Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Utah: Now you can go to jail for having a miscarriage!

245678

Posts

  • rndmherorndmhero Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
  • Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User
    edited February 2010
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Andrew_Jay wrote: »
    Am I the only one who thinks this is awesome? I love it.

    The nutters are finally just taking their craziness to its logical conclusion. That logical conclusion is simple more crazy. It drives away sane people. It's the Palin/Beck presidential campaign of abortion laws.

    If I may get a little poetic here - this is the crazy person equivalent of flying too close to the sun on wings of wax: it will be their undoing.
    Well, aside from the part where women can go to prison for having miscarriages. That part is somewhat less awesome.
    Come on, haven't you ever heard the old saying about how you can't make an omelette without fetuses . . . though I might be mis-remembering it . . .

    Obviously I'm not completely serious. But it's not like these people haven't always wanted to do this. Now it's finally out in the open for everyone to see in all of its ugly, backwards, misogynist glory. Ideally human rights simply move forward, quietly and progressively, but this is almost the next best thing (okay, there are probably a bunch of better things, but you know what I mean).
    Aegis wrote: »
    But I see the result of this as causing more radical policies to take hold as there will be less and less people who disagree with the government of said locality due to the exodus of said people.
    Well, yeah, if this leads to the sane people literally leaving Utah (and drawing crazy people in), then all is lost. I mean driving sane people away from supporting or voting for these people.

  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    They should introduce legislation to behead women who don't birth a son to their husbands.

    Only one son? I say the legislation should demand two sons from these worthless females, and make it illegal for them to read!

    Your puny weapons are useless against me
  • ThrackThrack Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Kistra wrote: »
    Apparently this law was submitted in response to a case where a 17 year old girl couldn't afford a medical abortion so she hired some thugs to beat her up hoping it would cause a miscarriage. Previous laws protected women, basically saying they could do whatever they wanted to their own bodies.

    http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13547012

    "A 17 year olf girl paid someone to terminate her 7 month along pregnancy"

    "That's terrible and should never happen again"

    "I have an idea! Let's beef up our sexual education curriculum in public schools, and get rid of that abstinance only crap that has been proved to be pretty much worthless. That way there will be fewer 17 year olds with unwanted pregnancies"

    "No, we couldn't possibly do that, think of something else"

    "Okay, how about we make 'planned parenthood' style services easier to access. That way the next time a 17 year old does get pregnant when she doesn't want to, it will be more likely that she will end the pregnancy earlier and safer, instead of paying a dude to beat her up.

    "That doesn't work either, think harder"

    "Fine. Instead of trying to prevent everything that led up to it, we'll just make it so the next time that happens we can send her to jail for it. And since we're a bunch of old white mormon guys, well make the language really broad and not think about the effect it will have on all women in the state"

    "There. Done. Now, was that so hard?"

    image-1_zpsdcb9eee1.png
  • Monolithic_DomeMonolithic_Dome Registered User
    edited February 2010
    Decomposey wrote: »
    Tach wrote: »
    I'd be for nuking the whole state, but they've got some pretty scenery here and there.

    So let's just hit SLC.

    Too many Mormons would survive if we just hit the city. How about we compromise and use some sort of poison in the drinking water or large scale deployment of poisonus gas? The scenery would survive that.

    Poison the water.

    Put the antidote in the booze.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • FencingsaxFencingsax Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Decomposey wrote: »
    Tach wrote: »
    I'd be for nuking the whole state, but they've got some pretty scenery here and there.

    So let's just hit SLC.

    Too many Mormons would survive if we just hit the city. How about we compromise and use some sort of poison in the drinking water or large scale deployment of poisonus gas? The scenery would survive that.

    Poison the water.

    Put the antidote in the booze.

    Unfortunately, SLC is technically the sane part of Utah.


    Because 9% think it's too high, and shouldn't be cut! 9% of respondents could not fully
    get their arms around the question. There should be another box you can check for, "I
    have utterly no idea what you're talking about. Please, God, don't ask for my input."
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Yeah all the REALLY crazy people live in the middle of nowhere so they can practice polygamy away from prying eyes.

    _J_ wrote:
    If we only allowed pedophiles to be parents, then we would never have to worry about children being left alone, unwatched.
    XBL: Fanatical One AIM: itskagera
  • CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Decomposey wrote: »
    Tach wrote: »
    I'd be for nuking the whole state, but they've got some pretty scenery here and there.

    So let's just hit SLC.

    Too many Mormons would survive if we just hit the city. How about we compromise and use some sort of poison in the drinking water or large scale deployment of poisonus gas? The scenery would survive that.

    Poison the water.

    Put the antidote in the booze.

    Actually, antifreeze should do the trick. In a very clumsy and not-really sort of way.

    The libertarian response to anything is, "Sure, that works fine in practice, but it doesn't fly in theory."
  • DecomposeyDecomposey Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Decomposey wrote: »
    Tach wrote: »
    I'd be for nuking the whole state, but they've got some pretty scenery here and there.

    So let's just hit SLC.

    Too many Mormons would survive if we just hit the city. How about we compromise and use some sort of poison in the drinking water or large scale deployment of poisonus gas? The scenery would survive that.

    Poison the water.

    Put the antidote in the booze.

    Unfortunately, SLC is technically the sane part of Utah.

    Thats why we poison all the water in the state. Putting the anitdote in booze is brillant. But we should put it in coffee and caffinated soda as well. Mormons don't drink that either. The crazies all die, and the normal people are fine. It's a flawless plan.

    Before following any advice, opinions, or thoughts I may have expressed in the above post, I feel I should warn you: I found Keven Costners "Waterworld" to be a very entertaining film.
  • KistraKistra Registered User
    edited February 2010
    Does the 17 year old that hired people to beat her deserve to be in jail?

    It is a horrible situation to me, but my first response is "she needs help" not she should spend the rest of her life in jail. Obviously the utah lawmakers disagree, but it seems like we can all agree they are silly gooses. What do you guys think is jail or some sort of counseling more appropriate?

    Animal Crossing: City Folk Lissa in Filmore 3179-9580-0076
  • ThaumaturgistThaumaturgist Registered User
    edited February 2010
    Decomposey wrote: »
    So if we nuked Utah... exactly how much would we lose, and would they be acceptable losses?

    Wait for me to leave first.
    Tach wrote: »
    I'd be for nuking the whole state, but they've got some pretty scenery here and there.

    So let's just hit SLC.

    This is where all we liberals live!

    In all honesty though, I don't forsee this law having any legs when it hits the courts. The representative responsible for this bill has a history of pushing through message bills fully aware that they'll get repealed at some point.

    Edit: I also mentioned this bill in the state and local politics thread.

    XBL: Abiff PSN: Thaumaturgist
    http://www.suboptimist.com
  • Edith_Bagot-DixEdith_Bagot-Dix Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Kistra wrote: »
    Does the 17 year old that hired people to beat her deserve to be in jail?

    It is a horrible situation to me, but my first response is "she needs help" not she should spend the rest of her life in jail. Obviously the utah lawmakers disagree, but it seems like we can all agree they are silly gooses. What do you guys think is jail or some sort of counseling more appropriate?

    Putting her in prison is stupid. Since she has proven to be fertile, they should find a way she can repay her debt to society. Maybe she could bear children for an infertile couple? A sort of handmaid for them, if you will.

    steam_sig.png

    Also on PSN: twobadcats
  • Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User
    edited February 2010
    Decomposey wrote: »
    Tach wrote: »
    I'd be for nuking the whole state, but they've got some pretty scenery here and there.

    So let's just hit SLC.
    Too many Mormons would survive if we just hit the city. How about we compromise and use some sort of poison in the drinking water or large scale deployment of poisonus gas? The scenery would survive that.
    Poison the water.

    Put the antidote in the booze.
    Even better: use their magic underwear as the delivery vehicle.

  • ThaumaturgistThaumaturgist Registered User
    edited February 2010
    Andrew_Jay wrote: »
    Decomposey wrote: »
    Tach wrote: »
    I'd be for nuking the whole state, but they've got some pretty scenery here and there.

    So let's just hit SLC.
    Too many Mormons would survive if we just hit the city. How about we compromise and use some sort of poison in the drinking water or large scale deployment of poisonus gas? The scenery would survive that.
    Poison the water.

    Put the antidote in the booze.
    Even better: use their magic underwear as the delivery vehicle.
    Havelock wrote: »
    Fucking LDS church is perpetually balls-deep in politics.
    Better keep them women barefoot and uneducated.

    Pretty much. They had their fingers (and wallets) deep in the fail-pie that was Prop. 8 over here in California. I think there was investigation into their donations to the Pro-8 campaign, but I don't know what, if anything, came of it.

    But this stuff here is pure silly goosery.

    Before we go overboard on some of the genocidal talk, I'd just like to mention that my family (not me) is Mormon. My sister is an active Mormon, and she was actively against Proposition 8

    This one, I think.

    XBL: Abiff PSN: Thaumaturgist
    http://www.suboptimist.com
  • CoinageCoinage Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    This law seems to be ill-conceived, but I don't see the problem with women having some responsibility towards the health of her fetus. For example, if you couldn't stop drinking and you gave your child FAS, you obviously bear some responsibility for that. Although a life sentence isn't really the solution for that, obviously.

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Coinage wrote: »
    This law seems to be ill-conceived, but I don't see the problem with women having some responsibility towards the health of her fetus. For example, if you couldn't stop drinking and you gave your child FAS, you obviously bear some responsibility for that. Although a life sentence isn't really the solution for that, obviously.
    This is exactly why providing actual prenatal support to people who can't afford it is very important. Helping with the actual birth is a lot less useful than providing assistance and education in the months leading up to it.

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Isn't this the same state that proposed doing away with the 12th grade as a cost cutting measure?

    Utah: They're just full of great ideas.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • Jademonkey79Jademonkey79 Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Isn't this the same state that proposed doing away with the 12th grade as a cost cutting measure?

    Utah: They're just full of great ideas.

    Also known as the place where everything closes at 10. Worst place in the world to be stuck on a business trip with no bars.

    "We’re surrounded. That simplifies our problem of getting to these people and killing them."
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Kistra wrote: »
    Does the 17 year old that hired people to beat her deserve to be in jail?

    It is a horrible situation to me, but my first response is "she needs help" not she should spend the rest of her life in jail. Obviously the utah lawmakers disagree, but it seems like we can all agree they are silly gooses. What do you guys think is jail or some sort of counseling more appropriate?

    Putting her in prison is stupid. Since she has proven to be fertile, they should find a way she can repay her debt to society. Maybe she could bear children for an infertile couple? A sort of handmaid for them, if you will.
    There's no such thing as an infertile marriage.

    If there were, the "natural order" opposing argument to Prop 8 wouldn't make any sense.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Henroid wrote: »

    (3) A person is not guilty of criminal homicide of an unborn child if the sole reason
    69
    for the death of the unborn child is that the person:
    70
    (a) refused to consent to:
    71
    (i) medical treatment; or
    72
    (ii) a cesarean section; or
    73
    (b) failed to follow medical advice.
    74--(4) A woman is not guilty of criminal homicide of her own unborn child if the death of
    75
    her unborn child:
    76
    (a) is caused by a criminally negligent act of the woman; and
    77
    (b) is not caused by an intentional, knowing, or reckless act of the woman.
    Wait, so this is saying you're not guilty if you ignore (or don't get) medical advice / treatment?

    I'm more concerned about the part where the exception for involuntary miscarriage only applies if they're caused by a criminally negligent act. Is there another clause that we're missing, or did a stray 'and' just criminalize every single involuntary miscarriage?

    Edit: Never mind, that's handled earlier within the definition.

  • emnmnmeemnmnme Heard about this on conservative radio:Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Cows are sacred in India, fetuses are sacred in Utah.

    .... I don't know what this means.

    FrenchCat2.jpg
  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    emnmnme wrote: »
    Cows are sacred in India, fetuses are sacred in Utah.

    .... I don't know what this means.

    They're both delicious?

  • Edith_Bagot-DixEdith_Bagot-Dix Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    emnmnme wrote: »
    Cows are sacred in India, fetuses are sacred in Utah.

    .... I don't know what this means.

    Fetusburgers.

    steam_sig.png

    Also on PSN: twobadcats
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    They should introduce legislation to behead women who don't birth a son to their husbands.

    let's not be barbaric
    stoning it is

    sc.jpgsc.jpg
  • bowenbowen Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Wow, it's like.. it's like we've got our own little Australia. Baren wasteland with a whole bunch of crazy mcfuckers running the local government. The only thing now we need is animals that ooze poison.

  • TanolenTanolen Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Isn't this law mostly aimed at stopping back alley abortions, not at abortions in general.

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Tanolen wrote: »
    Isn't this law mostly aimed at stopping back alley abortions, not at abortions in general.
    How?

    I mean, that might have been the causative reasoning, which I find suspect, but I don't see how it would actually help. I mean think about this: in order to prevent back-alley abortions we will imprison women who are desperate enough to try.

    It's like punishing suicides with life in prison. The idea that it will be a preventative measure is insane, because the situation it attempts to prevent doesn't exist due to a lack of consequence.

  • KistraKistra Registered User
    edited February 2010
    Tanolen wrote: »
    Isn't this law mostly aimed at stopping back alley abortions, not at abortions in general.

    The law is most definitely aimed at women who lose a pregnancy while not directly under the care of a doctor intending to have an abortion.

    The vague wording is disturbing. By the letter of this law a woman could be charged with criminal homicide for taking a drug that she needs to stay alive but has a known risk of causing a miscarriage. Think immunosuppressants for women who have had organ transplants, think some anti-psychotics, think chemo.

    1) it was a knowing action
    2) it wasn't criminal negligence
    3) it wasn't failure to follow medical advice

    It also creates miscarriage as a crime unless it falls under the exceptions. And while the exceptions should cover most instances, it is deeply disturbing to me that the base state is that having a miscarriage is a crime unless demonstrated otherwise.

    Animal Crossing: City Folk Lissa in Filmore 3179-9580-0076
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    How much law enforcement time is going to be wasted trying to determine if a miscarriage was illegal or not?

    camo_sig2.png
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    bowen wrote: »
    Wow, it's like.. it's like we've got our own little Australia. Baren wasteland with a whole bunch of crazy mcfuckers running the local government. The only thing now we need is animals that ooze poison.


    Yeah, no. We're nothing like Utah, thanks.

    So, has anyone kicked off the usual "mail your used tampons to the local police so they can check if you're a criminal" campaign yet? Because those are always fun.

    tmsig.jpg
  • Saint MadnessSaint Madness Registered User
    edited February 2010
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    Coinage wrote: »
    This law seems to be ill-conceived, but I don't see the problem with women having some responsibility towards the health of her fetus. For example, if you couldn't stop drinking and you gave your child FAS, you obviously bear some responsibility for that. Although a life sentence isn't really the solution for that, obviously.

    Theoretically, this law could punish women for driving cars, since that has a much higher chance of harming a pregnancy than a glass of chablis (leaving aside the fact that there's still a lot of debate about the medical underpinnings of things like FAS).

    Obligation may exist (I don't believe it extends any further than the lengths you're expected to go to to care for a live child, and that's only if you plan on completing the pregnancy), but the law is not the place to define it.

    In fact, I think a lot of the "stupid laws" stories we get are directly rooted in people trying to use the legal system to regulate things that its just not built to cope with.

    tmsig.jpg
  • FCDFCD Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Kistra wrote: »
    Does the 17 year old that hired people to beat her deserve to be in jail?

    It is a horrible situation to me, but my first response is "she needs help" not she should spend the rest of her life in jail. Obviously the utah lawmakers disagree, but it seems like we can all agree they are silly gooses. What do you guys think is jail or some sort of counseling more appropriate?

    Putting her in prison is stupid. Since she has proven to be fertile, they should find a way she can repay her debt to society. Maybe she could bear children for an infertile couple? A sort of handmaid for them, if you will.

    Just wanted to give a thumbs up for this subtle bit here.

    "If anyone tried to steal your WAX LIPS, you would eat their eyeballs and deliver an angry lecture into their empty sockets." Hearts Boxcars, The Midnight Crew
  • HenroidHenroid Maintenance Mode Tyler, TX (where hope comes to die!)Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    1267131424416.jpg

    HAHAHAHAHA, did you make that?!

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit." - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog
  • HenroidHenroid Maintenance Mode Tyler, TX (where hope comes to die!)Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    So there's a story about two Canadian teachers performing a lap dance at a school prep rally, and in the article I read about it Utah was referenced:
    Since 1992, the Utah State Board of Education suspended 313 teacher licenses, and 208 of those were for sexual misconduct. In 2005, the state of Utah was ranked 16 in the US for teacher sex offenses, according to KSL.
    I wonder how many of those stuations were benign.

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit." - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog
  • emnmnmeemnmnme Heard about this on conservative radio:Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    If Utah women are angry over this proposed bill, their baby-making parts should go on strike. No pregnancies = no abortions or miscarriages. I suggest all Utah women carry around the largest corks or drain stoppers they can find to add some symbolism to the strike.

    FrenchCat2.jpg
  • RobmanRobman Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Man America, this is why you can't have nice things. Please ignore Alberta in your scathing replies kthx.

  • Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    Coinage wrote: »
    This law seems to be ill-conceived, but I don't see the problem with women having some responsibility towards the health of her fetus. For example, if you couldn't stop drinking and you gave your child FAS, you obviously bear some responsibility for that. Although a life sentence isn't really the solution for that, obviously.
    Theoretically, this law could punish women for driving cars, since that has a much higher chance of harming a pregnancy than a glass of chablis (leaving aside the fact that there's still a lot of debate about the medical underpinnings of things like FAS).

    Obligation may exist (I don't believe it extends any further than the lengths you're expected to go to to care for a live child, and that's only if you plan on completing the pregnancy), but the law is not the place to define it.

    In fact, I think a lot of the "stupid laws" stories we get are directly rooted in people trying to use the legal system to regulate things that its just not built to cope with.
    I know at least in Canada a woman can not be held responsible for any injury to the fetus. Not surprisingly, the case involved a car accident (the cause of 28% of fetal injuries). It is simply infeasible (not to mention unconscionable) to attempt to blame the mother for any injury to her fetus as that would completely control what she can are, where she worked, basically everything she did, 24/7, for 9 months.

    I wish I could recall the case where the court basically said that even if you assumed the fetus was a person, under no circumstances would the law compel someone to sustain the life of another person at the risk of their own health. You can't go to jail for not saving someone from drowning, so why should a woman go to jail for not 'saving' her fetus?

  • emnmnmeemnmnme Heard about this on conservative radio:Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Andrew_Jay wrote: »
    It is simply infeasible (not to mention unconscionable) to attempt to blame the mother for any injury to her fetus as that would completely control what she can are, where she worked, basically everything she did, 24/7, for 9 months.

    Making a law doesn't mean you have to monitor all pregnant women 24/7. If a woman intends to give birth to her baby, it should be illegal for a woman to endanger the fetus with alcohol, drugs, skydiving, etc. I've never heard of a woman intentionally trying to give her baby brain damage or somesuch so it must be too rare to be made into a law.

    If you saw a pregnant woman drinking a beer and a joint while enjoying a tan, I would hope you have the stones to slap the can and the butt out of her hands and ask her what the fuck is her problem.

    FrenchCat2.jpg
  • TrusTrus Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    So there's a story about two Canadian teachers performing a lap dance at a school prep rally, and in the article I read about it Utah was referenced:
    Since 1992, the Utah State Board of Education suspended 313 teacher licenses, and 208 of those were for sexual misconduct. In 2005, the state of Utah was ranked 16 in the US for teacher sex offenses, according to KSL.
    I wonder how many of those stuations were benign.

    I demand you link that article

    qFN53.png
Sign In or Register to comment.