Maine bill claims to protect unborn gays??

[Meldread]

An unusual bill seeking to protect unborn gay children in Maine has angered many gay rights advocates, but it got a stamp of approval from gay pro-lifers.

The bill, LD 908, would make it illegal in Maine to abort a fetus that is known to have the "gay gene." Anticipating a future day when scientists might clearly identify such a gene, Rep. Brian Duprey claims he introduced the bill to prevent women from ending pregnancies based on their fetus' projected sexual orientation.

Read it all here.



I don't know what to make of this. I haven't read the bill so I don't know exactly what it says, but I could certainly see people aborting their children if a gay gene is discovered. I'm pro-choice, but I would refuse to support someone aborting their child simply based on sexual orientation. That's wrong on so many levels. It's akin to genocide. (Although, I would say anyone who would abort a child based on sexual orientation should be prevented from having -any- children because they are not worthy enough to be parents... but that's another topic all together I think.)

What do you guys think?

[eShirl]

1. why protect just that one gene?

could this bill be crafted specifically to drive a wedge between pro-choice and pro-gay rights people?

[Meldread]

4. That's what the article is hinting at.

Although, I haven't read the bill so I don't know EXACTLY what it says.

Regardless, I think in the future if we are able to tell if a child is going to be gay or straight, and a parent finds out that their child is gay, then it would be wrong to have an abortion based off that reason alone.

[eShirl]

6. here's the bill:

(from http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/billtexts/LD090801-1.asp )


Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:



Sec. 1. 22 MRSA §1597-B is enacted to read:




§1597-B.__Prohibited basis for abortion




An abortion may not be performed when the basis for the
procedure is the projected sexual orientation of the fetus after
birth, based on analysis of genetic materials of the fetus in
which sexual orientation is identified through the presence or
absence of a so-called "homosexual gene."




Sec. 2. 22 MRSA §1598, sub-§1, as amended by PL 1993, c. 61, §2, is
further amended to read:




1. Policy. It is the public policy of the State that the
State not restrict a woman's exercise of her private decision to
terminate a pregnancy before viability except as provided in
section sections 1597-A and 1597-B. After viability an abortion
may be performed only when it is necessary to preserve the life
or health of the mother. It is also the public policy of the
State that all abortions may be performed only by a physician.





SUMMARY




This bill prohibits an abortion when the reason for the
termination of the pregnancy is the projected sexual orientation
of the fetus after it is born. The projected sexual orientation
would be determined by analysis of the genetic materials of the
fetus in which the projected sexual orientation is identified
through the presence or absence of a so-called "homosexual gene."

[Meldread]

7. Odd wording...

I'm not a legal person or anything but the wording seems a bit odd to me. Why does it mention twice "the presence or absence of..."? Would the "absence of" be used to protect heterosexual children?

What I'm trying to ask is this guy trying to use the whole "gay gene" thing as a loophole to restrict abortions in general? I'm not a woman so I've never went through the process of having an abortion, so I don't know if you have to give a reason for aborting a fetus.

If a gay gene is found it is likely that prospective parents will want their children tested for it. So is this bill in effect saying anyone who would have this test preformed couldn't have an abortion? (Seeing as how the bill includes the words "in absence of..."?)

I don't know if any of that made sense, but I hope you catch what I'm saying.

[Misunderestimator]

15. I think you're right about that...

"This bill prohibits an abortion when the reason for the
termination of the pregnancy is the projected sexual orientation
of the fetus after it is born. The projected sexual orientation
would be determined by analysis of the genetic materials of the
fetus in which the projected sexual orientation is identified
through the presence or absence of a so-called "homosexual gene."

Given the above... seems that whatever "orientation" is found, if you simply find out the "orientation," you cannot abort, whether the "gay gene" is present or not. I don't see how else that can be interpreted.

And would this be the first bill ever introduced that covers science fiction futuristic scenarios? :eyes:

[etherealtruth]

2. I don't see how this could be...

Is someone "yanking your chain"?
How would one purport to determine the sexual orientation of a fetus...? One gene, a combination of genes, would it be offered in prenatal testing (amnio)... I am sure that this is a joke...

edit: spelling

[TwentyFive]

3. I would support their right to abort the child

If they were forced to have this gay child, they would probably abuse him or her.

Perhaps supporting a law making it illegal to identify a gay gene in unborn children. In fact, identifying any characteristic beyond congental defects should be illegal.

Otherwise, everybody would want desingner children.

[Meldread]

5. That's true and a better way to go about it...

...making it illegal to identify if your child will be gay or not would eliminate the problem.

Although, if for some reason that law could not be passed I think any Mother who aborts a child based solely on sexual orientation should be sterilized and prevented from having future children. I'd consider her an unfit mother.

[TwentyFive]

8. Excellent point. She is worse than a proven child molestor.

Anybody who would abort a healthy child simply because she is prejudiced against gays....could never raise a mentally healthy child regardless of sexual orientation.

Of course, these people would hide behind the excuse that they are only acting in the best interests of the child....and don't want him/her to suffer a life of anti-gay discrimination. An ironic position, considering anti-gay discrimination exists only because of human scum like themselves.

[Meeker Morgan]

11. A law making it illegal to identify a gay gene?

A law against doing something that can't be done anyway?

Is there even any research going on to identify a "gay gene"?

[dsc]

12. Yes

There are several researchers attempting to find a genetic link to homosexuality.

[dsc]

9. I firmly believe this will be possible one day

and when it is we will have a genocide against LGBT people the likes of which Hitler could only dream of.

[justin899]

10. This Bill was introduced by the same guy who just a couple of

months ago intorduced a bill that would make gay marriage legal in Maine only so that he could vocally oppose it.

Duprey doesn't give a damn about gays or gay babies.

He's only using this bill to force Democrats to choose between abortion rights and gay rights.

[mitchtv]

13. this sword has two edges

I predict an upsurge of "Christians" supporting limited abortion rights, throughout Jesusland.

[Misunderestimator]

14. What a stupid bill. And pretty treacherous as well...

Wonder how many gay men this will bring over to the anti-choice movement. There already seem to be so many. What a transparent ploy this bill is.