NM Republicans introducing legislation to criminalize rape victims who abort the baby

[Mr. Flopnuts]

This is ****ing insanity.

http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/13%2...se/HB0206.html

HOUSE BILL 206

51st legislature - STATE OF NEW MEXICO - first session, 2013

INTRODUCED BY

Cathrynn N. Brown











AN ACT

RELATING TO CRIMINAL LAW; SPECIFYING PROCURING OF AN ABORTION AS TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE IN CASES OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL PENETRATION OR INCEST.



BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO:

SECTION 1. Section 30-22-5 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 1963, Chapter 303, Section 22-5, as amended) is amended to read:

"30-22-5. TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE.--

A. Tampering with evidence consists of destroying, changing, hiding, placing or fabricating any physical evidence with intent to prevent the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of any person or to throw suspicion of the commission of a crime upon another.

B. 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.

[B.] C. Whoever commits tampering with evidence shall be punished as follows:

(1) if the highest crime for which tampering with evidence is committed is a capital or first degree felony or a second degree felony, the person committing tampering with evidence is guilty of a third degree felony;

(2) if the highest crime for which tampering with evidence is committed is a third degree felony or a fourth degree felony, the person committing tampering with evidence is guilty of a fourth degree felony;

(3) if the highest crime for which tampering with evidence is committed is a misdemeanor or a petty misdemeanor, the person committing tampering with evidence is guilty of a petty misdemeanor; and

(4) if the highest crime for which tampering with evidence is committed is indeterminate, the person committing tampering with evidence is guilty of a fourth degree felony."

SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.--The effective date of the provisions of this act is July 1, 2013.











I discovered this across my Facebook feed, and will be happy to throw in the article linked there that got me looking into this.

http://www.politicususa.com/republic...ncubators.html


Republicans Turn Victims of Rape and Incest into Felons and Forced Incubators

By: Sarah JonesJan. 24th, 2013more from Sarah Jones

In New Mexico yesterday, Republicans treated us to “Exhibit A” legislation, introduced as House Bill 206. It criminalizes the ending of a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest in some cases, declaring the fetus to be evidence in a criminal trial.

I’ve been pointing out for a while now that House Republicans were going out of their way to give rapists more access to victims (via GOP’s version of the Violence Against Women Act) and forcing a rape victim to carry her rapist’s baby to term, while also granting the rapist access to the child, inadvertently (?) incentivizing rape. Republicans have also been working on redefining rape and trying to pass laws so that victims would be renamed “accusers”. But now, they have finally found a way to just come out and say it.

If you get raped or molested, you are the criminal. If you don’t carry the fetus to term, you may face up to three years in prison.

New Mexico Republicans got one of their token females, Republican State Representative Cathrynn Brown, to introduce HB206 in the New Mexico Legislature — new legislation that would force a rape victim to carry the fetus to term in order to preserve evidence (since when do Republicans care about rape evidence?).

The bill reads, “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 or criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime.”

The only good news I can potentially see here is that Republicans are claiming to care about rape evidence, and so in a world in which their values were consistent, House Republicans would pass the new bipartisan Senate version of the Violence Against Women Act. The new verion of the VAWA seeks to address the epidemic of untested rape kits. If Republicans want evidence, a rape kit might be a bit easier than forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term.



But if they really wanted evidence in order to prosecute rape, then they wouldn’t need to force a woman to carry a rapist’s fetus to term — they could simply test the aborted fetus, or better yet, process the rape kit. While science and the female body are proving to be too complicated for your modern day GOP, this bill isn’t about evidence. This is about finally finding a way to criminalize victims of rape and incest, so as to protect the perpetrators of those crimes, as all patriarchal systems do (Penn State, the Catholic Church, the Stuebenville football culture, etc). Money and power versus the rape/incest victim.

How many women will be reporting a rape if they know they’ll be forced to carry the fetus to term? Even less than report it right now.

“In addition to being blatantly un-Constitutional, the bill turns victims of rape and incest into felons and forces them to become incubators of evidence for the state,” says Pat Davis of ProgressNow New Mexico, a progressive non-profit opposing the bill. “According to Republican philosophy, victims who are ‘legitimately raped’ will now have to carry the fetus to term in order to prove their case.”

Incubators of evidence and felons? It’s called punishment for reporting a rape.

While hopefully this bill has little chance of passing, it’s important in the sense that it reveals the intentions behind Republican policies relating to women. Taken in context with their refusal to pass the Violence Against Women Act and their many egregious comments about rape and rape victims, it appears as if the intention behind this bill is to protect rapists by inhibiting the reporting of rape.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

Even if that's true, the media elected a normal guy with no accomplishments. Which I think goes against his point.

Mostly. Kind of. In a way.

That would assume you think Obama is "a normal person".

[ClevelandBronco]

What's more normal than a lower middle class stoner that doesn't give **** all for college?

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

A meaningless, empty-headed response. I don't think that was his point, but he can answer that.

Not unlike most of your posts. Call us even then.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

What's more normal than a lower middle class stoner that doesn't give **** all for college?

Which is what the MSM wants us to elect so they can manipulate them like the current DA.

[notorious]

If you don't tow the media line or bow to the big money you will get destroyed.



A normal, honest person doesn't want to deal with that garbage.

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by notorious

If you don't tow the media line or bow to the big money you will get destroyed.



A normal, honest person doesn't want to deal with that garbage.

Oh, throw in "honest" and there really can't be any argument.

[notorious]

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

Oh, throw in "honest" and there really can't be any argument.

Touche.


Normal and honest used to go hand-and-hand.

[Psyko Tek]

Originally Posted by notorious

I do genuinely think that both parties are full of crooks.


I want a full reboot of the Senate and House. We need new blood that isn't completely full of shit or in someone's pocket.

the problem is how much it costs to run an election
they all sell out to get the position before they get even close to it

they are sucking cock for a job that will get them millions if the play it right
and hell most pol;s (both sides are running on grandpa's money)


and they are mostly lawyers
I trust whores more than lawyers

[listopencil]

By the way, I checked out Cathrynn N. Brown's website. She has a link to the text of the bill. The article quoted in the OP (apparently deliberately) left out chunks of text to misrepresent the nature of the bill. From the link:

http://cathrynnbrown.com/page.php?t=hb_206

RELATING TO CRIMINAL LAW; SPECIFYING THAT A PERSON WHO COMMITS
CRIMINAL SEXUAL PENETRATION OR INCEST AND WHO PROCURES AN
ABORTION OF A FETUS RESULTING FROM THE CRIME WITH THE INTENT TO
DESTROY EVIDENCE OF THE CRIME IS GUILTY OF TAMPERING WITH
EVIDENCE; PROHIBITING PROSECUTION OF THE MOTHER OF THE FETUS.

...and...

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.



So...looks like this is all fear mongering bullshit.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Meanwhile, crickets in this thread. I understand. I'd be ashamed too. Both parties have shithead dumbasses, but no since talking about yours and fixing the problems in house. Keep pointing your finger across the ****ing street about the roof collapsing over there. ****ing children.

Yeah, let's all get mad and talk for 70 pages about something that's not ever going to actually happen.

[CoMoChief]

Todd Akin approves this bill.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Originally Posted by listopencil

By the way, I checked out Cathrynn N. Brown's website. She has a link to the text of the bill. The article quoted in the OP (apparently deliberately) left out chunks of text to misrepresent the nature of the bill. From the link:

http://cathrynnbrown.com/page.php?t=hb_206

RELATING TO CRIMINAL LAW; SPECIFYING THAT A PERSON WHO COMMITS
CRIMINAL SEXUAL PENETRATION OR INCEST AND WHO PROCURES AN
ABORTION OF A FETUS RESULTING FROM THE CRIME WITH THE INTENT TO
DESTROY EVIDENCE OF THE CRIME IS GUILTY OF TAMPERING WITH
EVIDENCE; PROHIBITING PROSECUTION OF THE MOTHER OF THE FETUS.

...and...

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.



So...looks like this is all fear mongering bullshit.

Actually sir, I quoted everything provided by the states website, and linked said website. Soooo, not sure how I was fear mongering. But okay.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Actually sir, I quoted everything provided by the states website, and linked said website. Soooo, not sure how I was fear mongering. But okay.

So, are we still worried about the crickets then?

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Originally Posted by blaise

So, are we still worried about the crickets then?

Glad you're here now. My point remains the same.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Glad you're here now. My point remains the same.

Yes, that most people realized it was much ado about nothing.