(05-22-2019 06:39 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-22-2019 03:23 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-20-2019 10:23 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(05-20-2019 09:50 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-20-2019 09:23 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I don't mean to be coming off as a strong supporter of the New York law or even giving it a vigorous defense. I found the Alabama law repulsive and asked you why you found the New York law equally repulsive. I am trying to figure out why they law was put in place and what their reasoning was in terms of taking out the criminal repercussions.

Their reasoning was simple. To make actions like Gosnell's legal. There can be no other logical rationale.

As stated multiple times, the rationale was likely to provide more available doctors who are willing to perform 3rd trimester abortions when needed.

No, that's false.

That may be the stated rationale, but that's not what this law does. This law exempts actions like Gosnell's from any punishment or liability of any form. That is not necessary to accomplish the stated rationale. I suppose it doesn't even technically make actions like Gosnell's legal. But exempting them from and penalty or liability pretty much accomplishes the same thing.

I’ve just read a few FAQs, the bills language, and some articles written by state legislators, and since the bill results in abortion care being moved from under the penal code, I can see why there is this concern about runaway, unethical doctors carrying out dangerous and heinous acts. But since abortion care was moved under the umbrella of health care procedures, it seems that this wouldn’t exempt providers from liability if the abortion procedure is done outside of the realm of appropriate healthcare procedures. I’d have to do more digging into the legal intricacies of trying to hold someone accountable for wrongdoing, but my guess would be there could still be criminal penalties if the medical procedure was not deemed to be in the interest of the woman’s health.

lad, if a someone stabbed a pregnant woman and cannot be tried for that harm to a fetus, do you *really* think there is some 'hidden provision' that allows a viable-pregnancy abortion to be charged? Knock yourself out looking for that provision. There is no reference at all in the NY codes to the newly created 2599A. Zero. It stands alone, and there is no portion of NY law that prescribes any penalty for that act. It just sits there in its own little space, like a smelly dirty kid that never washes his hair and has to eat by themself at lunch/playground.

Quote:Furthermore, NY law still defines a person as “a human being that has been born and is alive,” so in the Gosnell case, where he was killing born babies after failed abortion procedures, a doctor would still be committing murder in New York.

Correct, the ones where the pulled out alive and the spinal cords clipped outside would be considered murder under the current NY criminal code. The ones where he reached in and snipped the spinal cords in utero would not.

Rule to be taken: reach in and snip the spinal cord and wait ten minutes to be sure no breath is ever taken. Collect $200 and advance to St James Place. Let the child take on breath -- go directly to jail.

Amazing nuance there.

Quote:And in the case of someone murdering a fetus, or a woman and her unborn baby, NY either has separate charges for that (that are unrelated to abortion)

The bill that implemented 2599A removed all corresponding criminal charges that could be (and were at times) applied to a
act that resulted in a 'death' of a fetus aside from an allowed- abortion.

Quote:Reading the actual law and about it, it seems to make sense to me to move abortion under the umbrella of healthcare. Are their similar healthcare procedures that are covered in state penal codes that we can compare this to?

I could care less *where* in the state code it is applied. The fact that NY sweeps away the care for a viable fetus like garbage and allows a scot-free and absolutely liability-free destruction of that life is grotesque. And that, in my opinion, borders on derangement.