Indiana Lawmaker Will Close The Rape Loophole In Abortion Law, Because Of All The Women Pretending To Be Rape Survivors

The ministrations of lawmakers who seem to believe women are chattel roll on, today to the Indiana State legislature. There, lawmakers are considering HB 1210, which "would make most abortions illegal after 20 weeks." (Current law imposes restrictions at the 24 week mark.) One lawmaker, state Representative Gail Riecken (D) urged her colleagues to consider an amendment that would provide exceptions to the law for women who were rape or incest survivors. But the law's sponsor, Representative Eric Turner (R) was ready for that. Per Tanya Somander at Think Progress:

Turner then stepped to the podium and insisted that Riecken's amendment would create a "giant loophole" for women. That loophole? Women "could simply say they've been raped":

TURNER: With all due respect to Rep. Riecken, I understand what she's trying to do. But as you know that when the federal health care bill was going through Congress there was a lot of discussion whether this would allow for abortion coverage and of course we were all told it would not. And the bill, my house bill 1210, would prevent that for any insurance company to provide abortion coverage under federal health care bill. This [amendment] would open that window and I would ask you to oppose this amendment.

I just want you to think about this, in my view, giant loophole that could be created where someone who could -- now i want to be careful, I don't want to disparage in any way someone who has gone through the experience of a rape or incest -- but someone who is desirous of an abortion could simply say that they've been raped or there's incest.

Yeah, okay, not to "disparage" anyone, but we have to close this "fake rape loophole" I just dreamed up, even if it negatively impacts actual women who have actually been raped. Sorry, rape survivors! A few bad apples just straight up ruined it for everybody!

Naturally, the House voted down Riecken's amendment, which would have also provided an exception for "women for whom pregnancy [is life-threatening] or could cause serious and irreversible physical harm." So, you might as well stop pretending, woman who has "died" from "complications due to pre-eclampsia," because you're not fooling anybody, either.

RELATED:
VIDEO: Indiana GOP Rep Says Women Will Pretend To Be Raped To Get Free Abortions [Think Progress]

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Comments

[Hopelessly Liberal]

03:06 PM on 04/08/2011

I disagree. It’s NOT about spending, it’s about their social agenda.

[PhilliesWS08]

03:55 PM on 04/07/2011

Wow, don't these state legislatures have more constructive bills to pass or things to do??? What about doing something about these gas prices, jobs, unemployment and so forth???

[harmonikasavingsbonds]

11:59 AM on 04/07/2011

"It was 'God's Will' that a woman be raped".

Whose god was this?

[shehariah]

03:33 AM on 04/06/2011

Wow, what a guy. I'm so flummoxed by this kind of thinking I can't even think straight. The word "loophole" should not be used in the same sentence as "rape" or "incest".

[iflew]

05:34 PM on 04/05/2011

If only women could write laws about abortion,......

Who writes these laws now?

Childless old guys, grumpy old codgers, and young rapists want more women to be in misery over early childbearing. What a waste!

Todays' women have to delay childbearing so they can get a career started to support themselves on today's low wages, and even lower pensions available to their spouses.

[iflew]

05:27 PM on 04/05/2011

Probably has the support of two important groups of priests.

They are the OPP and the OCM.

Order of Pedaphile Priests, and Order of Child Molesters. They do not want a drop in the birth rate for anyone of any religion.

[airmikee99]

02:15 AM on 04/04/2011

So these women that will be forced to carry the baby to term, are they the same women that Repukelicans will accuse of having too many kids they can't afford to feed and to get off the food stamps after the birth happens?

[cwebster]

01:59 AM on 04/05/2011

Yup.

[shehariah]

03:34 AM on 04/06/2011

Yep.

[Genders]

09:25 PM on 04/03/2011

Yet you dupes keep voting for the GOP? Explain yourselves, please.

[MosesDidItBest]

09:23 PM on 04/03/2011

Does anyone believe that Eric Turner is dumb simply because of his wardrobe?

I think he was born that way.

[MarcU]

08:44 PM on 04/03/2011

Yet another "small government" Repubagger who wants to make sure that government is just small enough to monitor every uterus in the country.

[apiazza]

08:32 PM on 04/03/2011

Indiana flirting with Sharia law by trying to ban abortion.

[harmonikasavingsbonds]

12:02 PM on 04/07/2011

These nutbags are trying to guarantee that Sharia Law BECOME a reality. In fact, they are praying it does.

[Sister Bluebird]

08:31 PM on 04/03/2011

You didn't know? If a woman anywhere ever has sex, desires sex or enjoys sex, then she cannot be raped according these dingleberries. Only virgins can be raped, and even then only under certain circumstances.
Everything else is buyer's remorse.

[Channa]

07:35 PM on 04/03/2011

I once went through the process with a woman. (no, I was not the father of the fetus being aborted) Sitting in that waiting room and seeing the deep sadness every patient had, the personal devastation my friend was feeling, the profound seriousness everyone had about this...
I can tell you I will never believe a woman takes this lightly. I held espoused pro life convictions before this but seeing it all up close and personal, I realized that as a man I had no business judging women who seek an abortion.

Believe me, I am against abortion. I don't know anyone who is really "pro abortion". I don't know any woman who would want to "play the rape card". It is a tragic situation that leaves women wounded emotionally. The solution is not to ban abortions. The solution is less unwanted pregnancies. And let's have a heart for women who feel the need to make this difficult choice.

[Sister Bluebird]

08:33 PM on 04/03/2011

Thank you.

[LauraLoo]

08:46 PM on 04/04/2011

Really, thank you.

[SmileAndActNice]

07:19 PM on 04/03/2011

Don't argue about whether a fetus is a person or not. Because YOU are a person. And YOU aren't entitled to the flesh of another person under any circumstances. Not even if you will die without it. You can ask, and someone can donate, but you are never entitled. Your right to life doesn't change that. So even if fetuses were granted equal rights they would not be entitled to unwilling gestation.

So the question of "personhood" really doesn't matter as people aren't allowed to do what these folks demand fetus's be allowed to do.

They aren't really anti-choice as they love choice. Their choice. They love it so much they want to force everyone else to do it too. What they are is Fetal Supremacists. Pre-Lifers. They value potential life over actual life.

Potential life has never sinned, never done wrong, it is pure and innocent and good. Actual people always let you down.

[SmileAndActNice]

07:55 PM on 04/03/2011

And don't let the Pre-Lifers revise history.

They love to lie about what Roe-V-Wade was about. Some popular lies:

1) Roe V Wade was judicial activism with liberal judges legislating from the bench!

Nope. It was a 7-2 decision in a conservative majority court. It passed in a bipartisan fashion with the support of four liberal judges and three conservative judges.

2) The idea that a woman had a right to abort was completely new and was "created" by the court!

Nope. The law in Texas that Jane was fighting specifically stated that the mother could not be charged with self aborting or seeking help with an abortion. Jane had every right to abort as women have had since the founding of this country. What it said was that Medical Doctors were not allowed to perform abortions. From the roe text:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0410_0113_ZO.html
-------
When most criminal abortion laws were first enacted, the procedure was a hazardous one for the woman. This was particularly true prior to the development of antisepsis.
--
in many States, including Texas, by statute or judicial interpretation, the pregnant woman herself could not be prosecuted for self-abortion or for cooperating in an abortion performed upon her by another.
-------

They are taking an outdated ban on a medical procedure that is no longer dangerous and imagineering a completely alternate history.

[ThomasVeil]

08:31 PM on 04/03/2011

Very good way to think about this.
That they value potential life over actual life is true - and still puzzling me. They even prefer the unborn baby - because right now the same people are against health care, education and other help for children.

[cwebster]

02:02 AM on 04/05/2011

That's because they think they can be all noble and "protect" the foetus...as long as it doesn't cost them anything. Once it's a baby, they no longer care, because they might have to shell out...

[Channa]

12:08 PM on 04/05/2011

Another puzzling thing is that "pro lifers" almost all favor the death penalty.

[SaulBloodworth]

06:43 PM on 04/03/2011

How about a compromise: Abortion for rape victims is still possible if the woman is white, and the rapist is black? That should be consent within the GOP.

[harmonikasavingsbonds]

12:07 PM on 04/07/2011

Were that the case, abortion would be mandatory.