Idaho Rejects 'Rape and Incest' Exception in Abortion Bill

[P4P Opinion]

Idaho Rejects Rape Exception In Abortion Bill Because ‘The Hand Of The Almighty’ Was At Work

Marching in step with the GOP’s nationwide war on a woman’s right to choose, the Idaho legislature gave final approval to a bill that would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks. Modeled after Nebraska’s first-in-the-nation measure, the bill — like the one passed in Kansas last week — is based on highly disputed medical research alleging that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks. Idaho’s bill, however, also fails to include exceptions for rape, incest, severe fetal abnormality or the mental or psychological health of the mother. “Only when the pregnancy threatens the mother’s life or physical health could a post-20-week abortion be performed.”

In 1990, Idaho’s anti-abortion Gov. Cecil Andrus (D) vetoed a similar bill expressly because it failed to provide a rape or incest exception. “The bill is drawn so narrowly that it would punitively and without compassion further harm an Idaho woman who may find herself in the horrible, unthinkable position of confronting a pregnancy that resulted from rape or incest,” he said.

But this year during Sexual Assault Awareness Month, state Republican lawmakers found plenty of reasons to advocate for it. State Rep. Shannon McMillan (R) argued that women who were impregnated under “violent circumstances” should have no choice because it’s not the fetus’s fault. State Rep. Brent Crane, the bill’s sponsor, took it a step further. Believing that “tragic, horrific” acts of rape or incest are the “hand of the Almighty,” Crane said women should trust God to turn the consequences of their sexual assault into “wonderful examples”:

“Is not the child of that rape or incest also a victim?” asked Rep. Shannon McMillan, R-Silverton. “It didn’t ask to be here. It was here under violent circumstances perhaps, but that was through no fault of its own.”[...]

The Idaho bill’s House sponsor, state Rep. Brent Crane, R-Nampa, told legislators that the “hand of the Almighty” was at work. “His ways are higher than our ways,” Crane said. “He has the ability to take difficult, tragic, horrific circumstances and then turn them into wonderful examples.”

Crane’s belief that good can come from such horrific circumstances may be one shared or embraced by a sexual assault victim. However, that interpretation, that belief, that choice should be made by the woman — not forced upon her by law. The right to choose is not about the “innocence” or “guilt” of the fetus – or of the woman for that matter. It is about a woman being able to decide whether she is willing and able to carry a pregnancy to term.

The bill does more than compel sexual assault victims to carry pregnancies to term, it makes it a felony to perform such an abortion and allows spouses and relatives to file legal injunctions against physicians who break the ban. The bill also sets up a fund that can accept donations to defend the bill — a needed provision since the Idaho attorney general has issued two legal opinions declaring the bill unconstitutional for violating the Roe v. Wade decision’s viability standard.

Despite the lack of constitutionality or compassion, the bill passed 54 to 14 with only one Republican joining all 13 Democrats in opposition. The bill now heads to Gov. Butch Otter (R) “who is expected to sign it.”

Source: http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/07/...ghty-abortion/

Seriously, this if ****ed up. The vast, vast majority of people I've talked to who are either against abortion or against abortion after a point would at least concede that there needs to be an exception in the law for victims of rape and incest. Only irrational relgious fundamentalists without reason could be so callous.

[Jim Jeffries]

Funny that you would criticize irrational fundamentalists while quoting Thingprogress.org.

Since premature babies have survived as early as 21 weeks, I think 20 weeks is a reasonable cutoff.

[P4P Opinion]

Funny that you would criticize irrational fundamentalists while quoting Thingprogress.org.

How about Reuters then?: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...72M8VZ20110323

I have never read Think Progress before today, so I have no idea if they qualify as 'irrational fundamentalists', but the fact remains over the new bill in Idaho.

Since premature babies have survived as early as 21 weeks, I think 20 weeks is a reasonable cutoff.

Relevance? Do try and stick on point. The issue is not the cutoff (although I do disagree with the length), the issue is the lack of exceptions in cases of rape and incest. The fact that the decision was heavily influenced by zealous religious beliefs only makes it more laughably awful.

[Jim Jeffries]

Relevance? Do try and stick on point. The issue is not the cutoff (although I do disagree with the length), the issue is the lack of exceptions in cases of rape and incest. The fact that the decision was heavily influenced by zealous religious beliefs only makes it more laughably awful.

5 months is plenty of time for someone to get an abortion. If babies are surviving at 21 weeks, I think 20 weeks is a perfect cutoff. In cases of rape and incest, they still have 5 months to get an abortion. Perfectly reasonable, unless you're an irrational fundamentalist.

If someday they try to do away with abortions entirely, even in the case of rape and incest, I would absolutely be against that.

[P4P Opinion]

5 months is plenty of time for someone to get an abortion. If babies are surviving at 21 weeks, I think 20 weeks is a perfect cutoff. In cases of rape and incest, they still have 5 months to get an abortion. Perfectly reasonable, unless you're an irrational fundamentalist.

Of course, because victims of rape and/or incest always come forward right away. In cases of young women who are raped or victims of incest, they often don't even know about their pregnancy until very late. You'd be surprised by the statistics and the ignorance.

[squealpiggy]

I think the most disturbing part of this bill is the following:

The Idaho bill’s House sponsor, state Rep. Brent Crane, R-Nampa, told legislators that the “hand of the Almighty” was at work. “His ways are higher than our ways,” Crane said. “He has the ability to take difficult, tragic, horrific circumstances and then turn them into wonderful examples.”

That should be enough for this to be overturned on constitutional grounds. Basically "Your superstitions are irrelevant, come back to us when you have a more worthy argument."