The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Our Infanticidal President

By on 2.28.12 @ 11:08AM

Kerry Picket at The Washington Times puts together all the evidence, in one place, proving that Barack Obama worked really hard in Illinois to support infanticide. Great reporting.

Here is part of Obama’s testimony at the time:

Unfortunately, this bill goes a little bit further so I just want to suggest, not that I think it’ll make too much difference with respect to how we vote, that this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny. Number one, whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that we would be provided to a - - a child, a nine-month-old - - child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it - - it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute.

Note: Obama was talking about children who the doctors had tried to abort, but who came out still alive and breathing, in the open air. Such children are not by any definition mere fetuses. They are children. Yet he would allow them to be killed, at least by deliberate neglect. What a monster.

View all comments (33) |

mjs_pa| 2.28.12 @ 11:25AM

Rick and Karen Santorum and their tender love and care for Bella.

vs.

barack obama and his support for infanticide.

Drek| 2.28.12 @ 1:10PM

You've been sucked into an issue that isn't an issue.

This isn't about which family takes the best pictures, nor is this in any way a contest about which man is the best husband.

We're selecting that man best able to articulate and subsequently enact the conservative agenda.

Of all the traits we should be looking for in a candidate, ------ Santorum's family life doesn't show up on the radar screen.

This is all THE OTHER MCCAIN nonsense, -------- as if Santorum's large family somehow confers upon the former Senator knowledge and skills that his lack of executive experience, and his former closeness to Trent Lott don't immediately convey.

Focus on who can box obama inside political cages that he can't escape from.

And that's not Santorum.

mjs_pa| 2.28.12 @ 3:25PM

If the contrast between Santorum and his repect/love for human life doesn't put obama in a cage he can't escape from, nothing will.

Before there is liberty, there is LIFE!

Pete| 2.28.12 @ 4:04PM

How can supporting infanticide not be an issue?

Drek| 2.28.12 @ 4:16PM

It's an issue beyond obama supporting partial birth abortion.

If you don't show most people actual video of obama being against the born alive provision, ------ they won't even believe it.

Don't you guys get that?

This thing is so sick, so bizarre, that instead of tarnishing obama by mentioning it, you besmirch yourself, because most people are simply too decent to even countenance it.

All they know of obama, besides him being incompetent, is all these wonderful glossy cover photo spreads of him and his wife. The idea of that guy that the whole world waxed rhapsodic over being for this grisly, gruesome procedure is just too much.

Partial birth abortion however has gained attention from the public.

Oldefarte| 2.28.12 @ 11:30AM

May I suggest a supplemental reading of 'Special Report Obama's Food Stamp Fetish Ross Kaminsky | 2.28.12 @ 6:10AM ' to this editorial perhaps????????

Tammy| 2.28.12 @ 11:46AM

First off. Thanks for bringing the subject again. After Newt's comment and MSM quick rebuttal (acting more as Obama's fortress than impartial arbiter by bringing the subject to public life for discussion) the MSM went again silent. Surprise!
Some liberal recently wrote about the "demonizing of Barack Obama"; to that I say: Anybody who opposes a law to give legal protection to a person survivor of abortion needs no demonizing. That's a monster in his own rights!

RJ| 2.28.12 @ 11:58AM

Newt had it right and it should be repeated frequently: None of the 4 GOP candidates are extremists; Obama and his followers are the extremists. Their record proves it on numerous issues.

Drek| 2.28.12 @ 1:07PM

Newt was right there.

Newt's been right elsewhere.

And we're about to saddle ourselves with Santorum, a guy who has never run anything in his entire life.

Nick| 2.28.12 @ 12:32PM

As an Illinois resident I apologize for the Obamanation.

Bob Grant| 2.28.12 @ 12:33PM

Nothing to see here folks. It's just one of about 200 relevant tidbits '08 voters should have been aware of but weren't, thanks to our beloved 4th estate.

Voters WERE/ARE aware, however, that anything bad that's ever occurred, or will occur, to this country will be Bushs' fault.

Tea Pot Dome Scandal? - Blame Bush
30's Depression? - Blame Bush
Cuban Missile Crisis? - Blame Bush
Civil War? - Bush
Watergate? - Bush
Middle East Clusterfarke a.k.a Arab Spring? - Bush
2012 Energy Crisis? - Bush
Upcoming Commercial Mortgage Crisis? - Bush
....

Fiscal| 2.28.12 @ 12:45PM

You may not like abortion, but technically Obama was correct and most objective reviews of this claim find that your interpretation is obtuse. The new law didn't distinguish between viable and nonviable, meaning that an infant of any age that survived an abortion should receive care. Besides there was a 1975 law on the books that mandated doctors to provide care for infants that were born. Politifact called this accusation "Pants-on-Fire" and you should be ashamed of yourself Quin for buying into the rhetoric without researching the issue.

If you guys really believe this is an issue, perhaps the intelligence of you social conservatives should be questioned. All you are doing by using these false accusations is insuring that Republicans look like fools and that Obama will get re-elected.

rightasrain| 2.28.12 @ 1:25PM

Even Barbara Boxer voted for the federal BAIPA. Obama voted against the Illinois version which contained the same language as the federal version. I'd say that when you are willing to let a baby who had the temerity to survive its abortion die without any treatment, monster is a polite word for what you are.

Fiscal| 2.28.12 @ 1:36PM

Again, there was already a law in Illinois that mandated doctors treat VIABLE babies born no matter whether they were from abortion or anything else. "Idiot" is a non-polite word for people who don't know the facts here.

Pete| 2.28.12 @ 4:07PM

You ignore Obamas vote. Keep trying though.

rightasrain| 2.28.12 @ 6:06PM

BAIPA was intended to clarify the existing law-- just ask the nurse who saw aborted babies left to die in closets.

W| 2.28.12 @ 1:38PM

Fiscal also believes the Aghanis were provoked into killing four Americans and wounding seven Americans because a Koran was burned. This is a variation of the Rev Wright sermon on the "chickens coming home to roost" that we Americans cause the terrorrists to kill and injure us. It is all our fault.
So it is not surprising that Fiscal agrees with Obama that it is ok to kill Americans who are unable to protect themselves.

Fiscal| 2.28.12 @ 3:26PM

Actually, W, I don't agree that we "provoked" those Afghan kooks. Just because I don't think we should still be in Afghanistan, doesn't mean I blame the U.S. for such a ridiculous reaction. What you are doing is simply demonization -- it seems to be a staple of social conservatives these days.

W| 2.28.12 @ 6:31PM

I agree we should get out of Afghan. Have said that repeatedly on this site.

Drek| 2.28.12 @ 1:05PM

Don't mention abortion, but always morph the issue to that procedure that outrages a commanding majority of the electorate, that is partial birth abortion.

ALWAYS mention that obama is so hopelessly captured by the planned parenthood, that he can't even allow himself to oppose the most gruesome of all such procedures.

THEN move on to say that even that wasn't radical enough for this most radical of politicians.

You have to set the issue up.

Fiscal| 2.28.12 @ 1:19PM

Except that Obama supports a ban on partial birth abortion if an exception for the health of the mother is present. The majority of the electorate would agree with that exception, you know.

Pete| 2.28.12 @ 4:09PM

You realize the health of the mother is a mere formality. The doctor can say she will suffer distress from having the baby.

Drek| 2.28.12 @ 4:19PM

EXACTLY!

Obama's support for a partial birth abortion ban is in the abstract, and he can say that knowing full well that his support for the ban will never have to be made good on.

It's posturing.

This guy was against the born alive provision, he voted against twice.

Not once, but twice.

RJ| 2.28.12 @ 2:04PM

For what is worth - A member of my immediate family is a physician who conducted research and treated pregnant patients with significant health risks. When partial-birth abortions made the news several years ago, he asked his OB-GYN colleagues if they had ever seen a case where it was medically needed. The answer was no.

Fiscal| 2.28.12 @ 3:32PM

Let's get the fact separated from the rhetoric. Intact D&E (the medical term) occurs in only 0.2% (that's 2 tenths of one percent) of the cases. Aside from what the rhetoric says, only a handful of these are made during the third trimester. Most of them are done when the fetus is not viable in the second trimester. Ask your doctor friend about the facts.

Fiscal| 2.28.12 @ 3:36PM

One more point... While I'm obviously not a very religious guy, I do have a real problem personally with abortion as the fetus gets older and becomes viable. However, I do not have a right to impose my beliefs on others to restrict their liberty. We've lost enough of our personal liberty already.

Silver Bullet| 2.28.12 @ 4:00PM

@Fiscal: Even though you aren't religious, maybe you should consider the issue from the perspective of "natural law." Please consider reading, for instance: J. Budziszewski's "What We Can't Not Know." The author is a professor of government at the University of Texas. I have read this book, and I recommend it to you as something that bases its argument for the rights of the fetus upon "natural law," in which one need not give consideration to religious views in order to understand the necessity of respecting the right of the unborn fetus as taking precedence over any perceived right of the mother.

I appeal to you to broaden your perspective a bit. Please consider!!

Fiscal| 2.28.12 @ 4:15PM

@Silver Bullet -- Do you really know what "Natural Law" is? Here's the wiki so you can learn:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

What you are talking about is CHRISTIAN NATURAL LAW. Many Christians confuse the two. Other Christians who know the difference leave out the religious word to make it more palatable.

I've studied a great deal of philosophy. I don't accept the argument that because we don't know something that void must be filled with a belief. For example, the primary argument for "intelligent design" is that there is too much order for it to be non-intelligent. That is not reason, that is belief. In philosophy, you don't prove something with a negative.

I thoroughly accept that you have a right to believe as you do, but you must also honor that I have a right to do the same. I don't think we should discriminate against those who hold religious beliefs but the reverse is true, I don't want them discriminating against me by using government to enforce their religion. We should leave moral decisions like this to the individuals involved. That is what true liberty is all about.

Now, I would ask you to "broaden" YOUR PERSPECTIVE to include my line of reasoning.

Pete| 2.28.12 @ 4:11PM

Fiscal do you also believe we should not impose our views on murder on other people? I sincerely doubt you have problems with abortion at all.

Fiscal| 2.28.12 @ 4:23PM

Pete, I've discussed your proposition with a number of people. We can go through it again, but what it ends up becoming is that I am obviously against someone taking another person's life -- not for religious reasons -- but because you need some rules for an orderly society to make sure that some level of "happiness" can be achieved. Then you are going to make the argument that abortion is "murder". I don't buy that assumption so I wouldn't buy your argument. Oversimplification of this philosophy is what religious people use for their substitution of reason, but as St. Thomas Acquinas properly utilized, you make an argument primarily by getting others to accept your assumptions. You can't make a reasoned support of an anti-abortion stance without imposing some level of religious assumption whether that be life begins at conception or that murder extends to the fetus because of personhood.

W| 2.28.12 @ 6:50PM

Fiscal,
You can believe whatever you want to believe but what you believe about abortion is plain wrong. You are doing mental gymnastics and gyrations to convince yourself that a fetus is not a person entitled to legal protection.

A fetus does have legal protection except for abortion. This as you know is completely illogical because a mother and her doctor can legally kill a fetus but if you kill a pregnant woman you will be charged with two homicides. The only reason for this distinction is a political one: the abortion forces have won. It is a matter of pure political power exercised throught the judiciary.

see the following:

Updated November 2010

State Laws || Resources

The debate over fetal rights is not new to the legislative arena. Every year pro-life and pro-choice advocates vie for the upper hand in this contentious issue. In recent years, states have expanded this debate to include the issue of fetuses killed by violent acts against pregnant women. In some states, legislation has increased the criminal penalties for crimes involving pregnant women. These laws have focused on the harm done to a pregnant woman and the subsequent loss of her pregnancy, but not on the rights of the fetus.

Other legislation has defined the fetus as a person under fetal homicide or "feticide" laws. Such legislation is hotly debated under names such as the Fetal Protection Act, the Preborn Victims of Violence Act and the Unborn Victim of Violence Act. Those supporting these acts, often pro-life advocates, say that both the lives of the pregnant woman and the fetus should be explicitly protected. They assert that fetal homicide laws justly criminalize these cases and provide an opportunity to protect unborn children and their mothers.

Those on the other side feel that laws to protect a fetus could become a "slippery slope" that could jeopardize a woman's right to choose an abortion. Pro-choice advocates say such laws grant a fetus legal status distinct from the pregnant woman - possibly creating an adversarial relationship between a woman and her baby. They are also concerned that the laws could be interpreted to apply to a woman's behavior during her pregnancy (such as smoking, drinking or using drugs). They prefer criminalizing an assault on a pregnant woman and recognizing her as the only victim.

Currently, at least 38 states have fetal homicide laws. The states include: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. At least 20 states have fetal homicide laws that apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy ("any state of gestation," "conception," "fertilization" or "post-fertilization"); these are indicated below with an asterisk (*).

First Letter of State A C D F G H I K L M N O P R S T U V W

State

Summary of Statutes and Case Laws

Alabama*

Ala. Code § 13A-6-1 (2006) defines "person," for the purpose of criminal homicide or assaults, to include an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability and specifies that nothing in the act shall make it a crime to perform or obtain an abortion that is otherwise legal.

Alaska

Alaska. Stat. § 11.41.150 et seq., § 11.81.250 , § 12.55.035, and § 12.55.125 (2005) relate to offenses against unborn children. The law provides that a defendant convicted of murder in the second degree or murder of an unborn child shall be sentenced to a definite term of imprisonment of at least 10 years but no more than 99 years. The law does not apply to acts that cause the death of an unborn child if those acts were committed during a legal abortion to which the pregnant woman consented or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf consented, or for which such consent is implied by law.

Arizona*

Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-1102, § 13-1103, § 13-1104 and § 13-1105 define negligent homicide, manslaughter and first and second degree murder. The law specifies that the offenses apply to an unborn child at any stage in its development.

Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann § 13-701, § 13-704, § 13-705 and § 13-751 define aggravated circumstances in the sentence of death or life imprisonment. The law specifies that the defendant shall not be released until the completion of 35 years if the murdered person was under 15 years of age or was an unborn child. The law states that for the purposes of punishment, an unborn child shall be treated like a minor under 12 years of age.

Arkansas

Ark. Stat. Ann. § 5-1-102(13) defines "person," as used in § 5-10-101 through § 5-10-105, to include an unborn child in utero at any stage of development. "Unborn child" is defined as a living fetus of 12 weeks or greater gestation. The law specifies that these provisions do not apply to an act that causes the death of an unborn child in utero if the act was committed during a legal abortion to which the woman consented, an act committed pursuant to a usual and customary standard of medical practice during testing or treatment, or an act committed in the course of medical research, experimental medicine or an act deemed necessary to save the life or preserve the health of the woman.

Ark. Stat. Ann. § 5-10-101 through § 5-10-105 define capital murder, murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree, manslaughter and negligent homicide.

California

Cal. Penal Code § 187 (a) defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being or a fetus with malice aforethought.

Colorado

Colo. Rev. Stat. §18-1.3-401 (13) specifies that a court shall sentence a defendant convicted of committing specified offenses against a pregnant woman, if the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the victim was pregnant, to a term of at least the midpoint, but not more than twice the maximum, of the presumptive range for the punishment of the offense.

Colo. Rev. Stat. §18-1.3-501 (6) establishes that a court shall sentence a defendant convicted of assault in the third degree to a term of imprisonment of at least six months, but not longer than the maximum sentence authorized for the offense, if the victim of the assault was a pregnant woman and the defendant knew or should have known that the victim was pregnant.

Colo. Rev. Stat. §18-1.3-1201 defines aggravating factors in the sentence of death or life imprisonment. The law defines the intentional killing of a pregnant woman with the knowledge that she was pregnant as an aggravating factor.

Connecticut

-

Delaware

-

District of Columbia

-

Florida

Fla. Stat. Ann. § 316.193 (2005) defines DUI manslaughter to include the death of an unborn quick child.

Fla. Stat. Ann. § 782.09 defines murder as the willful killing of an unborn quick child by any injury to the mother. The law also defines manslaughter.

Fla. Stat. Ann. § 782.071 defines vehicular homicide as the killing of a human being, or the killing of a viable fetus by any injury to the mother, caused by the operation of a motor vehicle by another in a reckless manner likely to cause the death of, or great bodily harm to, another.

Georgia*

Ga. Code Ann. § 16-5-80 defines feticide. A person commits the offense of feticide if he or she willfully kills an unborn child so far developed as to be ordinarily called "quick" by causing any injury to the mother of such child. The penalty for feticide is imprisonment for life.

Ga. Code Ann. § 40-6-393.1 defines vehicular feticide and provides for penalties.

Ga. Code Ann. § 52-7-12.3 defines the term "unborn child" to mean a member of the species Homo sapien at any stage of development who is carried in the womb. The law defines feticide by watercraft in the first and second degrees and provides for penalties.

Hawaii

-

Idaho*

Idaho Code § 18-4001, § 18-4006 and § 18-4016 (2002) declare that murder includes the unlawful killing of a human embryo or fetus under certain conditions. The law provides that manslaughter includes the unlawful killing of a human embryo or fetus without malice. The law defines "embryo" or "fetus" as any human in utero. These laws do not apply to conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law, or to any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her embryo or fetus.

Illinois*

Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 720 § 5/9-1.2, § 5/9-2.1 and § 5/9-3.2 define intentional homicide of an unborn child, voluntary manslaughter of an unborn child, involuntary manslaughter and reckless homicide of an unborn child, respectively. The laws define "unborn child" as any individual of the human species from fertilization until birth. The laws also specify that these provisions do not apply to acts which cause the death of an unborn child if those acts were committed during any abortion to which the pregnant woman has consented or to acts which were committed pursuant to usual and customary standards of medical practice during testing or treatment. (1986 Ill. Laws, P.A. 84-1414; 1987 Ill. Laws, P.A. 85-293; 2000 Ill. Laws, P.A. 91-404; 2010 Ill. Laws, P.A. 96-1000)

Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 720 § 5/12-3.1, § 5/12-3.2 (2004) and § 5/12-4.4 define battery and aggravated battery of an unborn child.

Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 730 § 5/3-6-3 directs the Department of Corrections to prescribe rules and regulations for early release on account of good conduct and specify that a prisoner serving a sentence for attempt to commit the intentional homicide of an unborn child shall receive no more than 4.5 days of good conduct credit for each month of his or her sentence.

2010 Ill. Laws, P.A. 1294 amended the Child Murderer and Violent Offender Against Youth Registration Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 730 § 154/1 et seq.) to include aggravated battery of an unborn child as a "violent offense against youth." (2010 SB 3305)

Indiana

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-41-1-25 defines serious bodily injury as bodily injury that causes the loss of a fetus.

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-42-1-3 defines voluntary manslaughter as a person who knowingly or intentionally kills a fetus that has attained viability while acting under sudden heat and provides penalties.

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-42-1-4 defines involuntary manslaughter and includes a person who kills a fetus that has attained viability in certain circumstances. Viability is defined by Ind. Code Ann. § 16-18-2-365 to mean the ability of a fetus to live outside the mother's womb.

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-42-1-6 specifies that a person who knowingly or intentionally terminates a human pregnancy with an intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus commits feticide; the law does not apply to an abortion. The law was amended in 2009 to change feticide from a Class C to a Class B felony. (2009 Ind. Acts, P.L. 40, SB 236)

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-42-2-1.5 defines aggravated battery as a person who knowingly or intentionally inflicts injury on a person that causes the loss of a fetus.

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-2-9(b)(16) allows the state to seek either a death sentence or a sentence of life imprisonment without parole for murder by alleging the victim of the murder was pregnant and the murder resulted in the intentional killing of a fetus that has attained viability.

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-2-16 (2009) allows the state to seek an additional fixed term of imprisonment if a person, while committing or attempting to commit murder, caused the termination of a pregnancy. Prosecution of the murder or attempted murder and the enhancement of the penalty for that crime does not require proof that the person committing or attempting to commit the murder had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim was pregnant or that the defendant intended to cause the termination of a pregnancy. The additional consecutive term of imprisonment may be between six and 20 years. (2009 Ind. Acts, P.L. 40, SB 236)

Iowa

Iowa Code §707.8 provides penalties for the nonconsensual termination or serious injury to a human pregnancy. Specifically, the law defines penalties for a person who terminates a human pregnancy without the consent of the pregnant person under specified circumstances. The law also defines serious injury to a human pregnancy and provides for penalties to a person who causes serious injury to a human pregnancy under specified circumstances.

Kansas*

Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-3452 "Alexa's Law" defines "unborn child" as a living individual organism of the species homo sapiens, in utero, at any stage of gestation from fertilization to birth. The law specifies that "person" and "human being" shall also mean an unborn child as used in Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-3401 through § 21-3405, § 21-3412, § 21-3414, § 21-3439 and § 21-3442 which define murder in the first and second degrees, voluntary and involuntary manslaughter, battery, aggravated battery, capital murder and involuntary manslaughter while driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. (2010 HB 2668)

Kentucky*

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 507A.010 et seq. (2004) define "unborn child" as a member of the species Homo sapiens in utero from conception onward, without regard to age, health or condition of dependency. The laws define fetal homicide in the first, second, third, and fourth degrees. These laws do not apply to acts performed during any abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman has been obtained or for which the consent is implied by law in a medical emergency. (2004 HB 108)

Louisiana*

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:32.5 defines feticide as the killing of an unborn child by the act, procurement, or culpable omission of a person other than the mother of the unborn child. The offense of feticide shall not include acts which cause the death of an unborn child if those acts were committed during any abortion to which the pregnant woman or her legal guardian has consented or which was performed in an emergency. Nor shall the offense of feticide include acts which are committed pursuant to usual and customary standards of medical practice during diagnostic testing or therapeutic treatment.

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:32.6 (2006) defines first degree feticide as the killing of an unborn child when the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm, and includes the killing of an unborn child when the offender is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of aggravated rape, forcible rape, aggravated arson, aggravated burglary, aggravated escape, armed robbery, first degree robbery, second degree robbery, cruelty to juveniles, second degree cruelty to juveniles, terrorism, or simple robbery, even though he has no intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm.

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:32.7 (1989) defines second degree feticide as the killing of an unborn child which would be first degree feticide, but the offense is committed in sudden passion or heat of blood immediately caused by provocation of the mother of the unborn child sufficient to deprive an average person of his self control and cool reflection; and is defined as feticide committed without any intent to cause death or great bodily harm.

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:2 (7), (11) defines "person" as a human being from the moment of fertilization and implantation and also includes a body of persons, whether incorporated or not. "Unborn child" means any individual of the human species from fertilization and implantation until birth.

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:32.8 (2006, 2008) defines third degree feticide as the killing of an unborn child by criminal negligence; and is defined as the killing of an unborn child caused proximately or caused directly by an offender engaged in the operation of, or in actual physical control of, any motor vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other means of conveyance whether or not the offender had the intent to cause death or great bodily harm whenever specified conditions occur and such conditions were a contributing factor to the killing. (2008 SB 382)

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 32.414(B)(1) was amended by 2010 La. Acts, P.A. 403 to allow the suspension of a driver's license for 24 months of any person who is convicted of committing third degree feticide as defined in § 14:32.8. (2010 HB 1231)

Maine

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 17-A § 208-C creates the Protect Unborn Children from Acts of Violence Act; defines the crimes of murder, felony murder, assault, aggravated assault and elevated aggravated assault against an unborn child. Punishment for these crimes is consistent with penalties for the same offenses committed against persons as defined in Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 17-A, Chapter 9. These crimes against unborn children do not apply to an abortion to which the pregnant woman has consented, nor do they apply to acts committed pursuant to usual and customary standards of medical practice. (2005 Me. Laws, Chap. 408, LD 262)

Maryland

Md. Criminal Law Code Ann. § 2-103 (2005) establishes that a prosecution may be instituted for murder or manslaughter of a viable fetus as defined in Md. Health-General Code Ann. § 20-209. A person prosecuted for murder or manslaughter must have intended to cause the death of the viable fetus; intended to cause serious physical injury to the viable fetus; or wantonly or recklessly disregarded the likelihood that the person’s actions would cause the death of or serious physical injury to the viable fetus. (2005 Md. Laws, Chap. 546)

Massachusetts #

Commonwealth vs. Lawrence, 536 N.E.2d 571 (Mass. 1973) affirms the conviction for murder of a woman and involuntary manslaughter of her 27-week-old fetus.

Commonwealth vs. Cass, 467 N.E.2d 1324 (Mass. 1984) rules that a viable fetus is within the ambit of the term "person" in the vehicular homicide statute. The case refers to Mass. Gen Law, ch. 90 § 24G, which defines vehicular homicide.

Michigan

Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 750.322 defines the willful killing of an unborn quick child by any injury to the mother of the child as manslaughter.

Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 750.323 declares that any person who administers medicines, drugs or substances to any woman pregnant with a quick child or uses an instrument or other means to destroy the child, unless the same shall have been necessary to preserve the life of the mother, is guilty of manslaughter.

Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 750.90a et seq. define penalties and punishments if any of the crimes defined by § 750.81 et seq. (including assault and battery; felonious assault; torture; and assault with intent to murder, do great bodily harm, maim, or rob and steal), are committed against a pregnant woman and were intended to cause or result in a miscarriage or stillbirth or death to the embryo or fetus, great bodily harm to the embryo or fetus, serious or aggravated physical injury to the embryo or fetus, or physical injury to the embryo or fetus.

Minnesota*

Minn. Stat. § 609.205 and § 609.266 et seq. define unborn child and provide penalties for an assault to a pregnant woman and subsequent harm to an unborn child. The law also defines an assault of an unborn child and provides penalties. The law defines murder of an unborn child in the first, second and third degrees and provides penalties.

Minn. Stat. §609.21 (2004) declares that a person is guilty of criminal vehicular operation if an unborn child is killed in the act. The law also states that as punishment, this person may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both. (SB 58)

Mississippi

Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-37 defines manslaughter to include the willful killing of an unborn quick child by an injury to the mother of such child. (SB 2869)

Miss. Code Ann. § 11.7.13 includes the death of a fetus in wrongful death statute as murder or manslaughter. This law excludes acts committed by the mother, a medical procedure performed by a medical professional or lawfully prescribed medication.

Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-19 defines murder to include murder that is done with deliberate design to effect the death of an unborn child.

Missouri

-

Montana

-

Nebraska*

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-388 et seq. create the Homicide of the Unborn Child Act. The law defines premeditation and unborn child. The law defines murder of an unborn child in the first degree, murder in the second degree, and manslaughter. The law also provides for penalties for vehicular homicide. Amended in 2003 to change provisions relating to driving under the influence and amends provisions regarding motor vehicle homicide. Provides a penalty for motor vehicle homicide of an unborn child and recognizes an action for an unborn child in wrongful death cases.

Nevada

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.210 defines manslaughter as a person who willfully kills an unborn quick child by any injury committed upon the mother of the child.

New Hampshire

-

New Jersey

-

New Mexico

-

New York

-

North Carolina

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-18.2 relates to injury to a pregnant woman. The law states that any person, who in the commission of a felony, causes injury to a woman, knowing the woman to be pregnant, in which injury results in the miscarriage or stillbirth by the woman is guilty of a felony that is one class higher than the felony committed.

North Dakota*

N.D. Cent. Code, § 12.1-17.1-01 et seq. define abortion, person and unborn child. The law defines the murder and manslaughter of an unborn child and provides penalties.

Ohio*

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2903.01 et seq. (2002) define aggravated murder, murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide, aggravated vehicular homicide, aggravated vehicular assault, felonious assault, aggravated assault, assault and negligent assault. The law applies to a person, which includes an "unborn member of the species Homo sapiens, who is or was carried in the womb of another."

Oklahoma*

Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21 § 691 (2006) defines unborn child as a human being. Homicide does not include legal abortion or instances of death during normal medical, therapeutic or diagnostic testing. A mother shall not be prosecuted for the death of an unborn child unless the death was a result of criminal behavior.

Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21 § 714 and § 652 (2005) revises civil wrongful death statutes to include the death of an unborn child; revises the provisions governing the intentional shooting with intent to kill another and any assault and battery upon another to add an unborn child; provides the penalty reference for anyone who willfully kills an unborn child; provides an exemption for a legal abortion, or the usual and customary diagnostic testing or therapeutic treatment.

Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21 § 723 (2005) specifies that any offense committed pursuant to the provisions of Section 652 and 713 of Title 21, does not require proof that the person engaging in the conduct had knowledge or should have had the knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant or that the offender intended to cause the death or bodily injury to the unborn child.

Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 20 § 644 (2008) states that any person convicted of domestic abuse committed against a pregnant woman with knowledge of the pregnancy is guilty of a misdemeanor and any person convicted of domestic abuse committed against a pregnant woman with knowledge of the pregnancy and a miscarriage or injury to the unborn child occurs is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for not less than 20 years. (2008 Okla. Sess. Laws, Chap 318, HB 1897)

Oregon

-

Pennsylvania*

Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. tit. 18 § 106, § 1102 and § 2604 define first degree, second degree and third degree murder of an unborn child and provides penalties. § 1102 was amended in 2008 to provide for the sentence of the first degree murder and second degree murder or an unborn child (2008 HB 1845).

Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. tit. 18. § 2603 defines homicide of an unborn child. An individual commits criminal homicide of an unborn child if the individual intentionally, knowingly, recklessly or negligently causes the death of an unborn child.

Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. tit. 18 § 2605 defines voluntary manslaughter of an unborn child and provides for penalties.

Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. tit. 18 § 2606 (1997) defines aggravated assault of an unborn child. The law specifies that aggravated assault of an unborn child is a felony of the first degree.

Rhode Island

R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-23-5 defines "quick child." The willful killing of an unborn quick child by any injury to the mother of that child is deemed manslaughter.

South Carolina*

S.C. Code Ann § 16-3-1083 provides that a person who commits a violent crime that causes the death of, or injury to, a child in utero is guilty of a separate offense and that the person must be punished as if the death or injury occurred to the unborn child's mother. The law also provides that the person must be punished for murder or attempted murder if the person intentionally killed or attempted to kill the unborn child. The law defines "unborn child" as a child in utero, and "child in utero" or "child who is in utero" as a member of the species homo sapiens, at any state of development, who is carried in the womb. The law does not apply to conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law, or to a person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child.

State vs. Horne, 319 S.E.2d 703 (S.C. 1984) reversed voluntary manslaughter conviction, holding that the killing of a viable human being in utero did not constitute a criminal homicide. The case refers to S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-10.

State vs. Ard, 505 S.E.2d328 (S.C. 1998) held, in relation to a murder conviction, that the terms "person" and "child" in S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-20 (C)(a) included a viable fetus.

South Dakota*

S.D. Codified Laws Ann. § 22-16-41 defines vehicular homicide, which includes the death of an unborn child. Amended in 2003 to revise provisions concerning court suspensions and revocations of driver licenses; relates to driving while under the influence of alcohol or controlled substances and causing the death of another person, including an unborn child (2006 HB 1163).

S.D. Codified Laws Ann. § 22-16-1.1 et seq. defines fetal homicide which refers to a person who knew, or reasonably should have known, that a woman bearing an unborn child was pregnant and caused the death of the unborn child without lawful justification. The law provides for penalties.

S.D. Codified Laws Ann. § 22-16-4 defines homicide as murder in the first degree to include the death of a person or any other human being, including an unborn child.

Tennessee

Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-214 and § 39-13-215 defines "another" and "another person" as a viable fetus of a human being when any such term refers to the victim of any act made criminal by the provisions of the law. The law defines reckless homicide as the reckless killing of another.

Texas*

Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 1.07 relates to the death of or injury to an unborn child and provides penalties. The law defines an individual as a human being who is alive, including an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth.

Utah *

Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-201 et seq. declares that a person commits criminal homicide if the person intentionally, knowingly, recklessly causes the death of another human being, including an unborn child at any stage of its development. This law was amended by 2010 Utah Laws, Chap. 13 (HB 462) to specify that a person is not guilty of criminal homicide of an unborn child if the sole reason for the death of the unborn child is that the person refused to consent to medical treatment or a cesarean section, or failed to follow medical advice. The amendment also states that a woman is not guilty of criminal homicide of her own unborn child if the death of her unborn child is caused by a criminally negligent act or reckless act of the woman and is not caused by an intentional or knowing act of the woman. The amendment also clarifies that criminal homicide constitutes aggravated murder (as defined by § 76-5-202) if the actor intentionally or knowingly causes the death of another under several circumstances, including if the victim was younger than 14 years of age, but that this does not apply to an unborn child.

Vermont

-

Virginia

Va. Code § 18.2-32.2 (2004) declares that any person who unlawfully, willfully, deliberately, maliciously and with premeditation kills a fetus is guilty of a Class 2 felony. The law also provides penalties.

Washington

Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9A.32.060 declares that a person is guilty of manslaughter in the first degree when he intentionally and unlawfully kills an unborn quick child by inflicting any injury upon the mother of such child.

West Virginia *

W. Va. Code § 61-2-30 recognizes an embryo or fetus as a distinct unborn victim of certain crimes of violence against a person, including homicide and manslaughter.

Wisconsin*

Wis. Stat. § 940.04 (2) et seq. declare that any person who intentionally destroys the life of an unborn quick child or causes the death of the mother by an act done with intent to destroy the life of an unborn child is guilty of homicide. It is unnecessary to prove that the fetus was alive when the act so causing the mother's death was committed.


Wyoming

-

* Indicates states that have fetal homicide laws that apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy ("any state of gestation," "conception," "fertilization" or "post-fertilization").

# Massachusetts established fetal homicide/manslaughter laws only through case law, not through legislation.

Sources: National Conference of State Legislatures and StateNet
Note: List may not be comprehensive, but is representative of state laws that exist. NCSL appreciates additions and corrections.

Controse| 2.28.12 @ 3:37PM

"What a monster." Wouldn't you say such a person could easily be confused with Satan?

Ken| 2.28.12 @ 5:50PM

" You can't make a reasoned support of an anti-abortion stance without imposing some level of religious assumption whether that be life begins at conception or that murder extends to the fetus because of personhood."

Carefull reasoning requires more clarity and verbal precision than your muddled solipsitic assertion displays.

Life des not begin at conception because already living material must first come together to cause conception. What occurs at conception is not the beginning of life itself, but the beginning of a new entity, undenialbly human and undenialby living, who is gentically differentiated and distinct from his or her parents, whose living gametes joined to form him or her. That is not a religious assumption, but an unassailable fact of biological science.

Denying the worth of a human life by appeals to subjective and ill-defined, nay, undefinable terms like sentience and viability is a cowardly retreat into metaphysics when the objective reality of gestation and abortion are obvious and compelling.

More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/02/28/our-infanticidal-president

ADVERTISEMENT

The Spectacle Blog

Updated: NBC News: Holder Personally Approved Fox Reporter Warrant

Ross Kaminsky | 3:45PM

Felonious Attorney General?

Kaylin Bugos | 3:21PM

Did the Boy Scouts Cave to Pressure?

Claire Healey | 3:14PM

BBC World Survey Ranks Israel Near Bottom in Global Popularity

Aaron Goldstein | 12:36PM

Obamacare is a Big and Growing Problem for Democrats

Ross Kaminsky | 11:03AM

Stein on IRS Scandal

Patrick Ryan | 10:29AM

The Restricted Engine

Yogi Love | 6:00AM

Muslim, Er, Youth Riots in Sweden

Aaron Goldstein | 12:41AM

Latest Headlines

Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets

Ross Kaminsky|69 comments

Enough With the Bipartisanship

Matt Purple|37 comments

The United States of El Norte

Larry Thornberry|49 comments

Vodka = Vodka = Vodka

Daniel J. Flynn|74 comments

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer

Tornado Chasers

Claire Healey|24 comments

We Will Remember

Roger Kaplan|18 comments

The Chinese Waltz

George H. Wittman|1 comment

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

H/T to National Review Online

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.