Wednesday, March 11, 2009

/me facepalms

As expected, Planned Parenthood is throwing a hissy fit about North Dakota’s HB-1572. Seems they haven’t even read it, particularly Section 2, 3e-3k.

Here it is, for your convenience:

e. It is not yet possible to conclusively determine whether all chemical

contraception is abortifacient or not.

f. All abortions, whether surgically or chemically induced, terminate the life of a

whole, separate, unique, living human being. There is an existing relationship

between a pregnant woman and her preborn child during the entire period of


g. Because all preborn children are persons, no abortion performed with specific

intent is legal. A direct abortion is always performed with the specific intent to

bring death to a preborn child; it is a deprivation of the right to life and the right

to the equal protection of the law and is the ultimate manifestation of the

involuntary servitude of one human being to another.

h. A mother is not going to die by recognizing her child's right to life. When the

mother needs a life-saving medical operation, then an indirect abortion is not

legally or morally considered abortion because it is not performed with specific

intent to bring death to a preborn child. The death of the child may be

permitted as an indirect and unavoidable result of steps necessary to save the

mother's life. Physicians shall make, in all cases, every effort to preserve

both the life of the mother and the life of the preborn child. Physicians shall

provide equal care and equal consideration to the mother and child.

i. Medical treatment that has as its primary purpose to cure a disease of the

pregnant woman or of a twin preborn human being may not be considered

abortion. The pregnant woman must be given the choice of which treatment

to receive provided it is treatment intended to act upon or cure a disease.

This excludes the possibility of ever performing an abortion under the

pretense of a medical necessity since a preborn human being is not a


j. In the case of twins, all medical procedures designed to address specific

medical conditions that affect both twins are lawful provided as the physician's

actions are performed with the specific intent to save the life of the preborn

human being with highest chance of survival.

k. If a pregnant woman's health is in danger during a pregnancy, the physician

may not be held criminally responsible for unintentionally causing the death of

the preborn human being from legitimate treatment administered to the

pregnant woman. Chemotherapy, radiation treatment, and other medical

procedures that are not intended to cause the death of the preborn human

being but that are likely to do so, may not be prohibited if prescribed to cure

the pregnant woman. Under no circumstance may abortion be considered

legitimate treatment.

And looky here:

SECTION 2. Legislative findings regarding certain effects of establishing


1. With respect to preborn personhood, it is the intent of the legislative assembly to:

a. Immunize a woman from criminal prosecution for abortion.

Also, this part disturbs me:

12.1-27.2-04.1. Possession of certain materials prohibited. A person is guilty of a

class C felony if, knowing of its character and content, that person knowingly possesses any

motion picture, photograph, or other visual representation that includes sexual conduct by a

minor. A person is guilty of a class B felony if the minor is a born alive child as defined in

section 1 of this Act.

Are they really implying there’s fetus porn (or necrophiliac CP)‽ And if there is fetus porn, is it less bad than CP?

No comments: