Does Anyone Else Get the Irony in This?
1st of all, I am all for a woman doing everything she can to protect her unborn child. But think about it. If the woman doesn't want to protect the child, all she has to do is go to the nearest abortionist who will then use deadly force on that child to kill him or her. Yes, this is a step in the right direction. & hopefully it will get more people to realize the truth about abortion as well.
Missouri Becomes Second State to Allow Women to Use Force to Protect Unborn
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
Jefferson City, MO (LifeNews.com) -- Last week, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon signed House Bill 2081 into law -- making the Midwestern state the second in the nation to adopt a new kind of law. The measure ensures a pregnant woman can use deadly force to protect the life of her unborn child.
The new law is based on innovative Americans United for Life model legislation:the “Pregnant Woman’s Protection Act.”
In 2009, Oklahoma became the first state to enact what AUL attorney Denise Burke terms "important and much-needed legislation" -- passing it by unanimous votes in both the House and Senate.
Recognizing what Burke calls a "critical deficiency in state criminal laws," AUL developed the “Pregnant Woman’s Protection Act” that she says would "ensure that women who use force, including deadly force, to protect the lives of their unborn children from criminal attacks are not later themselves subjected to prosecution and incarceration."
"Importantly, the new law extends both legal recognition and legal protection to an unborn child. It also further isolates abortion as the only instance in which such legal recognition and legal protection are not afforded to an unborn child," Burke said of the new Missouri law.
The legislation allows the pregnant woman to use the deadly force when she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect her unborn child against death, serious injury or any forcible felony.
House Bill 2081 was sponsored by Rep. Jeanie Riddle, a Republican, in the House and handled in the Senate by Sen. Jack Goodman, also a Republican.
Missouri pro-life advocates are still waiting on Gov. Nixon’s decision regarding signing into law SB 793, Missouri’s revised informed consent law. Under the Missouri Constitution, the governor must make a decision within the next two weeks.
The new law is based on innovative Americans United for Life model legislation:the “Pregnant Woman’s Protection Act.”
In 2009, Oklahoma became the first state to enact what AUL attorney Denise Burke terms "important and much-needed legislation" -- passing it by unanimous votes in both the House and Senate.
Recognizing what Burke calls a "critical deficiency in state criminal laws," AUL developed the “Pregnant Woman’s Protection Act” that she says would "ensure that women who use force, including deadly force, to protect the lives of their unborn children from criminal attacks are not later themselves subjected to prosecution and incarceration."
"Importantly, the new law extends both legal recognition and legal protection to an unborn child. It also further isolates abortion as the only instance in which such legal recognition and legal protection are not afforded to an unborn child," Burke said of the new Missouri law.
The legislation allows the pregnant woman to use the deadly force when she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect her unborn child against death, serious injury or any forcible felony.
House Bill 2081 was sponsored by Rep. Jeanie Riddle, a Republican, in the House and handled in the Senate by Sen. Jack Goodman, also a Republican.
Missouri pro-life advocates are still waiting on Gov. Nixon’s decision regarding signing into law SB 793, Missouri’s revised informed consent law. Under the Missouri Constitution, the governor must make a decision within the next two weeks.
posted by Al @ 3:52 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home