MA: Simplify Abortion Laws Act (Vetoed)

[Boston Bread]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
Sponsor: New Canadaland

The purpose of this act is to put all abortion related regulations into one statute. I am not supporting this out of any ideological reason, but rather the will to make Mideast statutes easily understood. I do not believe this changes any laws currently in place, except for:

1) Clarifying whether abortion is banned after the second trimester (Abortion Statute) or after the 16th week (Right to Life Act). This act chooses the 16th week.
2) Affirming the legality of abortion in the case of rape/incest after the 16th week. The Mideast Right to Life Act does not allow it, while the current Abortion Statute explicitly permits it.
3) Adding in a protection to prevent mothers who undergo illicit abortions from being punished by current abortion statutes.

Otherwise, this bill does not change the status quo.
If the current immigration bill fails, I will introduce a bill reinstating the original protections the Right to Life Act gave to illegal immigrants.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Well... I support the consolidation of abortion statute into a single bill, but much of the substance of this proposal makes my stomach churn. I'll have to think about this.

[Boston Bread]

I would like to know what our pro-life Assembly members and Governor think of this effort to consolidate and clarify Mideast abortion laws.

[Hatman 🍁]

I oppose this. As terrible as abortion is, it should be legal throughout the duration of the pregnancy.

[Boston Bread]

I oppose this. As terrible as abortion is, it should be legal throughout the duration of the pregnancy.

I would totally repeal all of it if I could. But, I can't get it through a veto. Be reminded that this law changes next to nothing from the status quo; it merely clarifies contradictions in our current abortion laws. I support this as a matter of good governance than a pro-choice or pro-life matter.

[TJ in Oregon]

I'm not an Assemblyman so my opinion doesn't matter but I encourage the Assembly to pass this.

[Lumine]

Also not a member of the Assembly, but I share TJ's favorable opinion on this. It is rather surprising to see this degree of ambiguity, and this situation has to be corrected.

I do wonder if there is a need to amend Articles 8 and 10 of the Mideast Abortion Statute II, since they mention risk to the mother's health but not rape or incest (I'm not sure if that could be used as a loop hole), and Articles 5 and 6 may need some changes as well.

[Boston Bread]

Based on the text, in the case of rape or incest abortions are legal after the 16th week, but provisions 5, 6, 8, and 10 still apply which make it harder to get an abortion (well, as hard as it would have been before the 16th week). So I don't think it's a loophole.

I will call a vote on this soon if there are no objections.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I need to a review a couple parts of this language as it compares to the prior statutes.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The Mideast Right to Life Act is the most recent law, so it would supersede all others.
The final part needs revision to be integrated with the rest of the act.

to that end, an amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I object to the removal of rape/incest as an exception to the 16-week rule. No mother should be forced to bear a child conceived against her will.

I'm uneasy enough about this bill as it is, but there's no way I will support it if it tightens existing abortion regulations.

[Boston Bread]

I'm not going to say the amendment is hostile, since it only reintroduces part of the Mideast Right to Life Act. But I refuse to remove rape/incest exceptions.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I object to the removal of rape/incest as an exception to the 16-week rule. No mother should be forced to bear a child conceived against her will.

I'm uneasy enough about this bill as it is, but there's no way I will support it if it tightens existing abortion regulations.

Just to be clear, my amendment does not tighten existing abortion regulations.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I object to the removal of rape/incest as an exception to the 16-week rule. No mother should be forced to bear a child conceived against her will.

I'm uneasy enough about this bill as it is, but there's no way I will support it if it tightens existing abortion regulations.

Just to be clear, my amendment does not tighten existing abortion regulations.

It removes rape/incest as an exception to the 16-weeks rule, which technically makes it harder to get an abortion.

[Boston Bread]

Based on current laws, I could imagine someone suing for the right to abort in the rape/incest case despite the Right to Life Act being passed later because of the text of the Mideast Abortion Statute. It just hasn't happened because abortion past the 16th week is rare even if abortion was legal then, and in the specific case of rape/incest even rarer.

So I don't believe the current law is concrete in it's no rape/incest exception. So I think your amendment does tighten current abortion laws by removing the contradiction.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I object to the removal of rape/incest as an exception to the 16-week rule. No mother should be forced to bear a child conceived against her will.

I'm uneasy enough about this bill as it is, but there's no way I will support it if it tightens existing abortion regulations.

Just to be clear, my amendment does not tighten existing abortion regulations.

It removes rape/incest as an exception to the 16-weeks rule, which technically makes it harder to get an abortion.

but that is not the current law. Without my amendment, this bill would change current law in that area.

Normally, a law passed later overrides a previous law where there is a point of disagreement.  The Right to Life Act explicitly prohibits any abortion after 16 weeks that is not related to a threat to life. This law expands that to health - I have concern over how that is determined in practice but in principle it makes sense.  Changing the law to allow a late term abortion based on the circumstances of conception is not something I can support.

[Boston Bread]

I feel like the debate isn't convincing anyone, and I want to get this over with. I will call a vote on Shua's amendment. Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Nay

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Aye

btw, if this fails the references to "this initiative" near the end of the bill still need to be fixed in some way.

[Hatman 🍁]

Nay

[Boston Bread]

Nay

[Boston Bread]

The amendment fails, 1-3.

[Boston Bread]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
As its sponsor, I am amending the bill as follows. This doesn't change its content significantly.

[Boston Bread]

I am calling a final vote on this bill. Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Nay