Player2 said:
I can do better. If I've read it correctly, a father who raped his underage daughter can sue because neither rape nor incest are good enough abortion reasons in the eyes of the masterminds behind this bill: (...) (C) If the woman who received a dismemberment abortion in 35 violation of this subchapter is a minor or has died as a result of the 36 dismemberment abortion, the parents or legal guardians of the woman who 1 received a dismemberment abortion in violation of this subchapter. 2 (...) |
I'm not terribly used to American legal language, but I think that is an incorrect interpretation. Your statement is a continuation of
"(b) A cause of action for civil damages against a person who has purposely violated this subchapter may be maintained by:"
Together, the two mean that if the person who had the abortion was a minor, the parents may sue the doctor.
I have no idea what's happening in this thread. People are following an utterly rabid interpretation of the law, and then assuming the lawmaker are idiots based on their strange interpretation.
This is a somewhat odd law, but it's by no means diabolical.
