Women--We Can Be Our Own Worst Enemy

New Mexican State Representative Cathrynn Brown (R) introduced a bill on Wednesday that would legally require victims of rape to carry their pregnancies to term in order to use the fetus as evidence for a sexual assault trial.

House Bill 206 would charge a rape victim who ended her pregnancy with a third-degree felony for tampering with evidence:  “Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime," the bill says.  Third-degree felonies in New Mexico carry a sentence of up to three years in prison.

So, first and foremost, the basis of this is ludicrous.  Tampering with evidence definitely is an offense, and there are statutes proscribing tampering with evidence, fabricating evidence, and the concealment or destruction of evidence for the purpose of impairing its availability as evidence in an investigation or official proceeding. At common law, suppression, fabrication, or destruction of physical evidence amounts to obstruction of justice.  However, for something to be "destroyed" within the context of a tampering with evidence statute, the evidentiary value of the item must be ruined, and a mere abandonment of evidence does not amount to criminal tampering with evidence.

So abortion does not amount to tampering with evidence--once the fetus is aborted, there is a plethora of available DNA to verify the identity of the sex offender.  Evidence for the crime at hand is not destroyed.  The fact that the offense led to pregnancy has no bearing on the legality of or penalty for the crime.  So requiring the maintenance of the pregnancy provides no additional evidence of legal value, physical or otherwise.  It is just a further assault on the woman and her autonomy.

The restriction of the civil rights of women continues, and as we previously suspected, it is not just men at the helm.  Apparently there are quite a number of women that would prefer not to have their choices be their own.  Women and the men who love them need to vociferously fight back.  The two U.S. Senatorial candidates who spoke with the biological background of a kindergartner and the compassion that belongs in the 18^th century are not alone.  They have a lot of company, and the defeat of the radical social agenda they represent in the last election has convinced them they need to be more vocal rather than less so—it is definitely time to redefine ‘lady like’ as someone who is a well informed, independent thinker thoroughly capable of making her own choices. Once again the party who decries ‘big government’ proposes to dictate personal health choices.  Just say no!