Political Crossfire Forums

[F'losrix]

The Health Finance Commission of Indiana, chaired by senator Patricia Miller, is evaluating proposed legislation to add language to existing law in order to regulate 'assisted reproduction'.

This site (disclaimor - possibly biased source) states the following:

'According to a draft of the recommended change in state law, every woman in Indiana seeking to become a mother through assisted reproduction therapy such as in vitro fertilization, sperm donation, and egg donation, must first file for a "petition for parentage" in their local county probate court.

Only women who are married will be considered for the "gestational certificate" that must be presented to any doctor who facilitates the pregnancy. Further, the "gestational certificate" will only be given to married couples that successfully complete the same screening process currently required by law of adoptive parents.

As the draft of the new law reads now, an intended parent "who knowingly or willingly participates in an artificial reproduction procedure" without court approval, "commits unauthorized reproduction, a Class B misdemeanor." The criminal charges will be the same for physicians who commit "unauthorized practice of artificial reproduction."'

The actual text of the amending language is at this link (it's about impossible to decode without a copy of the current law in hand for comparison.)

http://www.in.gov/legislative/interim/committee/prelim/HFCO04.pdf

If they start regulating who can become a parent through artificial means, one naturally wonders how long before they decide who's eligible to do it the 'old fashioned way'.

If this story is true, it represents an enormous invasion of privacy.

[ToonArmyIsComing]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: If they start regulating who can become a parent through artificial means, one naturally wonders how long before they decide who's eligible to do it the 'old fashioned way'.

If this story is true, it represents an enormous invasion of privacy.

Well, this is disturbing to say the least! :( Here is the rationale behind the law: if they prevent the gay people from becoming a parent through artificial means, then gays will be forced to do it the "old fashioned way", which might make them become straight!!! :shock:

[F'losrix]

ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Skeptical Mystic wrote: If they start regulating who can become a parent through artificial means, one naturally wonders how long before they decide who's eligible to do it the 'old fashioned way'.

If this story is true, it represents an enormous invasion of privacy.

Well, this is disturbing to say the least! :( Here is the rationale behind the law: if they prevent the gay people from becoming a parent through artificial means, then gays will be forced to do it the "old fashioned way", which might make them become straight!!! :shock:
While there's no mistaking that the policy is anti-gay, I actually find more disturbing the attempt to regulate reproduction, period. If they can make it a criminal offense for an unmarried person to be artificially inseminated, what's to stop them from also criminalizing pregnancies of unwed mothers who become pregnant through sexual intercourse? Let me deconstruct it:

The only way they can get away with this is by saying there is not right to reproductive freedom and no right to privacy. If neither of those things exist, then the government is perfectly free to regulate reproduction on a number lof levels. Why not require all parents to pass an IQ test at a certain level? Require them all to provide proof of their economic ability to raise a child. Remove children from homes with parents who have criminal convictions. Many states already have stringent requirements surrounding adoption - why not apply them to all parent/child relationships? Heck, this is far more important than marriage - why not pass a federal Defense of Children act that applies a standard that all parents must adhere to if they want to avoid prosecution for unauthorized pregnancies?

Why not convert the marriage license to a procreation license and adopt stricter regulations of who can or can't get married & produce children - wouldn't that be a more meaningful defense of marriage than just excluding gay people from the institution?

It all comes down to whether the State serves the people or vice versa. I think you can guess in which direction I think we're headed. I'm not saying any of the above will come to pass - that would be a 'slippery slope' argument. But it should make any thinking person wonder just what the government is really up to.

[Enoch]

Speaking as a resident of Indiana, I can't say that I am entirely surprised. This state is one of the more conservative in the nation, while still trying to maintain a front of political correctness. While this bill may not have been specifically written in order to prevent gay men and women from becoming parents, I have no doubt that they look at this effect as a welcome side effect.

9 more months until I move out of this backwoods state.

[Gryff1nd0r]

There's enough babies in the world. If you really want a kid you should adopt.

I just heard a crazy statistic... and this might not be exact, but: there are more people alive on planet Earth today than there have been in the history of the world since before the oldest-man-alive-today's time.

I don't know if that's true. A freind told me. But regardless, we have enough babies already.

[F'losrix]

Update: The legislation has been dropped. (Link to the story)

State Sen. Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis, issued a one-sentence statement late Wednesday about her decision to drop the proposal.

"The issue has become more complex than anticipated and will be withdrawn from consideration by the Health Finance Commission," she said.

Personally, I doubt that this means the issue is actually dead. Time willl tell.

[liberalman]

Ind. bill would ban gays, singles from assisted reproduction

October 6, 2005

Advertisement






INDIANAPOLIS -- An interim legislative committee is considering a bill that would prohibit gays, lesbians and single people in Indiana from using medical science to assist them in having a child.

Sen. Patricia Miller (R-Indianapolis) said state law does not have regulations on assisted reproduction and should have similar requirements to adoption in Indiana.

''If we're going to try to put Indiana on the map, I wouldn't go this route,'' said Betty Cockrum, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Indiana. ''It feels pretty chilling. It is governmental intrusion into a very private part of our lives.''

Miller acknowledged that the legislation would be ''enormously controversial.''

''Our statutes are nearly silent on all this. You can think of guidelines, but when you put it on paper it becomes different,'' she told the Journal Gazette of Fort Wayne for a story Tuesday.

Miller is chairwoman of the Health Finance Commission, a panel of lawmakers that will vote Oct. 20 on whether to recommend the legislation to the full General Assembly.

The bill defines assisted reproduction as causing pregnancy by means other than sexual intercourse, including intrauterine insemination, donation of an egg, donation of an embryo, in vitro fertilization and transfer of an embryo, and sperm injection.

It then requires ''intended parents'' to be married to each other and says an unmarried person may not be an intended parent.http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-child06.html


One has to love the party of anti-freedom...the GOP. This seems pretty representative of the moulahs that run the GOP. Oh sure they talk about freedom and limitied government but then you look at the record. Who wants the gvt to jump feet first into a woman's vagina? The GOP. Who wants to spy on and leglislate what consenting adults want to do in their bedrooms? The GOP. Who wants to bring gvt funding to religion? The GOP

Sorry kids but your mantra of states rights and freedom is pure bulls**t. If the GOP was pro-states rights they would stay out of decisions by statewide referendum on topics ranging from Death with Dignity laws to Medical Marijauna. But they cannot help themselves to this cadre' busybodies they should have the right to take AWAY any right that they deem in the "moral" good of the country...f***ing bastard commies!

Nope it seems the more red states we have the more we look like Red China...whats next GOP mandates on how many kids you can have?

[F'losrix]

Actually, there'a already another thread on this:

http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38931&highlight=

And the bill has already been killed (or at least placed in a state of suspended animation) for now:

http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/10/100605indiana.htm

[liberalman]

Oops go ahead and shut her down mods

[George W Bush]

belated rant:

Then ban marriage while they're at it!