritanism in the USA right now? i don't follow a lot politcs there but looking at the recent threads posted here and some random news from internet it looks so. I think there are things more important to fix in this world that what is each woman doing with her vagina...but probably this is a good way to make ppl think on other things than the real issues.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Icy

Is there a new wave of extreme puritanism in the USA right now?

Just a little bit yeah. <-- Sarcasm.

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Republican Senator Patricia Miller is both the Health Finance
Commission Chair and the sponsor of the bill. She believes the new
law will protect children in the state of Indiana and make parenting
laws more explicit.

Wait.....Protecting children from what?

On top of that...this entire bill just reminds me why I am scared of the way we are going...government involvement in day to day lives....

I honestly don't know if I am able to express my dismay at this in the proper fashion, without bashing, so I will hold back altogether...

[Butter]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Out of your Pocketbook and into your Vagina

For some reason, this seems like it would make a good song for a long overdue Billy Ocean comeback. Maybe a bit unwieldy, but a talent like Billy could make it work.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Icy

Is there a new wave of extreme puritanism in the USA right now? i don't follow a lot politcs there but looking at the recent threads posted here and some random news from internet it looks so. I think there are things more important to fix in this world that what is each woman doing with her vagina...but probably this is a good way to make ppl think on other things than the real issues.

There has always been the people in this country that have felt that way. Remember, we had to forcibly integrate less than 50 years ago. The reason you are hearing more about it now is that these people, formerly on the fringes, have been found to be a pretty reliable voting bloc, so big business has latched on to them to form a coalition that had been dominating American elections. Usually there is a bunch of sound and fury to these issues, but nothing ever comes of them, because most people don't really want to implement these things (like overturning Roe v Wade or outlawing gay marriage in the Constitution). Most politicians just give the fundamentalists lip service.

[bob]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

The thread title is slightly misleading--the legislation seems to be aimed at gay and lesbian couples. But, yes--people who fall under the traditional perception of the unwed mother (teenage girl in trouble) look like they are affected by this too...

I only read this one, and don't agree with it at all, but how does this affect the "teenage girl in trouble?" How many of them go to get an assisted pregnancy?

[cody8200]

That's my state!

[Young Drachma]

This has to be for people who don't have sexual intercourse to get pregnant. Seems like they have plenty of other stuff they could be legislating instead of this.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by bob

I only read this one, and don't agree with it at all, but how does this affect the "teenage girl in trouble?" How many of them go to get an assisted pregnancy?

First line of the article:

"Republican lawmakers are drafting new legislation that will make
marriage a requirement for motherhood in the state of Indiana..."

There are extra punishments if the woman gets pregnant without a man getting laid.

[John Galt]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

First line of the article:

"Republican lawmakers are drafting new legislation that will make
marriage a requirement for motherhood in the state of Indiana..."

There are extra punishments if the woman gets pregnant without a man getting laid.

I think bob is right. The only prohibitions are on people seeking to get assistance in having a baby. The opening sentence is confusing, but I don't think it applies to people having sex to have kids.

Either way, it is a horrible idea.

[rkmsuf]

If they are looking to close Indiana this is a great idea.

[Honolulu_Blue]

I don't think this bill has any chance of being passed. Mrs. Bigs is right, this is just paying lip service to fundamentalists. Regardless, it's retarded and offensive on many levels. Senator Patricia Miller is an ass.

[bob]

I think it is a poorly written first sentence (or written intentionally that way to scare more people).

Stupid idea that will never pass.

[Kodos]

Morons.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by John Galt

I think bob is right. The only prohibitions are on people seeking to get assistance in having a baby. The opening sentence is confusing, but I don't think it applies to people having sex to have kids.

Either way, it is a horrible idea.

I'm looking for the actual text of the bill, but I can't find it anywhere. Some news reports suggest the bill targets all unwed mothers, but all focus on the artificial fertilization aspect, so maybe that is all there is to it.

[-Mojo Jojo-]

I can't believe how down you all are a bill intended to get more women to have sex with the dudes. Apparently the state representatives are just not getting enough play, and it's high time they take action. Hot MILF-to-be's for everyone!

[AZSpeechCoach]

I do like the part that says that the state can determine who would be acceptable parents, and they will issue "gestational certificates." Now, will they also provide subsidized birth control to those who they find "undesirable?" Or will that violate another part of their legislated morality?

[Flasch186]

where is Jim in GA.

Imagine that I knew it was a republican backed bill before I even read it. How can that be? incredulous, you are, on this, I say.

[Buzzbee]

Hmmm...so if you get divorced, does that mean you have to have an abortion? Things that make you go...hmmmmm.

[Raiders Army]

LOL. Linky is dead:

We are sorry about the inconvenience.
The web page you have requested could not be located on our server. If you provided the web address yourself, please verify that what you've typed is correct.

[Raiders Army]

Dola, I sense this is to increase sales in marriage certificates. Imagine your rabbit having babies while unmarried. Perish the thought!!!

[MacroGuru]

Gotta laugh as I just got this one in my inbox:

In the year 2005, The Lord came unto Noah, who was now living in
United States, and said, "Once again, the earth has become wicked
and over-populated and I see the end of all flesh before me.
Build another Ark and save two of every living thing along with a
few good humans."

He gave Noah the blueprints, saying, "You have six months to build
the Ark before I will start the unending rain for 40 days and 40
nights".

Six months later, the Lord looked down and saw Noah weeping in his
yard, but no ark.

"Noah", He roared, "I'm about to start the rain! Where is the Ark?"

"Forgive me, Lord," begged Noah. "But things have changed. I needed
a building permit. I've been arguing with the inspector about the
need for a sprinkler system.

My neighbors claim that I've violated the neighborhood Home Owner's
Association zoning laws by building the Ark in my yard and exceeding
the height limitations.
We had to go to the Planning and Zoning Board for a decision.

Then the Department of Transportation demanded a bond be posted for
the future costs of moving power, overpasses and other overhead
obstructions, to clear the passage for the Ark's move to the sea.

I argued that the sea would be coming to us, but they would hear
nothing of it.

Getting the wood was another problem. There's a ban on cutting local
trees in order to save the spotted owl. I tried to convince the
environmentalists that I needed the wood to save the owls. But no
go!

When I started gathering the animals, I got sued by an animal rights
group. They insisted that I was confining wild animals against their
will.

As well, they argued the accommodation was too ! restricti ve and it
was cruel and inhumane to put so many animals in a confined space.

Then the EPA ruled that I couldn't build the Ark until they'd
conducted an environmental impact study on your proposed flood.

I'm still trying to resolve a complaint with the Civil Rights
Commission on how many minorities I'm supposed to hire for my
building crew.

Also, the trades unions say I can't use my sons. They insist I have
to hire only Union workers with Ark building experience.

To make matters worse, the Customs and Immigration Agency seized all
my assets, claiming I'm trying to leave the country illegally with
endangered species.

So, forgive me, Lord, but it would take at least ten years for me to
finish this Ark."

Suddenly the skies cleared, the sun began to shine, and a rainbow
stretched across the sky.

Noah looked up in wonder and asked, "You mean you're not going to
destroy the world?".

"No", said the Lord. "The Government has beat me to it."

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Morons.

Jim: "You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."

SI

[st.cronin]

On my ranking of States I Would Enjoy Living In, Indiana comes in 50th. It smells like feet.

[Galaxy]

I got a feeling the Republicans could be losing some of it's muscle to Dems after the 2008 elections.

[Ryche]

This is just an example of the loony bills that the fringes from both sides introduce. All it takes is one person to draft legislation. I would be surprised if it even gets out of committee. And the Democrats control the Indiana legislature. It's not going anywhere.

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

I got a feeling the Republicans could be losing some of it's muscle to Dems after the 2008 elections.

Yeah, that's what the wishful libs have been saying for the last 10yrs.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

On my ranking of States I Would Enjoy Living In, Indiana comes in 50th. It smells like feet.

Doesn't that at least put it above New Jersey, which smells like ass?

SI

[Mr. Wednesday]

The bill has been withdrawn. The sponsor gave one sentence of explanation, something to the effect of things being more complicated than she thought.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

Yeah, that's what the wishful libs have been saying for the last 10yrs.

I though the Dems had the stronger muscles in the 90's, in terms of power? I don't remember a party being as bad as the Republicans in the the Bush era.

[Ryche]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

I though the Dems had the stronger muscles in the 90's, in terms of power? I don't remember a party being as bad as the Republicans in the the Bush era.

That probably depends on your view of which side is good and which is bad. I know a lot of Republicans would say the Dems under Clinton were worse.

Personally, I say it's all politics as usual.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wednesday

The bill has been withdrawn. The sponsor gave one sentence of explanation, something to the effect of things being more complicated than she thought.

Yes, like someone else in the legislature pointing our her idiocy, hopefully loudly and publicly.

[Subby]

This is a good example of the lunacy that occurs as a result of one party wielding too much power.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Ryche

That probably depends on your view of which side is good and which is bad. I know a lot of Republicans would say the Dems under Clinton were worse.

Personally, I say it's all politics as usual.

I agree...But this I meant, that the Republicans seem to be even annoying some of it's own party.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wednesday

The bill has been withdrawn. The sponsor gave one sentence of explanation, something to the effect of things being more complicated than she thought.

Such as the fact that it's BLATENTLY unconstitutional?

The right to reproductive freedom makes up the right to privacy under Substantive Due Process. A bill designed to limit that reproductive freedom would get struck down in a heartbeat. There isn't a response that can be made by the state other than "We should over turn Griswold", to which the answer is "Fat fucking chance of that".

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Ryche

This is just an example of the loony bills that the fringes from both sides introduce. All it takes is one person to draft legislation. I would be surprised if it even gets out of committee. And the Democrats control the Indiana legislature. It's not going anywhere.

This is where I was on this. This wasn't a Republican bill, this was a moronic idea. The Dems have plenty of morons on their side of the aisle as well. Just take a look at the idiotoc gun laws the Dems proposed/passed in California. When it was brought up in debate that one law would outlaw the .22 caliber hand guns used in Olympic competition, the bill sponsor simply said that prospective Olympians were more than welcome to move to another state.

Note: the above was just an example..I'm am most definately not comparing the idiocy of the two "laws". The essentially anti gay parenting bill shows a level of contempt for fellow citizens only hinted at by the moron in California.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Doesn't that at least put it above New Jersey, which smells like ass?

SI

I have heard there are nice parts of New Jersey, plus they've got that whole East Coast Superiority Complex going for them, so it rates comfortably ahead of Indiana.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by indoorsoccersim

Wait.....Protecting children from what?

On top of that...this entire bill just reminds me why I am scared of the way we are going...government involvement in day to day lives....

I honestly don't know if I am able to express my dismay at this in the proper fashion, without bashing, so I will hold back altogether...

HERE! HERE!

[JediKooter]

It's nice to see that the Indiana legislature has tackled and elliminated any petty and miniscule problems like, unemployment, crime, welfare, and health care and can now finaly get to the really serious problems that affect Indiana and it's citizens.

[Ryche]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

It's nice to see that the Indiana legislature has tackled and elliminated any petty and miniscule problems like, unemployment, crime, welfare, and health care and can now finaly get to the really serious problems that affect Indiana and it's citizens.

I see the same argument brought up here all the time when someone proposes the passing of a stadium bill for the Twins or Vikings. These problems will never go away. Sometimes the 'unimportant' things need to be done as well.

(Not an endorsement of the bill, I just don't like seeing this argument used against proposed legislation)