Bill banning abortion outright introduced in Ohio House

[DonViejo]

Source: Cleveland.com




Updated 7:49 AM; Posted Mar 19, 4:19 PM

By Jackie Borchardt, cleveland.com [e-mail]

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Two Republican Ohio lawmakers have introduced a bill that would outright ban abortion in Ohio, legislation that some abortion opponents hope will push a more conservative U.S. Supreme Court to review past decisions legalizing abortion.

House Bill 565 would ban all abortions at all stages of pregnancy, even in cases of rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger. The bill makes an "unborn human" a person under Ohio's criminal code regarding murder, manslaughter and homicide and allows wrongful death lawsuits.

Rep. Ron Hood, an Ashville Republican and bill sponsor, said it would be up to a prosecutor to decide what punishment to seek and who to charge. Unlike other abortion restrictions passed in recent years, the pregnant woman seeking an abortion could be charged with a crime.

"I believe life begins at conception so the goal of this bill is to first of all continue to get the word out that life does begin at conception and move the debate in that direction, and to protect unborn Ohioans from being aborted," Hood said.




Read more: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2018/03/bill_banning_abortion_introduc.html

[Ohiogal]

1. Sigh .......

Like these overzealous knuckleheads in the Ohio legislature have NOTHING else better to spend their time on. This will never pass because it's unconstitutional and they know it. Bunch of friggin' assholes.

[ck4829]

2. Ron Hood was the same guy who tried to outright ban gay adoption

So... we'll have all these babies born but gay people won't be able to adopt them, so enjoy aging out of the foster care system!

Sanctity of life, foos!

[ehrnst]

3. Preparing for a challenge to go all the way to the Trump picked SCOTUS

especially after a Kennedy retirement this Summer.

It's not constitutional, so it will go all the way to SCOTUS, if passed.

[0rganism]

61. i assume that's their goal, but not sure how it gets to the SCOTUS

seems like a clear contradiction of existing federal caselaw, so any appeal should be squashed at the circuit court level or before

[ehrnst]

65. I should have said that they will appeal it all the way to SCOTUS

I'm not sure of which lower court and judge it will go to first - hopefully not one installed by this adminstration.

[nwduke]

4. Of course!

Two religious zealot wingnut “males” dictating what happens to women health! Next they will bring back the Salom witch burnings! These type of people are just plain sick!

[ProudMNDemocrat]

5. A woman's body is more lethal than a GUN

.

So men must REGULATE a woman's body at all costs.

Resist people.

[iluvtennis]

6. Utterly ridiculous...force women who can't financially/emotionally support a child to have it and

then after child is born, they provide no social programs or healthcare so they child can be nurtured and thrive. Rethungs are sh#tholes.

[Cryptoad]

7. Anybody giving odds on this becoming Law??????

How many $Millions have been by spent defending these bills in court knowing full well from the get-go that they can not stand up to Legal muster. ?????? $millions spent in these red states that can not even balance their budgets and depend on Federal $$ to exist......... Red State Moochers!

[BigmanPigman]

14. Excellent point!

[Skittles]

52. what issues will these sanctimonious assholes run on?

maybe they know that with Russia and CA they they think no longer NEED their red meat issues to "win" elections

[JDC]

8. This seems to be all they do in the Ohio Legislature

WTF is going on there?

[Ohiogal]

27. They're a bunch of assholes, that's what.

[SpankMe]

9. Move west, liberals! Move west!

More evidence of a failing and deteriorating America. We must make California, Oregon and Washington so impenetrably blue that none of this crap happening elsewhere in the country can happen here. The US needs a safe haven for TRUE freedom and a commitment to people rather than some narrow-minded theocratic agenda.

Brace for a more turbulent America than was seen during the civil war. Unless young people get out and vote non-Republican, the American experiment will quickly go the way of the white Rhino.

I have never been so pessimistic in my life. I'm almost in tears when I think of what my high school and college age sons are facing in their future.

[CelticWinter]

10. and i wonder when

they will not allow a woman to have her tubes cut and tied.
Celtic

[niyad]

19. are you old enough to remember the rule of 120?

[CelticWinter]

23. i dont remember it no....nt

[niyad]

25. in order for a woman to be able to get her tubes tied, or whatever, her age, times the

number of children she had, had to exceed 120. if not, no procedure.

[CelticWinter]

28. holy crapola

good thing they didn't use that formula when I had to have a hysterectomy at 22 I would have been shit out of luck. That is crazy tho.
Celtic

[niyad]

31. it is just part of the patriarchal control of women crap that has been going on for several

millenia now.

[CelticWinter]

33. i remember

my girl friends had to have their husbands sign when they got their tubes tied, this was back in the early 80's.
Celtic

[niyad]

41. sadly, your memory is correct

[llmart]

63. My story.

1975 - Had my two children by then; one boy, one girl, exactly four years apart. I was done. Nothing, and I mean nothing would have changed my mind about wanting my tubes tied. I was happy and in a good place. My ob/gyn group were all Catholic and when I asked one of them to do the surgery they refused on religious grounds. I was like WTF? So, I said to him (and they were ALL "hims" back then), "Well, then can you give me the name of a doctor that will do the surgery and I'll go to him." He did give me a name, I went to a new ob/gyn and had it done. Of course, had to have my husband sign off on it. I knew that was going to happen, so I prepared my husband ahead of time by saying, "They are going to ask you to give your approval and you better damned well sign or else go see a doctor for your vasectomy." He had noooooo problem signing and he was Catholic.

[CelticWinter]

64. isnt it amazing that we woman

would have to have our husbands permission to get OUR tubes tied!!!!! My hysterectomy was medical but I went through 4 surgeries before they finally did the hyster, and the last 2 surgeries were only 6 weeks apart, I was one sick little girl back then. I remember the doc saying well we don't want to take everything in case u want another child, I had one, and that was ok with me and hubby I just didn't want to go through anymore surgeries. I know hubby wasn't impressed by all the surgery, it wasn't like today micro it was the old fashion lets cut stem to stern. The did anything to keep those kids coming, and to be truthful we don't need anymore ppl in the world right now its over populated as it is.
Celtic

[NickB79]

56. A 31 yr old woman would need 4 children to pass 120

Holy shit.

[niyad]

58. exacctly

[demigoddess]

11. will someone explain to me why these people think this is a good idea.

These republicans must be so stupid that they failed kindergarten. They must be like my science-ignorant sister in law who thinks that all babies are perfect and that pregnancies never go wrong. Life does begin at conception but this idiot probably allows guns to exist in the world!!

[niyad]

12. and the war on women continues to accelerate.

[niyad]

13. here is the misogynistic, woman-hating pos:

Representative Ron Hood
District 78
77 S. High St
12th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Email Representative Hood

[Judi Lynn]

29. Ohio women don't know how lucky they are that Ron Hood is taking control of their private lives.

Ron the Magnificent.





He has kept that spectacular brain in brand new condition, never used, to be able to apply undiluted attention to their most intimate, painful, uniquely personal situations.

He won't be distracted by universal women's belief this is absolutely none of his business, never will be.

[niyad]

32. what a piece of work!

[CrispyQ]

42. I was gonna say what a piece of shit.

2010
Forced Labor, Revisited: The Thirteenth
Amendment and Abortion
Andrew Koppelman


https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1031&context=facultyworkingpapers

snip...

I. The basic argument
The Thirteenth Amendment reads as follows:
1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,
shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their
jurisdiction.
2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by
appropriate legislation.

My claim is that the amendment is violated by laws that prohibit abortion. When
women are compelled to carry and bear children, they are subjected to "involuntary
servitude" in violation of the amendment. Abortion prohibitions violate the
Amendment's guarantee of personal liberty, because forced pregnancy and childbirth, by
compelling the woman to serve the fetus, creates "that control by which the personal
service of one man [sic] is disposed of or coerced for another's benefit which is the
essence of involuntary servitude."6

Such laws violate the amendment's guarantee of
equality, because forcing women to be mothers makes them into a servant caste, a group
which, by virtue of a status of birth, is held subject to a special duty to serve others and
not themselves.

This argument makes available two responses to the standard defense of such
prohibitions, the claim that the fetus is a person. The first is that even if this is so, its
right to the continued aid of the woman does not follow. As Judith Jarvis Thomson
observes, "having a right to life does not guarantee having either a right to be given the
use of or a right to be allowed continued use of another person's body -- even if one needs
it for life itself."7

Giving fetuses a legal right to the continued use of their mothers'
bodies would be precisely what the Thirteenth Amendment forbids. The second response
is that since abortion prohibitions infringe on the fundamental right to be free of
involuntary servitude, the burden is on the state to show that the violation of this right is
justified. Since the thesis that the fetus is, or should at least be considered, a person
seems impossible to prove (or to refute), this is a burden that the state cannot carry. If we
are not certain that the fetus is a person, then the mere possibility that it might be is not
enough to justify violating women's Thirteenth Amendment rights by forcing them to be
mothers.

I don't know why the pro-choice movement doesn't adopt this argument.

[niyad]

45. thank you for that important reminder

[Proud Liberal Dem]

47. I don't know for sure. It seems like a good argument

and it's not the first time anybody has ever mentioned it. If I had to guess, maybe the pro-choice movement is concerned that there could be a political backlash from minority groups (or the anti-choicers) due to possible accusations of "trivializing" past African-American slavery (for which this amendment was written and passed to address) and/or trying to compare abortion to African-American slavery. There are some minority groups that feel that LGBTs have co-opted their civil rights legacy and (wrongfully) assumed their mantle. Clearly, that would not be the intent of the pro-choice movement and forcing women into essentially becoming "forced incubators" for fetuses seems like a kind of slavery to me, but I could see where pushing this argument could potentially backfire on us.

[moriah]

53. I prefer the organ donor argument. We grant more bodily autonomy after death...

...than forced birthers want to give women.

Even after you've died and have no use for your organs, the government can't compel their use by another, even to save lives. Even if you commit suicide or otherwise do something to bring about the state of death, and even if the person who needs your heart or kidneys or liver did nothing to deserve death -- even if they're your own child -- if you've said you don't want your organs donated they must respect that wish.

I absolutely refuse to accept less bodily autonomy alive than I would have after death.

[n2doc]

37. Stereotypical beady-eyed mouth-breather n/t

[DownriverDem]

15. Elections have consequences

The repubs have been waiting since 1973 for this time to come. I hope purity folks are happy.

[Freethinker65]

16. Kasich on the tightrope

[Ohiogal]

30. Kasich hates women, he'd probably sign it

[dansolo]

40. Not if he wants to run for president in 2020

Nt

[Demsrule86]

57. He vetoed the heartbeat law...so let's hope.

[Cold War Spook]

17. Why would any woman vote Republican?

Have they been brainwashed or just plain stupid?

[niyad]

20. brainwashing from churches, certain media, etc.

[amcgrath]

18. Using Republican logic,

If a foetus is life, then abortion is murder, and the penalty for murder is death. - Because life is sacred.

[paleotn]

24. But according to them, some lives are more sacred than others....

...They seem to correlate that closely with skin color. Of course, in their pea brains, once you're born, all bets are off. The odds only get worse the darker one's skin.

Like I needed anything else to despise Rethuglicans.

[barbtries]

21. these are the same people

who shrug at mass shootings. what a waste of taxpayer time and money. gawd i hate republicans

[paleotn]

22. I predict....

this bill will be aborted before it ever reaches the Ohio house floor.

And as for Hood....his very existence refutes the "life beginning at conception" nonsense, since I have a hard time classifying him as a life form. That's assuming he was conceived and didn't just crawl out of a puddle of slime.

[ProfessorGAC]

59. A Cell Of E Coli Is Alive

Doesn't make it good thing to be around!

[workinclasszero]

26. Uh....

Roe V Wade anybody???

[niyad]

34. shhhh, do not try to confuse these misogynistic assholes with FACTS!

[workinclasszero]

36. Ikr?

SMH

[CelticWinter]

35. omg take us

back to the dark ages and back street abortions.
Celtic

[workinclasszero]

38. Ron's GOP utopia...

[CelticWinter]

39. ACKKKKK

omg not in my worse nitemare.
Celtic

[sinkingfeeling]

43. So, your belief is superior to a thousand different beliefs, but yours should

be the law of Ohio.

[Eliot Rosewater]

44. Preparing for the heist of the SC, illegal appointments by illegal president (s)

[greatlaurel]

46. Amber Daniels will be running against Hood in the General Election

Here is the link to her website:

http://www.amberdaniels.com/


Hood ran unopposed last time. It is a horribly gerrymandered district designed to keep Hood in office. If he had to run in a fair district, he would never win any office. Hood graduated from college in 1991 and ran for office in 1992. He lost that year, but ran in 1994 and has been in one office or another since then. His main accomplishments are attacking LGBTQIA people, promote guns, push harmful legislation against women's health, and attack unions.

It would be great if someone could do some deep research on this guy to figure out a way to make him unpalatable to the rural and suburban voters. He votes against everything that helps ordinary citizens, yet keeps getting re-elected.

[Luciferous]

48. We are looking to move out of MS, but with the sheer number

of dumbasses across the country, I'm starting to think our only options are the west coast or the northeast.

[Vinca]

50. That's about it. I always thought I'd like to retire to the south,

but it looks like I'll be staying put in New England and enduring snow and cold rather than gun crazed, Bible-thumping idiots.

[Luciferous]

51. There are some liberal areas in the south, but they are few and far between!

[Vinca]

49. So Republicans will have to travel to get their mistresses abortions. Inconvenient.

[IcyPeas]

54. not this shit again, it's just a money making ploy

[procon]

55. Where is the punishment for the men who get women pregnant in the first place?

If the state is imposing forced pregnancy on women, where is the companion legislation that fully funds her child care expenses for 18 years and compensates her for the resulting hardship on her life and liberty?

[haele]

60. So, what do they do about miscarriages? Those are natural abortions.

If a woman doesn't "take care of herself" enough during pregnancy and miscarries, does she get charged with a crime?

Does her employer get charged with a crime if she continues to work and has a miscarriage due to the stress of working?

Do her family members - including other children in "difficult ages" get charged because she's under stress and miscarries?

Should all females get genetically tested once they have their first menses to establish some sort of "fertility" baseline to determine whether or not they run the risk of miscarrying and could be allowed to become pregnant.

Should they then be tested every year to identify when they should first be bred and when they should stop attempting to breed...

Why don't we as a nation just start calling young women "heifers" until they start bearing children and women of childbearing age "brood females"?

Maybe we should start auctioning off our eligible fertile daughters once they hit 16 or 17...

Maybe we should also start castrating our excess young sons if we're not well off enough to buy them a proper heifer to breed our grandchildren.

I mean, at least we're not killing them, and it's far better for them than just kicking them out and giving them a bus ticket to the big city with no education or means to survive the way those fundy sects treat their excess young men.

Haele

[Ilsa]

62. I would forego early pregnancy healthcare if that was law.

I wouldn't want to have to prove I had a miscarriage.

And I'd be damned if I allowed some asshole LEO to lock me up over it.