Texas rule on cremation or burial of fetal remains takes effect

[rangerrebew]

Texas rule on cremation or burial of fetal remains takes effect
Listen | Print
By Karen Graham     12 hours ago in Politics

Despite fierce opposition from abortion rights advocates and the medical community, a Texas rule requiring the cremation or burial of fetal remains, regardless of gestational age will go into effect on December 19, 2016.

The new rule pertaining to fetal and embryonic tissue as a result of miscarriage or abortion had hard opposition from the moment the regulation was proposed by health officials in July this year, according to the Texas Tribune.

And despite months of public comment periods, two-hours-long hearings, and over 35,000 comments submitted to the state’s Health and Human Services Commission, the voices of the voters were ignored and the rule is to go into effect on December 19.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/politics/texas-rule-on-cremation-or-burial-of-fetal-remains-takes-effect/article/480691#ixzz4RUnOtl41

[rangerrebew]

I fail to understand how this law deprives access to abortion.  The thing it deprives is using babies to become organ donors.

[TomSea]

Sounds like a great law. Who would have thought of this.

[kidd]

This is a small degree of dignity for those who suffered an undignified death at the request of their parent.

[Sanguine]

And, it tends to humanize them.  Turns out they're not just "fetal tissue".

[Free Vulcan]

Why would abortionists care? The baby's dead. That's what they want.

Unless the stated agenda isn't the real agenda. Whodathunk with leftists, so straightforward, upstanding, and without guile?

[Sanguine]

Why would abortionists care? The baby's dead. That's what they want.

Unless the stated agenda isn't the real agenda. Whodathunk with leftists, so straightforward, upstanding, and without guile?

I bet they care very deeply.  Like I said, it makes them handle that "fetal tissue" like a real human being. 

[TomSea]

There is a law something like this already existing in Indiana, I believe Pence signed the bill. I'm unsure of the details.

[Oceander]

Does the same law apply to the remains of children and adults?  If not, why not?

[Free Vulcan]

Does the same law apply to the remains of children and adults?  If not, why not?

I would assume since liberals do not see an aborted baby as human, they can't argue if it's treated differently, while at least being kept from being harvested.

[rangerrebew]

Let us not forget there has been liberal talk about post-birth abortions in several countries and here.  If they aren't included, it could open a lucrative business for abortionists.

[Ghost Bear]

Does the same law apply to the remains of children and adults?  If not, why not?

Actually, there were (and are) existing laws in place regarding the proper burial and/or cremation of human remains (corpses). I think the new rule just extends those laws to include "fetal remains", where previously they did not.

[jmyrlefuller]

Why would abortionists care? The baby's dead. That's what they want.

Because it's needless money spent to humanize something that they don't see as human. A standard burial costs thousands of dollars.

This won't stand in court. You cannot legislate morality for people who see no problem with their misdeeds. It's exactly the kind of Big Government stunt legislation that gives the pro-life movement a bad name.

Look, one in four pregnancies miscarries in this country. This law is going to spike the cost of disposing of the deceased by a huge amount. Why cause the hardship for people who are already hurting and suffering, just so you can say you got a temporary dig on the hot-button abortion issue?

[Oceander]

Actually, there were (and are) existing laws in place regarding the proper burial and/or cremation of human remains (corpses). I think the new rule just extends those laws to include "fetal remains", where previously they did not.

Then that's fair dinkum, so long as the laws apply equally. 

[TomSea]

Because it's needless money spent to humanize something that they don't see as human. A standard burial costs thousands of dollars.

This won't stand in court. You cannot legislate morality for people who see no problem with their misdeeds. It's exactly the kind of Big Government stunt legislation that gives the pro-life movement a bad name.

Look, one in four pregnancies miscarries in this country. This law is going to spike the cost of disposing of the deceased by a huge amount. Why cause the hardship for people who are already hurting and suffering, just so you can say you got a temporary dig on the hot-button abortion issue?

Indiana already has a similar bill; I do not know if it has been struck down, so I wouldn't assume that it will be struck down.

http://www.lifenews.com/2015/08/10/indiana-gov-mike-pence-signs-bill-mandating-aborted-babies-must-be-buried-or-cremated/

There's a black market for baby body parts, this cuts out that shady industry.

Is that better, if livers, etc. are being harvested? It turns a profit we could argue.

Rand and Ron Paul are big libertarians and very pro-life. Texas and Indiana have acted for their rights as states. Bring it on if one thinks it will be struck down.

[TomSea]

Planned Parenthood should not be selling body parts on top of getting $500 million in Federal monies every year. So one makes the abortion clinics job harder by making them bury these babies or fetuses if one insists, too bad.