Precious, and my house is very much in order. The Bill states: “TO DEFINE "PERSON" TO INCLUDE AN UNBORN CHILD AT ANY STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT AND TO ENSURE THAT AN UNBORN CHILD WHO IS A VICTIM OF HOMICIDE IS AFFORDED EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE HOMICIDE LAWS OF THE STATE” From the South Carolina Code of Laws: “SECTION 16-3-20. Punishment for murder; separate sentencing proceeding when death penalty sought. (A) A person who is convicted of or pleads guilty to murder must be punished by death” It doesn’t have to say the birth mother may be sentenced to death since they’re applying the same sentencing guidelines to an abortion.
When the death penalty is sought. Not automatic as implied. FWIW it’s a stupid law but the article and title are misleading as to the absolute nature.
Well that’s basically what State Rep. Rob Harris, a Spartanburg Republican who sponsored the measure, said. His words were: ”We have a problem with abortion, we don’t respect all life,” Harris said. “So, what my bill uniquely does is that it protects all life by defining life at conception. We have to ask ourselves as a culture, whether we believe life begins at conception or not. The ramifications of that are the same for anybody else who would take another life.” So what exactly do you think that means if not being eligible for the death penalty?
You left an important part out. SECTION 16-3-20. Punishment for murder; separate sentencing proceeding when death penalty sought. (A) A person who is convicted of or pleads guilty to murder must be punished by death, or by a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment for thirty years to life. If the State seeks the death penalty and a statutory aggravating circumstance is found beyond a reasonable doubt pursuant to subsections (B) and (C), and a recommendation of death is not made, the trial judge must impose a sentence of life imprisonment.
So is saying that a state has the death penalty for murder also be inaccurate? Only a small percentage of murderers are killed in every state.
I read the book at UF I think. I didn’t think it was predicting the future then. Now I am not so sure.
The point was being made that the death penalty was not literally in the bill, so I was attempting to show that it referred to the sentencing guidelines which included the death penalty.
The SC house is not some bell weather of the Pub party. Not making any excuses, which is why I led with its stupid. Extremists of either side aren’t going to move the needle either way but I see the play book is equate all Pubs with these nut jobs. Thankfully no Pub I know (even the full-bore No Abortion for any reason Pubs) is on board with such a thing.
Well IMO it means he and the others are nuts but to the point of the title of the RS article I think it’s still inaccurate.
The hyperboyle is from the left here. As other not the headline is rather misleading, but that’s what it’s intent was.
They kinda are though. It’s fair to say as of yet it hasn’t passed. But it would hardly be surprising to see other legislatures across the Southeast and TX try and push similar measures. There’s already plenty of dumb and extreme laws on abortion, this is basically just SC saying “hold my beer, we’re going all the way”.
Sad thing is I get the impression most of the left here would love for that to happen, I see none of the right leaning poster cheering for it or saying it’s a good idea…
Im not sure how this is misleading. You think it’s misleading to say death penalty is proposed for abortions because it isn’t mandatory sentencing? Where did anyone claim it was mandatory? It says the death penalty is being proposed for abortion seeking women - treating it the same as homicide. They are putting death penalty on the table. So what, exactly, is misleading? The other natural question is if it isn’t mandatory, how do they decide who gets the death penalty and who doesn’t? Obviously we can hazard a guess; in practice it would only be poor minorities being put to death.
I view it as a bellweather. No, I don’t think 25% of national Republican Party politicians support this, but I’ll bet it is at least 10%, maybe more. This has been proposed a couple of times in Texas. Texans who get abortions could face death penalty if proposed bill passed | The Texas Tribune And the trend just gets crazier. The momentum is rightward, whether it be religious issues, cultural issues or crazy conspiracy theories. The minority of people in this space exert outsize influence because they are passionate in their craziness. Why is it Liz Cheney gets resoundingly booted, but Majorie Talor Green is now a major player in the house? Why is it that Elise Stephanik went from moderate to full MAGA in two years? Why is Desantis calling for stricter abortion bans, attacking drag queen shows? Why has he gone vaccine skeptic? Why was he campaigning for some of the crazy senate candidates last year, many of whom lost? All the momentum in the Republican is towards crazy. The absolute kiss of death is to be perceived as moderate or a “RINO”. Ultimately this can lead to authoritarianism. We are on that path. I hope something stops the movement, but we continue to March in that direction.
No you don't. What you want is what all mainstream Republicans want. You want us all to stop reading the fascist bills you are throwing out there to control everything and everyone that you hate, and then forming our own opinions. That would be the death of fascism - education and thought, so any reporting along those lines is offensive, and I am sure will eventually be banned in fascist states like Florida. As for the reality if such a bill were put into law you know damn well that it is a) meant to control women and b)would be gleefully applied to the first poor, non-white woman that these jackals could put to death.
