Idaho Lawmaker to Propose Bill Criminalizing Abortion as First-Degree Murder

BOISE, Idaho — A lawmaker in Idaho plans to propose a bill in the state legislature that would criminalize abortion as first-degree murder, with the exception of risk to the life of the mother.

Sen. Dan Foreman, R-Moscow, told reporters this week that he believes abortion needs to be prosecuted for what it is: murder.

“I think Roe v. Wade is a disgrace,” Foreman told East Idaho News. “It lies in the face of the U.S. Constitution, our Constitution here in Idaho, and it just lies in the face of common sense.”

Under his soon-coming legislation, both the woman who seeks out the death of her unborn child and the abortionist who murders the baby would be charged with first-degree murder.

“People find themselves, in many cases, with unwanted pregnancies and the easy answer is to just terminate the baby,” Foreman said. “We’re looking at killing innocent kids, and it’s not up to us to just kill it to solve someone else’s personal problem.”

Some lawmakers have criticized his plan, stating that the government has no business telling a mother what she should do with her body.

“From a woman’s standpoint, how dare somebody else decide what I should do with my body?” Sen. Cherie Buckner-Webb, D-Boise, stated. “From a constitutional standpoint, in the landmark case of Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the Constitution protects a woman’s right to make her own medical decisions, including her decision to have an abortion.”

  • Connect with Christian News

Foreman

But Foreman contends that abortion is not what is done to the woman’s body, but her child’s. It is not the mother who is killed, and she does not have a right to say that someone else should die.

“She can’t decide to take life away from somebody else,” Foreman outlined. “This country’s been saddled with this nonsense long enough, and that’s why I’m responding to the wishes of my constituents and bringing this legislation forward.”

“I’m not telling any woman what to do with her body; I would be completely against the government telling a woman or anyone else what to do with their body, but that logic is flawed when they use that,” he added to KBOI-TV.

Foreman’s bill would have no exception for rape or incest as he believes that the baby should not be punished for the crimes of his or her father.

“We are still faced with looking at the death of an innocent child. Why should the child pay for the sins of the person who committed the rape or the incest?” he asked.

Hodge

As previously reported, in an introductory lecture to his course on obstetrics in 1854, Philadelphia Dr. Hugh Lennox Hodge explained that if a woman were to come to a medical doctor in pursuit of an abortion, “he must, as it were, grasp the conscience of his weak and erring patient and let her know in language not to be misunderstood that she is responsible to her Creator for the life of the being within her.”

“So low, gentleman, is the moral sense of community on this subject. So ignorant are even the greater number of individuals, that even mothers in many instances shrink not at the commission of this crime, but will voluntarily destroy their own progeny, in violation of every natural sentiment, and in opposition to the laws of God and man,” he said.

“The procuring abortion is ‘a base and unmanly act,’” Hodge also said, quoting in part text from a court ruling of his day. “It is a crime against the natural feelings of man, against the welfare and safety of females, against the peace and prosperity of society, against the divine command ‘Thou shalt not kill.’ It is murder.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • The bill as reported appears to neglect the culpability of the father, who is frequently the one that seeks to murder the child and avoid expenses.

    • Dick Leppky

      I agree the father has to be held culpable – if he is counselling/pursuading the mother. However, when that is not the case, and when the father has no ‘influence’ or rights to the mother’s decision – then he canot be held responsible for her choice. (The argument from pro-choice women, never seems to consider the father either – they only harp on ‘a woman’s choice.’)

  • Tangent002

    This guy looks an awful lot like Putin.

  • Tangent002

    Not that I agree with this legislation, but how is it that the father gets off scot-free?

  • Joshua 1:9

    It is about time that SOMEONE in US politics grew a spine! However, this will get passed over because, for the most part, Americans love to keep the right to slaughter babies should they so choose to do so. And regardless of who is president, the liberal whiners will always get the rights they do not deserve.

  • Vince

    In 38 states it is already a felony to cause the death of a fetus –
    unless, that is, you happen to be its mother or an abortionist.

    Strange double standard there, huh?

    • Upsetti Spaghetti

      Not really, with one it is consensual, with the other it is not.

  • sammy13

    I like the bill. Whether it passes or not, it does raise the issue to the level of murder. Sen. Foreman uses language missing from most of the arguments for and against abortion and that is refreshing and much needed, to with: that abortion is not what is done to the woman’s body, but her child’s. It is not the mother who is killed, and she does not have a right to say that someone else should die.

    I wonder how many abortions are committed as a result of adultery? Or, if out of wedlock, is the result of unfaithfulness to their partner? Done out of fear? Maybe with some misguided sense of atonement for their fornicating activities? It is a puzzlement. As for the man, if he actively seeks to have the woman abort, I suppose he is nearly as guilty, if not equally so. And if he is unaware of the pregnancy, and the termination, he is still guilty of fornication. In the end, whether abortion is allowed to continue or is outlawed, there will be a final and permanent judgement.

  • jael2

    I applaud Sen. Foreman for drafting a bill, that has some “biblical” teeth.

    For the past 43 years, the majority of our so called “pro-life” legislators have done nothing but micro- manage murder. But praise God, there are a few men of such fine caliber that understand the magnitude of this scourge, and willing to bring this to the forefront.

    For those who cry foul that the mother would be prosecuted, we really need to rethink who the real victim is: The Baby! Think about it… it’s the mother who spends weeks deciding what to do ( pre-meditation) about her” problem”. It’s the mother who makes the phone call to the abortion mill. It’s the mother who signs the consent forms (death warrant). It’s the mother who lies down on that hard cold table, and let’s an abortionist dismember her child. If one plots and plans to kill an “unwanted” born child, why should there be an exception for a preborn child. Murder is murder.

    If we ever intend to see this bloodshed stopped in our land, Christians must begin to agree with God’s Word, and stop all the victimhood nonsense. The only victim is the child.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Finally!! The Lord bless the heroic American! Child’s life is more important over all matters. Yes, America therefore the entire world got to have the Judeo-Christian values to be humane and civilized and protect all children.

  • Bezukhov

    And if a baby is stillborn the charge will be involuntary manslaughter.

    • Tangent002

      Every miscarriage would have to be investigated as murder.