Bill To Require Proof of Marriage for Assisted Pregnancy; Singles and Gays Banned (Resolved!)

Got your state license to have a baby?

State bill would limit procreation assistance
Process would rule out homosexuals, singles
By Niki Kelly
The Journal Gazette
Ft. Wayne

INDIANAPOLIS – Gays, lesbians and single Hoosiers would be prohibited from using medical science to help have a child under a bill being considered by an interim legislative committee.

The legislation puts Indiana in the middle of a national battle over reproductive rights and promises to be contentious.

“If we’re going to try to put Indiana on the map, I wouldn’t go this route,” said Betty Cockrum, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Indiana. “It feels pretty chilling. It is governmental intrusion into a very private part of our lives.”

But Sen. Pat Miller, R-Indianapolis, said Indiana law currently has no regulations regarding assisted reproduction and should have similar requirements to adoption in Indiana.

“Needless to say it’s going to be enormously controversial and difficult,” she said. “Our statutes are nearly silent on all this. You can think of guidelines, but when you put it on paper it becomes different.”

Miller chairs the Health Finance Commission – a panel of lawmakers that will vote Oct. 20 on whether to recommend the legislation to the full General Assembly.

A “no” vote doesn’t preclude it from being offered in the 2006 legislative short session, which starts in January. A “yes” vote does not ensure its passage.

There are two parts to the draft legislation – the first dealing with some irregularities in central Indiana regarding surrogacy and adoptions. But the part of the bill raising eyebrows involves assisted reproduction.

It defines assisted reproduction as causing pregnancy by means other than sexual intercourse, including intrauterine insemination, donation of an egg, donation of an embryo, in vitro fertilization and transfer of an embryo, and sperm injection.

The bill then requires “intended parents” to be married to each other and specifically says an unmarried person may not be an intended parent.

A doctor can’t begin an assisted reproduction technology procedure that may result in a child’s being born until the intended parents of the child have received a certificate of satisfactory completion of an assessment required under the bill.

Continued...

I refuse to use the word "conservative" as part of the description of social "conservatives" anymore.

They're social regulators. And it's time to deregulate the Republican Party.

RESOLVED: See more recent posts at end of thread for details.
www.indystar.com.../20051005/NEWS01/51005006


[edit on 6-10-2005 by RANT]

Wait a moment here, its a sin to abort fetuses, but you need permission to procreate?

I can not stop laughing, see when I said that the pro-life regulations of women bodies is beyond just abortion I wasn't making it up.

The agenda is the total control of women bodies so they can get to anybody that is not in the list of what moral citizens and rights are under their self proclaim righteousness.

People another attempt to shove religion their way using politicians and the law.

And lady and gents, this the way fundamentalis, moral majorities and social regulators wants to control all of us in this so call the land of the free.

I am still laughing at this one.

Funny, despicable and completely outrageous.

I am still laughing at this one.

Well, if we ban abortions, they can just do away with all that assisted pregancy bit, so they can find all those nice, loving homes for all those babies!!! and I wouldn't be too picky about who they adopt out to either, as long as they are loving, and appear that they will take care of the kid, let them have it, at least until they are sure that they can find a home for EVERY CHILD.....even the ones severely handicapped due to medications that the mother had to take during pregnancy!!! they're gonna have to do some pretty heavy regulating for that one....maybe bribing or coercion will help. hey they can force us to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, force a c=section if they don't want to take it to term, maybe they can also force YOU to adopt it when the mother dies because of what they forced onto her?

If this ridiculous thing passes (which is a stretch - tell me there aren't that many 'regulators' concentrated in one spot) how many gay and single people will be marrying friends to get a baby, then getting divorced? Anyone? How utterly STUPID an attempt to control other people and their lives!

If people wonder why some are so furious about the religious imposition on our society, LOOK HERE! This is about religion for sure! This is an imposition of religious morals on all people of the country! An attempt to withhold the blessing of children until people get married to a member of the opposite sex, like God wants.

If there's one thing I detest, its the relentless, unreasonable, pigheaded pursuit of the regular citizens of this country by an outspoken, outlandish, spoiled, arrogant minority.

Mind your own business! Trust me, there's plenty of stuff to clean up in your own lives without sticking your noses in the business of everyone else!

Jesus, RANT, you sure know how to get my blood boiling!

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
tell me there aren't that many 'regulators' concentrated in one spot

I see you fully appreciate the intent behind the Christian Exodus Movement.

Jesus, RANT, you sure know how to get my blood boiling!

I like the sound of that. On many levels.

Especially "Jesus Rant." Nice ring to it.

Let me who is among you without pants throw the first stone.

[edit on 5-10-2005 by RANT]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
how many gay and single people will be marrying friends to get a baby, then getting divorced? Anyone? How utterly STUPID an attempt to control other people and their lives!

And you are completely right, the same way people pay to find a partner to be able to become legal in the US, who is to say that another market will not open on the side, just so people gay or single can get a baby.

But wait a minute!!!!!!

How about a status of limitation on how long you have to be married to have a child?

Will they regulate that too, they do it when is marriages of people from another country before they can apply for citizenship.

Our political moralistic systems is just bordering on ridiculous.

How about a status of limitation on how long you have to be married to have a child?

Will they regulate that too, they do it when is marriages of people from another country before they can apply for citizenship.

Yeah, what happens if they require you to be married for at least a year before you can get preggy, and you get preggy on your honeymoon? - will they force you to abort it? (this would apply to ALL couples, not just those where they suspect one might be a "gay")

Or what if a girl gets preggy out of wed-lock? will they force her to abort too? Or will they just stone her to death in the town square?

Both sound so rediculous - BUT, it would seem to be the logical conclusion of those control freaks if they were to get their way.

It really boils down to "We want to legally require you to marry and enjoy sexual intercourse with a person of the opposite gender if you wish to have a baby that's biologically yours, even if intercourse with someone of the opposite gender is totally disgusting and unnatural for you. . . Amen"

I'm so glad those "compassionate conservatives" have my best interests in mind. It takes alot of weight off my shoulders knowing that they will force on me what they think is best for me. Whew! Thank God I don't have to think for myself

Hey one question, when did Adam and Eve get married? Read the bible, Eve had no choice! She was literally a sex slave to Adam, hey, maybe I should become a bible christian! "It says right here Eve was Adam's sex slave, hoorah!" But I'll stick with hat God gave us, the 10 Commandments.

Originally posted by paulthefourth
It really boils down to "We want to legally require you to marry and enjoy sexual intercourse with a person of the opposite gender if you wish to have a baby that's biologically yours, even if intercourse with someone of the opposite gender is totally disgusting and unnatural for you. . . Amen"

Yeah, similiarly, it's always puzzled me that such 'regulators' teach that sex is a dirty and offensive act and should be saved for the one you love (and marry)!

Originally posted by paulthefourth

Or what if a girl gets preggy out of wed-lock? will they force her to abort too? Or will they just stone her to death in the town square?

Well I imagine that because the religious right are against abortion it will be against the law to do so

So I guess they will have more satisfaction, taking the offensive sinner to the town square and stone her to death.

Occurs alone with the gays and any other deviant and by then sinners under the new moralistic law.

I wonder these religious right are desperate to push their agendas and they are trying with a passion.

Originally posted by Full Metal
Hey one question, when did Adam and Eve get married? Read the bible, Eve had no choice! She was literally a sex slave to Adam, hey, maybe I should become a bible christian! "It says right here Eve was Adam's sex slave, hoorah!" But I'll stick with hat God gave us, the 10 Commandments.

I like that one!

We really should feel bad for Adam and Eve though. Poor things, they really couldn't get married, even if they wanted to - I mean, there were no homosexuals around, so who would have decorated? Who would have conducted the ceremony? Who would have catered the reception? Who would have driven the limo?

"Eve had no choice" indeed! I mean, could you imagine having to pull off a wedding, THE FIRST WEDDING at that, all by yourself? Oh, the humanity!



Sorry - had to do something to make myself laugh today.

I wish we could follow up on every post with a solution or outcome like this.

Legislator drops controversial plan
IndyStar.com
By Mary Beth Schneider
[email protected]

A controversial proposed bill to prohibit gays, lesbians and single people from using medical procedures to become pregnant has been dropped by its legislative sponsor.
State Sen. Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis, issued a one-sentence statement this afternoon saying: “The issue has become more complex than anticipated and will be withdrawn from consideration by the Health Finance Commission.”

Miller had asked that committee -- a panel of lawmakers who meet when the Indiana General Assembly is not in session to discuss possible legislation -- to recommend the bill to the full legislature when it meets in January.

Under her proposal, couples who need assistance to become pregnant -- such as through intrauterine insemination; the use of donor eggs, embryos and sperm; in vitro fertilization, embryo transfer or other medical means -- would have to be married to each other. In addition, married couples who needed donor sperm and eggs to become pregnant would be required to go through the same rigorous assessment process of their fitness to be parents as do people who adopt a child.

Miller had earlier acknowledged that the legislation would be "enormously controversial." It had already drawn fire from the Indiana Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood of Indiana.

Always keep feet to the fire.

That's too bad.

Children are not to be guinea pigs for social experiments (never mind that we as a society don't care SQUAT for children anymore).

Children need a mother and a father. That provides the child with balance.

Unfortunately, thanks in a large part to the feminazis, fathers are hugely underrated. What they won't admit is that fathers are sorely needed.

Having two fathers or two mothers can do some psychological damage to the child...but the liberals don't care. Children are to be treated as property anyway to these guys. They're disposable.

Of course I'm against a single woman just up and inseminating herself. She'd willfully depriving her child of a father.

I'm just sick and tired of children being forced to pay the price for this kind of nonsense. It's sad that my son may be in a minority--my husband and I had been married long before his conception.

Originally posted by RANT
Legislator drops controversial plan

Always keep feet to the fire.

That is great news!

In addition, married couples who needed donor sperm and eggs to become pregnant would be required to go through the same rigorous assessment process of their fitness to be parents as do people who adopt a child.

Now if they wanted to do this for ALL potential parents, that would be one thing, but to make people go through rigorous assessment just because they can't conceive on their own is ridiculous! Obviously there are many married, fertile couples who have no business breeding! What about those children?!?!

Amethyst, if a child has a loving, caring, interested, good father (or 2), he can very well turn out to be a balanced, responsible, self-confident adult. It's the quality of the parenting not the sex of the parents that counts. Many neglected, suicide victims had 2 parents of the opposite sex.

as did many abused children.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Amethyst, if a child has a loving, caring, interested, good father (or 2), he can very well turn out to be a balanced, responsible, self-confident adult. It's the quality of the parenting not the sex of the parents that counts. Many neglected, suicide victims had 2 parents of the opposite sex.

Then read what's here and this one here.

Quality of parenting is tied in to what gender combination you have.

Of course, if you don't believe that males and females are inherently different, and that one of each provides balance, you won't believe me anyhow.

Originally posted by Amethyst
Quality of parenting is tied in to what gender combination you have.

You can link to all the homophobic websites you wish, but my personal experience in this area convinces me otherwise. I will always believe what I see in front of my eyes before I trust what someone with an agenda has to say.

Of course, if you don't believe that males and females are inherently different, and that one of each provides balance, you won't believe me anyhow.

Certainly males and females are different. But you're right. I don't believe you anyhow. You're speaking from a position of prejudice and ignorance (not to mention from the lofty location of a towering equine).

I am very glad that the bill just die, when you look at the whole issue is just not about one groups, gender or what ever is the whole idea of controlling everybody choices.

I am a conscious person that live in world of diversity and I have learn to accept that fact.

We can not bring our moralistic views and impose them on others just because we don't like the way they live or do things.

I feel sorry for people that live their lives worrying about others people lives that more than often forget about theirown.

People like that live very unhappy, and when they face the end of their lives that is when they realized that they has wasted all on worrying about others that they forgot about themselves.

Parenting is what we teach our children about life responsibilities and life issues and how to respond to them in a intelligent and responsible way, without bias or prejudgment and to evaluate each case on their own merits.

That is good parenting and it doesn't matter if the one doing the teaching is a female or male.

Originally posted by Amethyst

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Amethyst, if a child has a loving, caring, interested, good father (or 2), he can very well turn out to be a balanced, responsible, self-confident adult. It's the quality of the parenting not the sex of the parents that counts. Many neglected, suicide victims had 2 parents of the opposite sex.

Then read what's here and this one here.

Quality of parenting is tied in to what gender combination you have.

Of course, if you don't believe that males and females are inherently different, and that one of each provides balance, you won't believe me anyhow.

OH MY GOD!

I read both of those links and cannot believe the lies that were being spewed from them. Or that someone would have the unmitigated GAUL to actually post them as reference.

In this day and age, I thought anyone civilized enough to have/use a computer would have advanced beyond believing that kind of garbage, and just ignored it like you'd ignore the KKK's propaganda about black people.

Both of those sites are full of hateful propaganda made for/by people that are trapped in the past - It's time to enter the 21st century.

If that's how you feel - then by all means, keep believing it - teach your kids those values - if they keep those values with them then you are sentencing your kids to a life of being judged intolerant bigots and your worries about them being in the minority will come true. Not because they were the only ones born in wedlock , but because they will be in the small group that has to sit by themselves in the cafeteria because they, as their teacher will write on their report card: "Don't get along well with others."

I'm sorry as I can be for having to say what I just said - but I can't take anymore of hearing all those statistics that say we're bad people just because we're gay - If you don't like gays, guess what - YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE ONE!!!!!!!!!!! it's not contagious - If you don't like what gays do, guess what - YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO WHAT THEY DO!!!!!!!! - Live your life the way you please, and afford me the same courtesy - Be homophobic if you want - Believe that the earth is flat if you want - Don't believe in Gravity if you don't want to, trust me, you won't fly off the face of the earth for not believing in it - BUT QUIT SPREADING YOUR LIES ABOUT GAYS!!!!!! -

Your kids won't 'turn' gay just because they hear being gay is OK - but If they are gay, imagine how tormented they will be knowing they can never come to you for support, knowing how much you'd 'hate' them for something they had no control over. Having to hide that and keep it all inside is enough to make anyone want to die.

I'm not trying to convert anyone to queerness, so quit trying to convert us into being straight. I don't want to molest your children - so quit saying we're all pedophiles. We don't all have mental problems, but if we do, its NOT because we're gay, it's because of the way we get treated just because we are.

Raise your kids like you feel is right, but don't EVER force your views of child-rearing on other people.

Any Idiot 'straight' couple can have kids, married or not, planned or not, wanted or not - but if you were infertile and WANTED children how would you feel if you had to take a test and be deemed "morally qualified" just to procreate? Try putting yourself in the underdog's place JUST FOR ONCE - PLEASE, REALLY TRY - if you don't feel just a little tug on your heartstrings - then your heart is a lost cause. Kids from parents that have to go through fertility clinics are WANTED KIDS - and how could any child that's wanted by it's parents (gay couple or straight) not be loved?

Kids learn how to love, and kids learn how to hate - - - and they usually learn both in the same place.

Bravo, Paul. I just have to say that was a seriously excellent post.

I really think it's important for people to walk in others' shoes if only for a moment, if only in their imagination. It's all about compassion in matters like this. To step out of the ingrained footprints of our positions and look at something from the other side, another perspective.

One of your best points (although there were plenty) is that anyone can have children, but the children born to people who really, really have to try hard to get them are likely to be among the best, most nurturing parents.

Well-said!