News

Missouri creationist now targets abortion

Missouri creationist now targets abortion

In 2013, Republican Rick Brattin sponsored a bill to put intelligent design and “destiny” on the same footing as evolution in Missouri textbooks.

Now, according to this report, he’s pushing a bill that would prevent a woman having an abortion unless she has the consent of the man who got her pregnant.

The measure would force a woman who wants an abortion to obtain written permission from the father first – unless she was the victim of “legitimate rape.”

Brattin, a state representative from outside Kansas City, filed the bill earlier this month for next year’s legislative session. The proposed measure reads:

No abortion shall be performed or induced unless and until the father of the unborn child provides written, notarized consent to the abortion.

The bill contains exceptions for women who become pregnant as the result of rape or incest – but there are caveats. Said Brattin:

Just like any rape, you have to report it, and you have to prove it. So you couldn’t just go and say, ‘Oh yeah, I was raped’ and get an abortion. It has to be a legitimate rape.

Brattin adds that he is not using the term “legitimate rape” in the same way as former Rep Todd Akin (R-Mo.), who famously claimed that women couldn’t get pregnant from a “legitimate rape” because “the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down.”

I’m just saying if there was a legitimate rape, you’re going to make a police report, just as if you were robbed. That’s just common sense.

Brattin notes that his bill also contains an exception for cases in which continuing the pregnancy would endanger the life of the mother. Women whose partners have died can sign a sworn affidavit to that effect.

When asked if he would support an exception for women whose partners are abusive, Brattin said:

I haven’t really thought about that aspect of it.

But he added:

What does that have to do with the child’s life? Just because it was an abusive relationship, does that mean the child should die?

Brattin notes that women in these situations can obtain protective custody once the child is born.

Brattin has cosponsored many anti-abortion bills, including several measures restricting medication abortions that passed the Missouri Legislature in recent years. His latest bill, which would allow a man to veto a woman’s decision to get an abortion, is identical to a measure Brattin proposed in April that died in committee.

M’Evie Mead, speaking  for Missouri’s Planned Parenthood, said:

This bill is insulting and a danger to women in abusive relationships. That’s very much our concern. But when it comes to abortion, Missouri legislators are always trying to outdo each other.

20 responses to “Missouri creationist now targets abortion”

  1. L.Long says:

    Does xtian taliban or xtian isis ring any bells here???
    It is amazing how a bunch of deluded fools think IsLame is a pile of crap, but when the xtians try the same BS it is inspired by jesus, what load of delusional psychotic sheeple. And that is an insult to delusionals and sheep as they are smarter.

  2. Stephen Mynett says:

    Very good point L. Long, although you are liable to get a few pelters for saying things like this. I agree with you as I agreed with Dawkins when he used the term American Taliban to refer to parts of the bible-belt.

    It caused a rumpus on Dawkins site a while back and it was a little frightening to see the responses of some American atheists, most likely a minority. Unfortunately they have renounced one form of fundamentalism but still hang on to another, Patriotism. Nowhere in the world is perfect, nowhere near it but it is a worry when some people refuse to accept criticism of their own system or country. I would run out of time listing the shit done in the name of England, GB or whatever you want to call it but at least am willing to accept it and try to learn from the mistakes, many horrendous, that the people on this rock have made. Others should do the same rather than running up their patriotic flag.

  3. Daz says:

    Fuckin’ hypocrite. By his own (I hasten to add, not my) reasoning: it’s murder to kill a foetus. In which case, it’s still murder if the foetus is the result of rape. The foetus, after all, has committed no crime.

    In effect, by admitting that the woman’s right to bodily autonomy over-rules any rights the foetus might have, even if the foetus is considered to be a person, in the case of rape, he’s admitting that it does so in all cases. He just either hasn’t followed his own logic through to its conclusion, or he has and doesn’t like where it leads.

  4. Newspaniard says:

    One wonders at the motives of these crazies? Are they all vegans? Will they get upset knowing that I have 2 fried eggs for breakfast? Do they have little or nothing worthwhile else to do than try to ruin other peoples’ lives? Ho Hum

  5. Laura Roberts says:

    I really wish Planned Parenthood and other women’s rights organizations would go on the attack whenever this comes up. Of course it’s going to create hardship for women, but that’s not relevant to religious zealots.

    Instead we need to make them admit that they are asking the government to force one class of humans to provide part or all of their bodies for the benefit of another class. They seem to have no trouble accepting that it’s wrong to force parents to donate organs, or even blood, to help a child once it’s born. Hence their goal appears to be to accord special privileges to embryos.

    Someone needs to hammer them on that point.

  6. Trevor Blake says:

    Babies don’t stop existing after they are born. I am sure Mr. Brattin is aware of this and has included provisions accordingly. For example, in the case of a parent or parents who cannot afford to raise a child, Mr. Brattin will personally make sure each and every child is financially secure through college. In the case of one or more parents being non-citizens and thus not beholden to all USA law, Mr. Brattin will petition the United Nations to match Missouri law. Finally, artificial insemination can sometimes lead to non-viable pregnancies including death in the womb. In this case the father is unknown but not a rapist, therefore Mr. Brattin will himself deliver the stillborn after nine months just as God intended.

  7. AgentCormac says:

    Here’s another raving right-wing xtian bigot for you.

    According to this report Paul Rimmer, ex-BNP activist,former UKIP candidate and English Democrat from Toxteth in Liverpool, has used Twitter to post that ‘From the Bible, Sodomy defiles a Nation. Those who promote it will be punished & vomited out of the Land. Lev.18.23. In 2012 Liverpool FC sponsored the City’s Gay Pride Parade. Unless they repent they will be under a continual curse.’ Yeah, right.

    Rimmer, who describes himself as a committed Christian, is clearly as unhinged as both Rick Brat and Bob Hutton, and equates Liverpool FC’s failed attempt to win last year’s English Premier League with their support for gay people. (Although I have to confess that as a lifelong Everton supporter I was rather pleased that they didn’t actually win the Prem.)

  8. barriejohn says:

    Daz: Exactly. There’s an absolute moral principle in force here – killing a foetus is murder – but there can be exceptions. Once again: so stupid he doesn’t know he’s stupid.

  9. L.Long says:

    Dimwits like this Ahole DO NOT WANT to protect the fetus!!! They want the woman as a sex slave and house servant. And be physically punished thru pain. If this dimwit wants no abortions it is a simple thing to accomplish.
    But he does not suggest any solutions other than to punish women, that alone tells you what a psychotic Ahole he is.

  10. barriejohn says:

    I remember coming across this same sort of hypocrisy when I was a young Christian, and making myself very unpopular by asking how absolute principles could have convenient exceptions. However, “Humanist Jesus” (as opposed to “Lunatic Jesus”) got there before me when he (supposedly) told the Jews that it was only because of their “hardness of hearts” that God allowed Moses to write a Bill of Divorcement, which meant that two people who had “become one” through marriage could miraculously become separate individuals again. And now we have the future head of the English church married to a divorcee – no problem.

  11. Angela_K says:

    According to this christian misogynist “killing” some cells or a foetus is murder, so is Missouri’s death penalty not murder too?

  12. Paul Cook says:

    If abortion is such a crime against humanity why does god waste so much sperm and eggs before god ‘allows’ pregnancy.

    I don’t normally say such things but for a man with such white bright teeth – how is that possible when he has shit in his mouth.

  13. Broga says:

    @barriejohn: Years ago a distant relative of mine wanted to marry an already married RC woman. The problem was that she was RC as was her husband. She was an attractive woman and had been married for three years. The marriage was so incompatible that the husband also wanted out.

    After many discussions with her priest, consultation with bishop a number of approaches were made to the Vatican. The marriage was eventually annulled on the grounds of non consummation. The new husband converted to Roman Catholicism. The four children were brought up as Roman Catholics.

    That non consummation idea was as inventive as it was shameless. The religious in pursuit of their ends, so to speak, don’t do shame.

  14. AgentCormac says:

    @Broga

    Sounds like a good compromise for the rcc. We’ll call it non-consumated if you re-marry, have lots of children and make sure they toe the party line. Now, how that sits with an all-seeing, all-knowing god is anybody’s guess. Maybe he just turns a blind eye too if it means more followers, more bums on pews and more money in the vatican bank. Does the expression ‘smoke and mirrors’ leap to mind? It certainly does for me!

  15. barriejohn says:

    “With God, all things are possible.”

  16. Vanity Unfair says:

    To Broga:
    I’m just wondering how much money changed hands (all legitimate expenses I’m certain) to facilitate this remarkable interpretation of Canon Law.

    ‘The measure would force a woman who wants an abortion to obtain written permission from the father first – unless she was the victim of “legitimate rape.”’
    “Legitimate rape”: I must add that to my list of oxymorons.

  17. Robster says:

    There’s not much to like about this god fantasy of theirs.

  18. Marky Mark says:

    “The measure would force a woman who wants an abortion to obtain written permission from the father first ”

    …I have something to say about this from a personal experience. I dated a girl for about a year who became pregnant and secretly went off an had an abortion with my child as well as hers…No discussion with me, nothing. She handed me the bill afterwards. I was shocked, we didn’t have to get married but I most certainly would have been in that child’s life.
    I understand that she would have had the final decision…but I should have been informed.

  19. Brummie says:

    Consensual sex, in all its forms, is wonderful. Procreation is a different matter. In the 21st century the two can be easily separated.
    We have a large armoury of knowledge and devices at our disposal these days to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Yet we are coy about their education, distribution and use to both sexes in the UK. For example; why aren’t there condom machines in every secondary school toilet, male and female, to cater for a most fertile and sexually charged section of our population?
    Controversial statement “Every child should be a wanted child”.

  20. Cali Ron says:

    Another problem with this stupid and unjust law: What if a girl gets pregnant by a man who won’t be involved or help raise the child, but his religious beliefs don’t allow abortion. She’s screwed because of his lack of responsibility and superstition.

    @Marky Mark-I do believe the father, if he’s willing to take responsibility should be involved in the decision, but ultimately it’s her body. Slippery slope, that one.