Religious Rightwing Bill: Ban Doctors From Helping Singles/Gays Conceive

[ruggerson]

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051005/NEWS02/510050438/1006/NEWS01

An interim legislative committee is considering a bill that would prohibit gays, lesbians and single people in Indiana from using medical science to assist them in having a child.
Sen. Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis, said the state does not regulate assisted reproduction but should have requirements similar to its adoption requirements.


Miller is chairwoman of the Health Finance Commission, a panel of lawmakers that will vote Oct. 20 on whether to recommend the legislation to the full General Assembly.
The bill defines assisted reproduction as causing pregnancy by means other than sexual intercourse, including intrauterine insemination, donation of an egg, donation of an embryo, in vitro fertilization and transfer of an embryo, and sperm injection.

[ruggerson]

1. My favorite part of this

is the "questionnaire" that they would legally MANDATE prospective parents to fill out. One of the questions is whether they have participated in any "faith based" activities. Presumably if they answer no, it will be a crime for the doctor to help them conceive.

This is what happens when we don't take the religious righwing seriously and fight them with every fiber of our being. They are after our very lives. And if you're married and heterosexual, don't think they won't eventually go after you too.

[moobu2]

2. Republicans are soooo crazy

[cloud_chaser1]

6. I'm not so sure this is just a republican move.

This appears more to be the work of religious fanatics who butt into everybody's business.
Damn, I just wish one was in front of me so I could punch him thru the nearest wall.

:spank:

[Hobarticus]

3. Here it comes...

The wave of right-wing looniness that'll make normal people scratch their heads, and the Kool-Aid drinkers froth with delight.

[Ilsa]

4. As a nurse, I don't make someone's marital status my business

unless there is a health reason to do so. What's to keep people from lying about these things and proceeding anyway, especially since insurance doesn't always cover it?

[Coastie for Truth]

5. Congress shall make no law ....

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I am a Constitutional originalist and strict constructionist of the Left--

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" means just that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Period.

Unconstitutional as hell.

A good read by a respected theologian and legal scholar on the Bill of Rights is Forrest Church's "The American Creed."