VA bill would prevent unmarried women from using insemination

[Charlie Brown]

http://www.sovo.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=4419

A bill in the Virginia state legislature would prevent unmarried women from using assisted reproductive technology, including lesbians who frequently use donor insemination to have children.

Robert Marshall, a Republican state lawmaker in Virginia, wants to stop doctors from helping unmarried women have babies. (AP file photo)

Del. Robert Marshall (R-Manassas), who has also sponsored measures to ban same-sex marriage and strictly limit abortions, pre-filed HB 187 on Jan. 2 for the 2006 state legislative session, which begins Jan. 11.

The measure would forbid medical professionals from providing to unmarried women “certain intervening medical technology” that “completely or partially replaces sexual intercourse as the means of conception.” The bill provides a list of medical procedures, including “artificial insemination by donor” and invitro fertilization.

[hlthe2b]

1. Methinks Robert Marshall

mst have a microscopic penis.... Anyone that insecure (and obviously desperate to control these "uppity liberated women..." :eyes:

[LisaL]

37. God knows, they are insane.

[ingac70]

2. What kind of NAZI crap is this?

Doubt it passes. He's messing with Doctors $$$$$$$ more than unmarried women. He's so hate filled, I doubt he'll realize it until some doctors stop donating to his campaign.

[Lindacooks]

3. Their need to control others is insane and psychopathic.

I think giving all repukes a big serving of Thorazine would be a step in the right direction. Why are they so pathologically obsessed by the behavior of others?

[saigon68]

21. PSYCHOPATHIC CHRISTIAN NUT-JOBS YIKES.

WHAT A BUNCH OF MENTALLY ILL HATEFUL DEVIANTS

[Plausible]

26. hahahahahaha I'd vote for that n/t

[area51]

50. What Lindacooks said.

Republinazis are insane and psychopathic.

[Lefty48197]

55. also...

While they're being so pathologically obsessed with controlling the behavior of others, they also walk around telling us how much faith they have in individuals taking responsibility for their own actions. They're control freaks. That's all there is to it. Untreated mental illness is a sad thing.

[charlyvi]

4. Indiana tried this too.

It was voted down big time. I think it will probably circle the bowl in Virginia as well.

[thinkingwoman]

13. yeah, public outcry

forced the thing to be withdrawn! Try it VA...get on the phones. Good luck.

[HereSince1628]

25. What's the deal on this? Did one of the idiots' think tanks write a model

legislation?

They aren't clever enough to do this on their own.

[Rainscents]

5. So, I'm guessing, it's ok for married women have this done, but not

unmarried women? Sounds like discrmination to me.

[charlyvi]

6. That's what Indiana said.

Plus, widows with sperm frozen from their deceased husbands were not too happy about it either.

[LisaL]

42. Of course it is discrimination.

Are they trying to prevent lesbians from reproducing, or just single women in general, I wonder.

[MountainLaurel]

52. A little of both, methinks

On one hand, the Repukes in VA can never get enough gay-hating accomplished: It's an obsession for them. On the other, this guy is located on the edge of the DC Metro area, where more than a few single women who have established careers use AI to have children lest they miss their opportunity before finding matrimonial bliss.

[CTyankee]

7. Same bs legis. was almost introduced in the Indiana lege

but I think it was withdrawn before it could be, there was such an outcry. Hope the VA lege gets the same earful and cans the crap.

I used to live in that state. What an embarrassment to the good folks who still do!

[Canuckistanian]

8. How do they intend to enforce this?

Are donors required to provide affidavits that their penis was actually in the vagina when said insemination took place?

[Orangepeel]

28. it wouldn't be that hard to enforce

The proposed law is a terrible idea for a lot of reasons, but it wouldn't be extraordinarily difficult to enforce.

The law could require doctors and clinics to ask to see a marriage license before performing a procedure. People could work around it by ignoring the law or forging papers, but it wouldn't be any harder to enforce then anything else that forces businesses to ask for documentation (like not hiring illegal workers or not selling beer to minors).

[Canuckistanian]

32. I didn't see anything about a marriage license

But it's totally predictable if they were to do that. And anyways, it's easy to go out of state and have the procedure done.

Some states might even profit from having quick'n'easy fertilization clinics.

[Orangepeel]

33. true

it is an expensive procedure anyway, so it won't be too much of an economic hardship who want to do it to go somewhere else (unlike, say, laws that restrict abortion).

[LisaL]

38. The fertility procedures take multiple tries, as far as I can

tell. To suggest that won't be too much of trouble for someone to keep going out of state doesn't make sense.

[Orangepeel]

48. I didn't say it wouldn't be trouble

and I don't at all mean to imply that fighting this bill isn't important. On principle, it is very important to fight.

But, the poster to whom I replied was arguing that it won't be effective in stopping unmarried women from obtaining the procedure. I agreed. A woman who is paying more than $10,000 (usually not covered by insurance) for a procedure will very likely pay $10,500 to go out of state to do it.

Therefore, even though this bill could limit access to the procedure for women within the state of VA, it is unlikely to actually stop the procedure (so it is intrusive and ineffective).

[LisaL]

83. No way the procedures cost that much.

After all, it's rather simple. You must be thinking about IVF.

[melody]

9. Why not burkas or chastity belts?

They're all trying to out-Jesus each other by restricting women's rights more and more, why don't they just go for the burka or the chastity belt or both?

[Colorado Blue]

10. Oh AAAARRRGGGHHHHHHHH.

I don't think this will fly but even so...

[pfitz59]

11. GOP distractor.......

"Look over here! Look over here! Puh-leeez...look over here!" Fires up the fundie/loony base for the 2006 election cycle. Think "gay marriage". Watch for more of the same.

[Vinnie From Indy]

12. There goes my Saturday night right out the window!

n/t

[baby_bear]

14. I think it's good that these people expose their extremist views

It's hard to believe that most thinking people would not be repulsed by this guy's lack of tolerance and his would-be governmental intrusion into people's private lives.

Maybe the Virginia ACLU will get a few new members based on this; and hopefully there will some good letters to the editor in local newspapers in the state.

b_b

[lynne]

15. More about Robert Marshall -

- you'll find his name near the bottom of the following article. As a Virginian, I find Marshall an embarrassment regardless of his political affiliation. Amazing that he would stand up for someone who neglectfully let their child die yet is unwilling to allow those that desperately want a child to have one.

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2002/072002/07212002/658818

"After Frances' death, some of the Kellys' fellow church members came to their defense, which I suppose is admirable given that Kevin Kelly's blunder was indefensible by any stretch of moral decency.

But it would seem that these church members view the sanctity of life in two ways: Choosing to terminate a fetus is a grievous sin, but leaving a toddler to die in a closed vehicle is an unfortunate oversight.

One of those co-members at All Saints Catholic Church is Del. Robert G. Marshall, the ardently pro-life Prince William County Republican. He thinks this situation could happen to anyone in a moment of distraction. Seven hours, however, is quite a long moment.

Such a blatant double standard is yet another dilemma facing a church already beset with scandal. Its inability to simply oust priests who sexually abuse children may reflect the desire to forgive, but it not only puts more children at risk, it also puts members to a test of faith that some won't stick around to take."

[MountainLaurel]

57. Why doesn't that surprise me?

If they Kellys had been an African-American family living down in Dale City, you can bet your bippy he'd be hollering about welfare mothers who need to keep their legs closed, the "culture of responsibility," and the need for capital punishment in such cases.

But on the other hand, I can thank him for reminding me why I don't go further from the city than Fairfax. (Prince William County: The barrier between Northern Virginia and the "real" Virginia.

[MasonJar]

16. Hey, Virginia DUers, please get in touch with your reps. This

man needs to be carted off in strait jacket.

[lynne]

17. Don't hold your breath -

- I live in his area. He been in office for years. I seem to remember a few years he went unchallenged. He was challenged in the last election and his opponent might as well have pissed up a rope for all the good it did. I don't know how Marshall keeps getting re-elected as even my Republican friends can't stand him.

It just stuns me . . .

[rodeodance]

18. What century do these jerks live in?

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

19. Would this include recently widowed military wives in VA Beach too?

They would "technically" be unmarried if their husbands are killed in Iraq?

This guy sounds like a real asshole!!!!

[MagickMuffin]

20. Hey DoucheBag

keep your hands off my uterus!:grr:

[aquart]

22. Ah, leading to insemination weddings.

Stupid laws breed contempt for law and encourage corruption.

I can see a man making a pretty penny out of serial marriages.

[HuffleClaw]

23. merely an election year gambit

it won't pass committee and more importantly it would never survive a court challenge.

[VegasWolf]

24. What kind of sick f**cker would propose a bill like this?

:puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke:
:puke:

[LisaL]

44. A republican.

[Dirty Hippie]

27. Time to break out the ole' turkey baster

Couple of lesbian friends I know used this method.

[Lefty48197]

56. Sorry. The proposed bill bans turkey basters too.

In fact, sperm will be outlawed too, as will having sex out of wedlock.

[Auntie Bush]

29. It should be a women's right to have a child any time she wants by

any method she feels fit to engage.

[terrible beauty]

30. Direct Deposit

Mr Terrible Beauty is volunteering to make a direct deposit:evilgrin:

[bluestateguy]

31. GOVERNOR KAINE will veto it

The children in the legislature can play around with this however long they would like to, but the GOVERNOR, GOVERNOR KAINE, will veto it.

[Darth_Kitten]

34. We all know how women ruin children you see.

:eyes:

[ismnotwasm]

35. Doesn't this idiot have ANYTHING better to do?

Sick asshole. I'm sure Virginia has pressing problems that need legislative attention.
So this guy concentrates on a very sick need to control women. Ugh. Thinking about it makes me ill.
Hope his obscene ass gets voted out.

[LisaL]

36. They want to stop the women from reproducing?

I thought they wanted women to keep on reproducing? When and how can anyone stop these republicans? I am getting so freaking tired of all the crap they keep trowing at us

[MountainLaurel]

54. They want the RIGHT women to keep reproducing

White, middle- and upper-class Christian women. The rest, they'd forcibly sterilize if given an opportunity.

[Jade Fox]

58. They want to CONTROL women reproducing...

rather than let women make their own decisions about reproduction.

[LeftyMom]

39. Do they plan to ban turkey basters and one night stands, too?

Morans. :eyes:

[IndianaGreen]

40. They tried this same crap in Indiana and they were thwarted

Looks like all the Republicans are following the same script to turn this country into a Taliban version of Christian nation.

[mainer]

41. Oh, yea. FAR better that they go out and screw strangers.

Are they TRYING to encourage women to have sex?

[LisaL]

43. Maybe they just don't want women to have sex with other women?

You know, every lesbian should just find herself a good man.

[Demeter]

45. If Only It Were That Easy

Finding a good man, I mean; one who will be there rain or shine, helping and loving the whole family.
What fairy=tale world do these people live in, anyway?

[struggle4progress]

71. I'm guessin Bobby thinks this ups his odds fer gettin laid. eom

[skids]

46. W. T. F.

This is utterly insane.

VA women considering AI should find a willing liberal celebrity who this guy would utterly detest, and sign a petition saying that if AI is banned for them, they will bear that guy's children.

[PassingFair]

49. I've got it!

They should all have Michael Moore's love children!

[AgadorSparticus]

47. damn! this is so out there that it sounds like a story from the Onion.

only....it's not. Someone REALLY IS this crazy. :wow::wow::wow:

[MountainLaurel]

51. Not this shit again.

Last year it was the baggy pants legislation and the proposed law to require women to report miscarriages to the police. If I were still a VA resident, I would be going apeshit over the waste of the legislature's time with unconstitutional crap like this.

But this will never get anywhere: Reproductive technology does HUGE business in the DC area, and one of the pioneering firms in IVF research is down near Norfolk. Those physicians raking in the dough will not allow this legislation to make it out of committee.

[Lefty48197]

53. That's our Christian theocracy for you

So much for Christianity NOT being established as the "preferred" religion in America.

[noamnety]

59. His email address

[e-mail]

I sent this:

Subject: HB 187 is perhaps the stupidest proposal I've ever read

Text: As I understand it, you've proposed legislation that prevents single women who want to raise a child from conceiving the baby with the aid of medicine. Why on earth would you propose something that has the end result of encouraging single women to have unprotected sex with strangers? A woman determined to have a baby can currently do it now with the informed consent of a sperm donor, but with your legislation, they would have to either talk a single man into knowingly having sex to try to get her pregnant, or trick him into it, by assuring him she's using birth control.

If I were a man in Virginia, I'd be irate with any legislation that will motivate women to trick me into becoming a father.

[politicat]

60. So he's going to check what I did on my California vacation?

If Lizzie and Lana Lesbians want to go to California for a month and get inseminated, then come back to Virginia (which isn't exactly gay friendly to begin with), is he going to go picking through their vacation records 30 weeks later?

It also sounds like it would prevent a widow from carrying out her late husband's wishes to have their child after he died (This being somewhat not uncommon, especially when there's a terminal illness and there was time to bank the sperm beforehand.)

What a waste of legislative resources. Yet another example of Repukes too obsessed about sex to realize how silly this is.

[LisaL]

61. In this case, they seem to be obsessed over the lack of sex.

They can't even be consistent in what it is they are obsessing about.

[BattyDem]

62. Why is it HIS business if an unmarried woman wants to have a child?

AI is a MEDICAL procedure! Since when does having a marriage license determine whether or not you can SPEND YOUR OWN MONEY on a LEGAL medical procedure?!?!? What's next? Arresting unmarried women who get pregnant the old-fashioned way? :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr:

Why are these assholes so fucking obsessed with other people's sex lives and reproduction? :eyes:

[Autobot77]

63. Robert Marshall is a friggin asshat

Here's his page on the VA House of Delegates site:

http://dela.state.va.us/dela/MemBios.nsf/a7b082ef6ed01eac85256c0d00515644/f81df381468f96ee85256f7e00694fa5?OpenDocument

You can see all of the fucked up legislation hes sponsored like banning the morning after pill from being distributed on college campuses, requiring schools to put up signs that say "In God We Trust", and banning the sale of fetuses (WTF??) Also lists his e-mail and address also.

[LisaL]

64. Oh my. One would think this guy would personally

distribute morning after pill to all single women out there. After all, god forbid they have a baby.

[Olney Blue]

65. Only children born to married women will be allowed.

This is where this is heading..... women will lose control of their bodies-
they cannot have an abortion, and they cannot conceive at will.

Now go out there and be a good little Christian girl like the GOP wants you to be.

:grr:

[LisaL]

66. Republicans must be certifiably insane, especially this guy.

If a single woman doesn't want a child, they don't want her to have an abortion. If a single woman wants to have a child, she shouldn't be allowed too.

[autorank]

67. More Republican Bull Shit in Virginia--this is why Kaine had to win.

We're in the process of converting the legislature from Republican to Democratic. It will happen in a about 4 years. In the mean time, true No. VA politicians of any stripe (and this guy isn't one of them) will have trouble supporting nut case bills like this. The worst of the few remaining No. VA screw ball Republicans have been tossed out. This guy is on the border. He'll go soon.

I can't wait for the reproductive health physicians in VA to get a load of this. There are a lot of them, they are powerful, and they'll stomp on this like a big roach.

[Surya Gayatri]

68. "The Handmaiden's Tale"

comes one step closer to reality. Women perform their duty as breeding machines for the fascist war juggernaut. SG

[roguevalley]

69. this is the latest of a few nutty bills from Virginia. You have a lot of

woman and sex hating legislators in ole Virginny.

[greiner3]

70. I'm crazy;

But the world is quickly catching up with me!

[ckramer]

72. Why do women need insemination?

Wouldn't be earier to go to bar or let a friend or colleague do it? Save lots of time, pain, and humuliation that way.

[LisaL]

73. Well, you can do it whatever the hell way you want to do it.

Doesn't mean that women who want to use these services shouldn't be allowed to only because they are not married.
:eyes:

[ckramer]

81. Did I say

"women who want to use these services shouldn't be allowed"?

[LisaL]

85. If you can't figure out why anybody would want to use the

service, there is no much point in arguing with you, is there? If there was no need for the service, then the service wouldn't exist.
Have it ever occurred to you that if a woman picks up a man in a bar to have a baby with, baby isn't the only thing she might end up having? Have you ever heard of STDs? Friends and co-workers won't be to happy to provide single women with babies, considering they would end up paying child support until the kid is 21. If two lesbians want to have a baby, should they go out and cheat on each other if they don't want to? Married women use the service too, if their husband is sterile. Should married woman go to a bar and pick up strangers if her husband can't provide her with a baby?

[Solon]

74. Should a man go to a gay bar to get his prostrate checked?

It would save money on visiting the doctor after all.

[ckramer]

82. You are comparing apple with orange here

sperm insemination is not checking; it's inserting, although checking is included.

[Solon]

84. So are prostate exams.

[ckramer]

86. Of course.

But why do you go to a bar for a doctor? That doesn't make sense.

But you sure can go to a bar for a sex partner, that's what I meant.

[Solon]

87. You forget a few things though...

First, Artificial Insemination is SAFE, much safer than some guy at a bar. Second, the guys who donate to said clinics voluntarily give up parental rights through a contract with the clinic in question. Guys at bars, oddly enough, do have parental rights. Not to mention that this bill is targeted against lesbians in particular, hence my original post. To lesbians, having sex with a man is about equivalent to a straight man having sex with a man, disgust factor wise. So, in both cases, some type of "insertion" is required, but both can theoretically be replace by guys at bars. After all, they just have to check that it is enlarged, nothing more. There is an equivalency there, you have to admit.

[Ilsa]

75. How about fear that the man would discover he was being used and

try to take the child away? Fear of STD's? I'd rather pay the money and know that my life was in order, not in fear.

[LisaL]

80. Add to that any friend or co-worker that

decides to provide a single woman with a baby the natural way will end up paying child support. I doubt many would be trilled to do that.

[ckramer]

88. Well, have you tried?

Send an email around the company asking who would like to do that I bet many young poeple would be willing to help.

Of course you have to have the "chosen one" sign a legal document first (to shut out all his rights with regard to the future baby) before let him get on to the bed. Well, isn't that much easier than opening your leg letting a dozen of stragners to look at your private part in the hospital multiple times?

[LisaL]

89. I think you are about as nutty as republican who proposes this

bill. You and him must be twins separated at birth.

[ckramer]

92. I just wanted to help in any way.

But I really don't have problem with the service if these women really needed it.

[Ilsa]

94. As a nurse, I can tell you, most of us don't get much of anything

out of seeing private parts in the clinic or hospital. And patients tend to lose their modesty when they are dealing with professionals who are very clinical about this, and by the time a baby is born, women aren't too shy about what they have to do. That's part of the deal with giving birth, and even getting annual pap smears, etc. And if done well, you don't feel very self-conscious at all. We still prefer to have the same doctor, nurse, though, for continuity of care.

[Tight_rope]

76. See...now that's the same ignorance talking like Marshall...

Are you cut from the same cloth. In case you forgot. This is the United States of America, where people have choices. That's why many die to come here. It's because of the word "FREEDOM".

[LeftyMom]

79. Because the guy at the bar can pursue parental rights and even custody

a sperm donor can't.

Besides, why should a woman have to have unprotected sex with somebody she doesn't know or love (a dangerous prospect) just because some dumbass fundie doesn't want the uppity women breeding? What if she's a lesbian? Should she have to have sex she doesn't want with somebody who doesn't turn her on to become a mother if there's a better option?

[Ilsa]

77. I bet women can find men to play the part for them and pretend

to be a spouse for the procedure.

[LisaL]

78. Women shouldn't have to lie and pretend to get

the procedures done.

[Ilsa]

95. ITA. IT is a terrible position to place women in, just like the idea of

only women who are raped being able to get abortions. Women shouldn't have to lie about uch a violent crime in order to take control over their reproduction, but I fear that is the direction being we are being led in. And eventually all reported rapes will be thought of as ground work for getting rid of an unwanted pregnancy. What an injustice to real rape victims.

[rocktivity]

90. I said that Indiana's attempt to pass such a law was unconstitutional

because it established a religion and renders unequal protection under the law. How can it be legal for gays and singles to conceive via sexual intercourse but illegal for them conceive any other way?

:headbang:
rocknation

[LisaL]

91. Don't give them ideas. They might start trowing

unmarried women in prison for having children next.

[Triana]

93. What an insecure control freak! (n/t)