Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R) #fundie

Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R) #fundie huffingtonpost.com

A Republican lawmaker in New Mexico introduced a bill on Wednesday that would legally require victims of rape to carry their pregnancies to term in order to use the fetus as evidence for a sexual assault trial.

House Bill 206, introduced by state Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R), would charge a rape victim who ended her pregnancy with a third-degree felony for "tampering with evidence."

“Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime," the bill says.

78 comments

old comment by Anon

Let me make some biology clear:

1. The vast majority of acts of rape do not lead to pregnancy.

2. Rape where semen is present is no less and no more likely to lead to pregnancy than consensual sex.

And a legal point:

The punishment for rape is usually independent of if it results in pregnancy.

So the presence or absence of an embryo in a woman who has been raped is not evident relevant to the charges against the person who raped her. Her getting an abortion is her and only her choice.

Brown is a fool and, I suspect, also a liar (her backpedaling is not convincing). The most logical interpretation is that she introduced the bill knowing that it would fail, as a calculated ploy to pander to her supporters in heavily Republican-leaning Carlsbad.

old comment by Canuovea

It isn't quite as bad as it looks, actually:

"UPDATE: 12:25 p.m. -- Brown said in a statement Thursday that she introduced the bill with the goal of punishing the person who commits incest or rape and then procures or facilitates an abortion to destroy the evidence of the crime."

"B. Tampering with evidence shall include a person
committing criminal sexual penetration or incest procuring or
facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to
obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of the
person's act of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the
intent to destroy evidence of the crime. In no circumstance
shall the mother of the fetus be charged under this subsection"

I repeat: "In no circumstance shall the mother of the fetus be charged under this subsection"

However, that doesn't mean it can't be misused... so I'm still worried about it.

old comment by Indicible

Actually, with the formulation and the express mention of "the intent to destroy evidence of the crime" (which was already present in the redaction), the mother should avoid prosecution, because her intent would not be of destroying evidence.

Yes, it can be misused, and I already said such misuse is unacceptable, but that bill does not say pregnant rape victims will not be able to get an abortion.
It is a case of special wilful misconduct, where the intention is a necessary condition in the prosecution.
Cut the woman some slack: she was not trying to forbid abortion for rape victims. All we can reproach her for, is not seeing the devastating misuse that can be made.

old comment by Anon

@Canuovea & Indicible:

Bullshit.

The first version of the bill charged women who sought abortions after being raped with a felony. After everyone pointed out the evil stupidity of that, Brown retracted it. Now she's trying to promote a version where the doctor preforming an abortion would be charged with a felony.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/28/new_mexico_lawmaker_resurrects_bill_making_abortion_after_rape_a_felony/

As I said, this bill is nonsensical, evil, and illegal. It also will not pass. Brown has a transparent agenda: to pander to her voting base. This particular strategy will alienate almost everyone else in New Mexico.

Also: you don't call a woman who is pregnant a 'mother of a fetus'. She is a mother if and only if the pregnancy is carried to term, and that should happen if and only if she wants it to happen. And, because it bears repeating: almost all abortions occur so early that they are dealing with an embyro, not a with a fetus.

old comment by tracer

Regretfully, I know one woman who believes that abortion, even in the case of rape, should be illegal -- and she isn't politically conservative.

The woman I'm talking about was raped herself, and became pregnant as a result ... but for her, this was a blessing rather than a curse. Due to the shape of her cervix or some similar detail, she had previously been told by a doctor that she was unable to get pregnant. She felt like "less of a woman" as a result. When the rapist proved there WAS a way to get her pregnant, she was overjoyed that she now had Magical Babymaking Powers.

She also had a female friend who used abortion as her birth control. After her friend had her dozenth or so abortion, she decided that her friend was murdering a dozen cute little babies. Why? Because her own (rape) baby had turned out so darned cute.

I really don't think this woman quite understood the difference between a wanted and an unwanted pregnancy.

old comment by Canuovea

Anon,

Okay. If that is so, then this is bullshit. But even the HP updated that this was supposed to be for punishing the rapist if he tried to force the victim to get an abortion.

That quote was from the HP. The other one might be from the comments section where someone quoted a part of the bill.

Even one comment in the article you linked to seemed to suggest that the article has misunderstood it.

Either way, there is the possibility for abuse of the law. But it isn't clear. Still, I don't think it should pass...

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

"The most logical interpretation is that she [Brown] introduced the bill knowing that it would fail, as a calculated ploy to pander to her supporters in heavily Republican-leaning Carlsbad."

In which case it achieved its aim. Not stupid.

And while we're in the West, how about a bill in Arizona which would mean you would have to recite this before you were allowed to graduate from high school:

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge these duties; so help me God.

The wording doesn't matter - your constituents don't care about the biology - it's the message that's important.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

Just one word completely blasts Cathy's argument out of the space-time continuum:

Amniocentecis.

DNA analysis can be performed then. Even before an abortion. Freezing DNA samples. Which are admissable as evidence.

Welcome to the 20th Century, fundie USA, a.k.a. Dumbfuckistan.

Moral: Under which stone did this stupid bitch crawl out from?!

@Anon

"As I said, this bill is nonsensical, evil, and illegal. It also will not pass. Brown has a transparent agenda: to pander to her voting base. This particular strategy will alienate almost everyone else in New Mexico."

Like I say, these dumb-cunt Repubicans seem to have a problem with [i]short[/i]-term memory; [b]collectively[/b], it seems.:

'The controversies caused the Republican Party to look for ways to stop its election candidates from making similar comments about rape. Kevin Madden, a Republican strategist and senior adviser to the Mitt Romney presidential campaign, said, “This is actually pretty simple. If you’re about to talk about rape as anything other than a brutal and horrible crime, stop,” Anti-abortion lobby groups, such as the Susan B. Anthony List, launched training programs to prevent controversial statements on rape and abortion. Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway, told Republican members of the House of Representatives that rape is a “four-letter word,” and Republicans need to avoid discussing it.'

And 'Abortion' needs to be a word completely excised from the right-wing lexicon too; as in even thinking of such is verboten.

Thoughtcrime.

'Only the individual woman has the right to decide, and nobody else has so much as the right to think about dissuading her otherwise; not even other women' should become more than Holy Writ in Republican (internal) policy. Anyone who so much as thinks of having so much as an 'opinion' on the subject will be permanently expelled from the Party.

Todd Akin. Richard Mourdock. They helped to destroy any possible chances of your golden boy - and last, best hope of beating the Democrats for potentially generations to come - Mitt the Tit Romney. It was women who destroyed their political careers, and your own political future, Reps. Women.

It's all about Demographics now.

The Teabaggers helped in your destruction too. The 'Religious Reich' as well. Fuck them. Your only chance to regain any possible credibility now, is to make yourselves as appealing to as wide an electorate as possible: African-Americans. Asians. Latinos. LGBTs.

They now decide elections. Akin & Mourdock prove that. Women ultimately 'legitimately raped' them.

Time to ditch the 'W.A.S.P.s'. The right-wing fundies. Fuck them. That means the Party itself. A complete purge of all vote-destroying & therefore inferior* elements within such.

And if that means only selecting candidates who are left-wing and Atheist, then so be it.

It's the only possible way you can become electable again, GOP. Being right-wing & fundie has ultimately done for you. Therefore it wouldn't kill you to go the other extreme: become more Democrat than the Democrats themselves.

*- Let the WASP Religious Reich form their own 'Party'. See how far it gets them.

Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R) #fundie huffingtonpost.com

78 comments

Confused?