Gov. Fallin signs ‘Humanity of the Unborn Child Act’ into law

[ABX]

OKLAHOMA CITY – A bill that requires the state Department of Health to develop informational material “for the purpose of achieving an abortion-free society” was signed into law.

On Monday afternoon, Gov. Fallin signed The Humanity of the Unborn Child Act.....

http://kfor.com/2016/06/07/gov-fallin-signs-humanity-of-the-unborn-child-act-into-law/

[TomSea]

  & PTL

[markomalley]

Actually, this is not that big a deal. Good, but not revolutionary.

https://legiscan.com/OK/text/HB2797/2016

It indicates that they will develop education programs to teach children that a fetus is a human being.

What I would hope for is that multiple states would pass bills (and governors sign into law) that stated that human beings from the moment of fertilization are considered natural persons. THAT would be revolutionary.

@AbaraXas @TomSea @don-o @Mrs Don-o

[don-o]

Actually, this is not that big a deal. Good, but not revolutionary.

https://legiscan.com/OK/text/HB2797/2016

It indicates that they will develop education programs to teach children that a fetus is a human being.

What I would hope for is that multiple states would pass bills (and governors sign into law) that stated that human beings from the moment of fertilization are considered natural persons. THAT would be revolutionary.

@AbaraXas @TomSea @don-o @Mrs Don-o

With the Feds propensity to squash state law like bugs, isn't the amendment process a better way to go?

[markomalley]

With the Feds propensity to squash state law like bugs, isn't the amendment process a better way to go?

If you actually read the Roe v Wade decision, it hangs on the assertion that there is no basis in law to extend "personhood" to the unborn. I don't have time to look up the exact verbiage, but that is the gist of it.

If there is a basis in law to extend "personhood," then the SCOTUS would have to re-evaluate Roe v Wade as part of deciding that case. And either Roe v Wade would be overturned or the Supreme Court would be in the business of denying personhood to certain classes (sort of a Dredd Scott type decision). If the former happens, we win. If the latter happens, that would create a massive outrage that could propel a "personhood amendment" type of movement that could end up resulting in a new Constitutional Amendment. The nice thing is that the POTUS (either Cankles or Stumpy) is not involved in the Amendment process one way or the other.

[Mrs Don-o]

What I would hope for is that multiple states would pass bills (and governors sign into law) that stated that human beings from the moment of fertilization are considered natural persons. THAT would be revolutionary.

@AbaraXas @TomSea @don-o @Mrs Don-o

Dang, I just erased my whole post.  Don't know how I did that.

I once gave a pro-life talk for young adolescents at a school which had been set up for run-aways and throw-aways and wards of the court.  A poorly-educated group of kids, and not inclined o listen attentively to speakers.  I tried to simplify my talk, but I suspect I was still way over their heads.

Finally their head teacher, a salt-of-the-earth black Christian woman named Mary Beth Kennedy, interrupted me (very nicely) and said with the utmost authority, "What she's saying is, Abortion Is Murder.  Yes, ABORTION IS MURDER. Because here's a baby there, and killing it makes you a murderer. "

"And do you know who was a murderer from the beginning?  Satan.  The head devil.  And in the end, he will take all murderers with him to Hell!"

I know the law can't direct teachers to say *that*, but it least it will open up the possibility of saying that a baby is a human being from Day One, and that every human being has a right to simply go on living.

It's a start.  In fact, it's the only place to start.