The party of ‘limited government’ strikes again

October 5, 2005

I vaguely remember the time — I believe it was called the “1980s and ’90s” — when Republicans railed against the idea of social engineering. In 1993, Henry Hyde wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post in which he lambasted the Clinton White House for its alleged belief that government could use its power to interfere with family structures. Hyde called the very idea “exotic social engineering.”

Since then, Republicans have embraced social engineering with both hands, using government authority to at least try to alter how people can and will behave. The latest, and perhaps most offensive, example comes by way of Indiana.

An interim legislative committee is considering a bill that would prohibit gays, lesbians and single people in Indiana from using medical science to assist them in having a child.

Sen. Patricia Miller (R-Indianapolis) said state law does not have regulations on assisted reproduction and should have similar requirements to adoption in Indiana. […]

“Our statutes are nearly silent on all this. You can think of guidelines, but when you put it on paper it becomes different,” she told The Journal Gazette of Fort Wayne for a story Tuesday.

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

Yes, at least some in the party of limited government want to use the power of the state to regulate who can get pregnant and how.

The bill 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.

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

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

It’s not entirely clear whether this lunacy might actually become law in Indiana, but I almost hope it does. The Indiana Civil Liberties Union would sue, the law would inevitably be struck down, and the trial would be terribly entertaining.

Soooo, if I’m reading this right, the state of Indiana would basically be empowered to issue a baby-making license if this passes. What’s next, euthanizing the mentally ill because they’re, like, so icky and inconvenient to care for and stuff? Talk about a slippery slope. Don’t these people have any sense at all?

  • Refer to the discussion at BOPnews by Shaula Evans.

    Bottom line: Don’t be so sure we can rely on the courts strike down even ridiculous legislation.

    Don’t forget that the required assessment includes “values”. In the crosshair are GLBT families and single parents. Future targets may include people who mistakenly think this crowd is on “their side”. Just look at the adoption agency that is refusing to place children with married Catholic couples because they feel Catholics don’t have “Christian values”.

  • Republicans always believed in social engineering it was just not Democrats version of social engineering. The things they believe now they always believed. This is nothing real new – now they are just louder.

  • The law would “inevitably be struck down” only if Griswold, Eisenstadt, and Roe still mean anything, which is an unclear point at present. Still, I’d much rather see this as a test case for reaffirming those precedents than something directly implicating abortion rights.

  • The hidden irony here is that the people most likely to support this legislation at the grassroots level–the socially conservative poor–are the most likely to get hammered by it.

  • Sad to say, my state has done it again. It’s not enough we send the Dan Quayles and Dan Burtons of the world to Washington to further diminish our standing in this country. No, we have to create our own lunacy here at home (see also, Mitch Daniels, governor, and privatization of state services). I would hope we have enough “true” conservatives (formerly called Republicans) and more sensible types with spines (formerly called Democrats) in our state legislature to prevent this law from even getting close to being a target for the ACLU.

  • I like Pendragon’s headline

    Put down that turkey baster and put your hands in the air so I can see your wedding ring

  • I wonder if they consider immaculate conception as assisted reproduction. If so, watch out Mary, they’re comin’ to get ya.

  • “Legislation has been introduced in the Indiana legislature that would prohibit black, jews, and Hispanics in Indiana from using medical science to assist them in having a child.”
    Imagine if they said this! I’m so sick of bing the right’s political football and hate object!

  • Although I still have trouble imagining a legal regime outside of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and China in which this passes muster, if it did somehow pass and get upheld then equal protection would demand that any requirements adhering to married couples using “reproductive assistance” be placed on couples trying for, let us say, more traditional methods of reproduction. So this is essentially, whether the mouth-breathers who drafted it understand it or not, a law for requiring government approval of any childbirth. (And no scienter requirement to the crimes, if I remember correctly.)

  • It’s pretty crazy, truly Orwellian stuff. Sadly, I think this is only the beginning of legislation like this. In an attempt to stop a handful of lesbians from having children they are including all unmarried people. Nice. Sounds like a solution in search of a problem– I’ll tell you why.

    A law like this reveals the depth of their ignorance about modern artificial insemination issues. I write this as a lesbian who has tried to conceive w/o having hetero sex– and I never stepped foot in a fertility clinic. For pete’s sake, do they not know you can order frozen sperm on-line, have it delivered to your house from other states? Also, some women who use known donors do the insemination at home with a needleless syringe. (No on actually uses turkeybasters, it’s a big myth.) The legislation is especially pointless considering that a lot of clinics won’t work with unmarried women and/or lesbians anyways. This is just a way to make all clinics in Indiana adopt that policy.

    Laws like this do have a chilling effect, though. The state doesn’t get to decide who can or cannot try to get pregnant. What’s next, taking children away from any and all parents who aren’t married?

  • The truely sad thing is, when you stop and think about it, that woman who are willing to use assisted reproduction are among the most seponsible and able people to have children. If they’re willing to take this step, they’ve thought about having children long and hard and are in a place in their lives where they are both financially and emotionally ready for a child.

    • Comments are closed.