First Voter Identification; Now Abortion Identification
If identification is needed for voting, then it also should be needed for obtaining an abortion—at least that’s the implication of HB 3994 by Representative Geanie Morrison (R) of Victoria.
Under Morrison’s bill, “a physician shall presume that a pregnant woman is a minor unless the woman presents a valid government record of identification showing that she has reached the age of majority.” The age of majority is defined as 18, but the bill doesn’t give a doctor the leeway to say a 30-year-old woman looks like a 30-year-old woman. The doctor has to presume the woman is an under-age minor.
The bill has been filed but not referred to a House committee. Usually I’m loath to write about filed bills because most go nowhere. In the 2013 session, just 732 of the 3,950 bills filed in the House passed. But Morrison’s legislation, as part of a 10-bill package by the “pro-life” movement, has the potential to become the sleeper bill that prompts an end of the session filibuster.
At a news conference this week, Morrison described her bill as “judicial bypass reform.” My definition: Reform, noun, make more difficult the process for a minor to receive a judicially authorized abortion without notifying or obtaining the consent of the minor’s parent or guardian. A pregnant minor will have to appear in court by person, not by videoconferencing or telephone conferencing. A judge currently only has to decide by the “preponderance” of evidence that an abortion is in the child’s best interest, but if the bill becomes law, the evidence will have to be “clear and convincing.” Judicial bypass often is used in cases of sexual abuse. A similar bill died in 2013.
Read more: http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/first-voter-identification-now-abortion-identification
= new reply since forum marked as read
She's a miserable woman, so why shouldn't other women be miserable. 
When are people going to learn about GOP AKA ISIS.
