From the article:

A bill making its way through the North Carolina Legislature states it would be permissible for a person to use deadly force on a woman they believe is seeking an abortion, something Democrats have branded as “wildly extreme.”

The legislation, now only backed by Republican State Representative Keith Kidwell, would classify abortion as first-degree murder and open up the right of another person to defend the life of the unborn baby as they see fit.

“Any person has the right to defend his or her own life or the life of another person, even by the use of deadly force if necessary, from willful destruction by another person,” the bill reads. “The State has an interest and a duty to defend innocent persons from willful destruction of their lives and to punish those who take the lives of persons, born or unborn, who have not committed any crime punishable by death.”

Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/republican-bill-deadly-force-stop-abortions-north-carolina-12005136

Nothing says being pro-unborn-child like murdering the mother while she’s pregnant. That’d really protect the fetus.

Who am I kidding? It’s really a cover hoping that someone will storm in and kill the doctors.

  • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    26 days ago

    Ummm. Wouldn’t that also kill the baby?

    When was the last time someone checked the lead levels in the drinking water in North Carolina?

    • SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      26 days ago

      If you close one eye and then the other, it doesn’t look that bad.

      The fact that they have any hope left in their lives is their most admirable quality.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      25 days ago

      It’s never been able the babies. It’s about abusing and controlling women.

      If they cared about kids, they would be angry about Trump and the other republicans raping them.

    • Fmstrat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      25 days ago

      You’re assuming the bill is about mothers. When you realize it’s about doctors, things make more sense.

  • Broadfern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    26 days ago

    Inb4 this is clearly an excuse for men to murder their pregnant partners and wipe it away as “she was trying to get an abortion” so he can get off scot-free as dead women can’t say anything to defend themselves.

    • Catma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      26 days ago

      Lol as if they would have to actually be pregnant.

      This is just going to lead to any man murdering any woman and claiming its about abortion

  • madcaesar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    25 days ago

    How any woman could vote Republican is beyond me.

    It’s like a black person voting for the KKK

    Like wtf is wrong with you?

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      25 days ago

      How any woman could vote Republican is beyond me.

      because “The only moral abortion is my abortion”

      because " I’m against this because those filthy non-whites use it, but its okay once I need it"

      because " I support this because it hurts people that arent me " ( cue inevitable wailing about the unfairness and cruelty of it all when it comes home to hurt them too.)

      • abigscaryhobo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        25 days ago

        “I never thought the leopards would eat my face”

        • Person who voted for the “Leopards Eating Faces Party” after having their face eaten.
    • MithranArkanere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      25 days ago

      They vote whoever their priests tell them to vote for, because apparently, church-state separation was something made up by woke liberals or something.

  • GraniteM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    25 days ago

    Let’s do a little transitive property game.

    The bill presupposes that there is an absolute moral duty to protect the unborn.

    A theoretical woman is considering an abortion, so it must therefore be okay to murder her.

    Therefore, it is okay to murder someone to protect an unborn person.

    This bill would make it okay to murder women to protect the unborn.

    But that would kill the unborn!

    So, it must therefore be okay to kill in order to prevent this bill from passing.

    So by this bill’s own logic, it would be morally correct to kill Keith Kidwell.

    ALL OF THE ABOVE IS PURELY AN EXERCISE IN ARGUMENTUM AD ABSURDUM AND NOT AN ACTUAL PROPOSAL. DO NOT DO MURDERS.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      25 days ago

      Wait a second… If someone is going to kill the mother, they are almost certainly killing the fetus. Therefore wouldn’t it be totally legal to shoot anyone who is trying to shoot a pregnant woman as your defending the fetus too?

    • deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      25 days ago

      make it legal to murder women for having abortions

      effectively makes it legal to murder women who are pregnant

      now you may legally murder / assault any woman, under the guise she was pregnant/was going to have an abortion, if the woman is even a little bit pro abortion or just isn’t a pro”life” psycho, it will be proven that “this man believed she had endangered her baby within reasonable doubt”

      Not only would this sexist, misogynist, murderous law allow people to murder women with near impunity, but it is just another piece of legislation that is attempting to legalize Republicans killing any democrat, leftist or otherwise. They tried to do it with Rittenhouse, J6, and inch closer and closer with their “legal” jargon like this all the time, now

      I firmly believe this is the end goal of American and other oligarch capitalists when it comes to laws like this. I really hope it would be like “fighting words” where it’s not very enforceable in practice, but that doesn’t matter when women are being killed or even dying being denied healthcare.

      They don’t care about the “unborn”. They want to force you to have children so your children can become their worker slaves or even worse with what we’ve seen in all this Epstein stuff. God I hate this place

  • anon_8675309@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    26 days ago

    Wait wait wait. Let me make sure I understand. In order to save the fetus you would kill the only entity capable of keeping it alive?

  • Shanmugha@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    25 days ago
    • a woman is going to have an abortion
    • someone goes after her to kill her
    • someone else goes after the person above to kill them, protecting the woman
    • repeat as many times as you wish

    Cherry on top: this gets into court, and judge goes “it’s all woman’s fault, jail her for life”

  • Tarambor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    25 days ago

    So to defend the life of an unborn baby they’re going to make it legal to kill the mother carrying it? What the actual fuck do they think would happen to the unborn baby in that scenario? Dumb beyond belief doesn’t even come close to describing this and is a prime example why religion should be absolutely nowhere near law making.

  • terraborra@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    26 days ago

    Just waiting for a Jewish legal group to sue for breaching freedom of religion protections. The life of the mother takes precedence.

    An unborn fetus in Jewish law is not considered a person until it has been born. The fetus is regarded as a part of the mother’s body and not a separate being until it begins to egress from the womb during parturition (childbirth). In fact, until 40 days after conception, the fertilized egg is considered as “mere fluid.” These facts form the basis for the Jewish legal view on abortion.

    • Inucune@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      If they are on birth control and have a fertilized egg that could be killed by said birth control, the bill authourized lethal force.

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    25 days ago

    I for one think it’s pretty ironic to stop unwanted pregnancies from being terminated by ordering law enforcement to carry out 153rd trimester abortions upon the doctors…

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      25 days ago

      cause they arent pro-life.

      they are pro-fetus.

      because a fetus is an amazing tool.

      They can force any idealism they want on a fetus, and the fetus has no way to say no.

      Liking young things that cant say no is kind of a running theme among conservatives.

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    26 days ago

    I’m old enough to remember all these assholes gaslighting about how rolling back Roe won’t “really” bring about Gilead states.

    I had at least one poster trying to get me banned from Denver Post forums for saying it, by the way. Apparently they found the comparison to Gilead to be hurtful and against community guidelines and not sufficiently milquetoast or whatever. Gotta love the Tone Police.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    25 days ago

    use deady force on a woman to stop an abortion

    Do… Eh. Do these people understand how life works, and that ending the mothers life would surely stop the abortion, but also kill the fetus? Like, do I need to explain this?

    Talking about throwing out the baby with the bathwater

  • lohky@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    25 days ago

    I asked the “Ask Conservatives” subreddit if they thought murdering a doctor about yo perform an abortion would be a just killing. I guess I have my answer.

  • DahGangalang@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    26 days ago

    Text of the bill:

    Subject to approval by a majority of voters during the 2026 general election, adds new Section 39 to Article I of the North Carolina Constitution as follows. Specifies that human life begins at fertilization. Recognizes a new human life as an individual person, entitled to the protection of the laws of this State from the moment of fertilization until the moment of natural death. Holds persons willfully seeking to destroy the life of another, at any stage of life, or who succeeds in doing so, accountable for first-degree murder, or attempted murder. Specifies that any person has the right to defend the life of themselves or another, even by use of deadly force if necessary, from willful destruction by another person. Specifies that the State has an  interest and a duty to defend innocent persons from willful destruction of their lives and to punish those who take the lives of persons, born or unborn, who have not committed any crime punishable by death. If approved, effective January 1, 2027.

    • Sunflier@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      Holds persons willfully seeking to destroy the life of another, at any stage of life, or who succeeds in doing so, accountable for first-degree murder, or attempted murder.

      That’s the part where I see them giving leeway to dumbfucks to just got shoot up abortion clinics. Its not really about killing the women (through they’d let that go by too) its about killing the doctors.

      *Edit: its also about killing the mom who takes her raped daughter across state lines to get an abortion elsewhere

      • DahGangalang@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        25 days ago

        Oh, I hadn’t considered trying to take out the docs (my initial read was focused on the mothers). That’s an especially bad feel.

    • jumjummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      26 days ago

      What idiotic wording. So if I see some asshole shooting a woman who they believe is having an abortion, I guess I can then legally kill him too since “any person has the right to defend the life of themselves or another, even by use of deadly force if necessary, from willful destruction by another person.”

      Oh no, then someone can kill me for the same reason… and so on.

      • DahGangalang@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        25 days ago

        Well, North Carolina has some beautiful scenes. I wouldn’t mind moving in and taking the place over if they daisy chained this law into wiping themselves out completely.