Feminist Philosophers

News feminist philosophers can use

Move to legalise killing of abortion providers February 15, 2011

Filed under: human rights,reproductive rights,violence — Jender @ 6:38 pm

Really.

A law under consideration in South Dakota would expand the definition of “justifiable homicide” to include killings that are intended to prevent harm to a fetus—a move that could make it legal to kill doctors who perform abortions. The Republican-backed legislation, House Bill 1171, has passed out of committee on a nine-to-three party-line vote, and is expected to face a floor vote in the state’s GOP-dominated House of Representatives soon.

 

6 Responses to “Move to legalise killing of abortion providers”

  1. Matt Says:
    February 15, 2011 at 6:47 pm

    While probably still a bad law*, it seems it’s probably not quite as bad as it seems at first. See the “update” here:

    http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/02/open-season-abortion-docs

    *If nothing else it’s probably a bad law because it’s almost certainly duplicative- in the case described by the author of the law in the “update” linked above, self defense up to and including lethal force would almost certainly be allowed already in most states. Duplicative laws are not always bad- they can help clarify cases, for example- but they often lead to unintended stretching, or even more confusion than before, and it’s easy to imagine that happening here.

  2. jj Says:
    February 15, 2011 at 7:08 pm

    Jender, Matt’s link seems to show the bill would NOT justify killing abortionists.

  3. Michel X. Says:
    February 15, 2011 at 8:12 pm

    Given that the right to self-defense already exists, I’m not sure what this law is supposed to cover. I’d be more concerned about potential abuses or conflicts (such as attempts to use it to justify harm against doctors) than I am (at present, anyway) but any supposed loopholes it may be meant to close.

  4. profbigk Says:
    February 16, 2011 at 1:41 am

    I do not buy the ‘update’ at all. The sponsor of the bill can say whatever he likes, but why was the bill amended to include language that says “or to harm the unborn child of such person in a manner and to a degree likely to result in the death of the unborn child” — without ANY reference to whether the harm is legal or illegal? Why the parade of anti-choice lobbyists? It is the modus operandi of organized anti-choice groups to chip away at reproductive freedom with a bill here, an amendment there. This is an invitation to someone to test the law. Given the absolute absence of any abortion providers in the state, I can only hope that the one flown in once a week by PP is not murdered to see how the law holds up.

  5. GardenGoblin Says:
    February 16, 2011 at 3:39 am

    I think the intent of the law is to make abortion providers require the permission of all the woman’s relatives so that the abortion provider isn’t put at risk. A sneaky, underhanded way to deny a woman the right to choose for herself.

  6. Katydidknot Says:
    February 17, 2011 at 4:47 am

    Are there any abortion doctors in South Dakota?

    I saw a chart a couple years back that showed states with NO doctors willing to perform abortions. Seems like South Dakota might be one of them. Statically speaking, I mean… I mean, an abortion would cut South Dakota’s population by like a third, wouldn’t it?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 272 other followers