U.S. Issues NM Republicans introducing legislation to criminalize rape victims who abort the baby - Page 6

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 01-24-2013, 02:32 PM

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.

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 01-25-2013, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

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

Keep calm. Carry on.

blaise · 01-25-2013, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Keep calm. Carry on.

No, you're right. Get all angry over something that someone posted on facebook, that turned out to be nothing.

Spaz.

listopencil · 01-25-2013, 02:41 PM

Quote:

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.

No, I didn't mean that you were fear mongering. I meant that the article itself was.

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 01-25-2013, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

No, you're right. Get all angry over something that someone posted on facebook, that turned out to be nothing.

Spaz.

Glad you could get that out of your system. Twit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by listopencil

No, I didn't mean that you were fear mongering. I meant that the article itself was.

Yeah, the article was complete horseshit written by the left's equivilent of Chiefshrink, and Shtsprayer. I only posted it because I laughed, and knew it would troll some folks here. Just look at blaise.

listopencil · 01-25-2013, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Yeah, the article was complete horseshit written by the left's equivilent of Chiefshrink, and Shtsprayer. I only posted it because I laughed, and knew it would troll some folks here. Just look at blaise.

I should point out that the article doesn't show the text of the bill that I quoted earlier, and that your thread title is incorrect.

blaise · 01-25-2013, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Glad you could get that out of your system. Twit.

Yeah, the article was complete horseshit written by the left's equivilent of Chiefshrink, and Shtsprayer. I only posted it because I laughed, and knew it would troll some folks here. Just look at blaise.

You're full of it. You jumped on your high horse for like 5 pages.

listopencil · 01-25-2013, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

You're full of it. You jumped on your high horse for like 5 pages.

I have my preferences set to show infinite posts per page.

blaise · 01-25-2013, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by listopencil

I have my preferences set to show infinite posts per page.

Well, he saddled up and rode for a little bit then.

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 01-25-2013, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

You're full of it. You jumped on your high horse for like 5 pages.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

Well, he saddled up and rode for a little bit then.

You poor baby. Listen, we're having a disagreement. Let's meet up at the White House and drink a beer over it.

JohnnyV13 · 01-25-2013, 07:55 PM

Hey, you guys don't know how to break down statutes.

Even in the op, its clear that the mother wouldn't get charged. The key is "with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime".

Thus the elements of this proposed criminal statute is:

Intent: with specific intent to destroy evidence of a crime.

Actus Reus:
1)Any individual who:
a) procures
b) facilitates
c) compells
d) coerces

2) someone to abort a fetus that
3) is the result of a) criminal penetration
b) rape

Penalty: Shall be guilty of tampering with evidence.

Clear that this is aimed at predators who molest their own children or pimps with minor prostitutes or men who coerce victims of statutory rate who then coerce the victim into abortions to hide their guilt.

This isn't about making rape victims carry their children to term or throwing them in jail.

Of course, I'm sure the democrats don't really want to read the statute correctly, nor do they want little things like accuracy get in the way of a good sound byte. Of course, the Republican drafters of this statute are pretty dumb, for not specifically excluding the pregnant mother in the text.

listopencil · 01-25-2013, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyV13

Of course, the Republican drafters of this statute are pretty dumb, for not specifically excluding the pregnant mother in the text.

They did.

JohnnyV13 · 01-25-2013, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by listopencil

They did.

Oh wow. I scrolled back and saw your post. They did.

Bump · 01-25-2013, 09:49 PM

**** religion.

listopencil · 01-25-2013, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyV13

Oh wow. I scrolled back and saw your post. They did.

The article was intentionally misleading.

listopencil · 01-25-2013, 09:57 PM

If i were a mod, I'd change the thread title to:

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

01-24-2013, 02:32 PM
Mr. Flopnuts Banned Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Down the rabbit hole Casino cash: $113743383	NM Republicans introducing legislation to criminalize rape victims who abort the baby 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.
Posts: 41,824

01-25-2013, 07:55 PM	#85
JohnnyV13 Veteran Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tucson AZ Casino cash: $54711	Hey, you guys don't know how to break down statutes. Even in the op, its clear that the mother wouldn't get charged. The key is "with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime". Thus the elements of this proposed criminal statute is: Intent: with specific intent to destroy evidence of a crime. Actus Reus: 1)Any individual who: a) procures b) facilitates c) compells d) coerces 2) someone to abort a fetus that 3) is the result of a) criminal penetration b) rape Penalty: Shall be guilty of tampering with evidence. Clear that this is aimed at predators who molest their own children or pimps with minor prostitutes or men who coerce victims of statutory rate who then coerce the victim into abortions to hide their guilt. This isn't about making rape victims carry their children to term or throwing them in jail. Of course, I'm sure the democrats don't really want to read the statute correctly, nor do they want little things like accuracy get in the way of a good sound byte. Of course, the Republican drafters of this statute are pretty dumb, for not specifically excluding the pregnant mother in the text. __________________ http://thevirilview.com/royals Where blogging is cheap therapy for 27 years of frustration Last edited by JohnnyV13; 01-25-2013 at 08:13 PM..
Posts: 2,634

01-25-2013, 09:49 PM	#88
Bump Legalize It Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Boston sucks :( Casino cash: $54191	**** religion. __________________
Posts: 11,252

01-25-2013, 09:57 PM	#90
listopencil sic semper tyrannis Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: :: In Partibus Infidelium Casino cash: $1083197	If i were a mod, I'd change the thread title to: NM Republicans introducing legislation to cannibalize rape victims who abort the baby __________________ I am my own God. We are here to unlearn the teachings of the church, state, and our educational system. We are here to drink beer. We are here to kill war. We are here to laugh at the odds and live our lives so well that Death will tremble to take us.
Posts: 21,362

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode