8mm
Posted on 02/24/2007 6:46:05 AM PST by markomalley
Most Alabama lawmakers responding to an Associated Press survey say they would support a proposed constitutional amendment declaring that life begins at conception -- a measure some see as a first step toward banning abortions in Alabama.
During last year's election campaigns, Democrats and Republicans listed passage of the amendment as a priority, but with the start of the 2007 regular session a little more than a week away, no lawmaker has announced plans to introduce the measure.
In the AP survey, 62 percent of House members responding and 58 percent of senators said they would support the amendment, which would also have to be approved by voters.
State Sen. Hank Erwin, R- Montevallo, said he is planning to introduce a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban abortions in Alabama, except to save the life of the mother. The ban would be similar to a proposed amendment banning abortions that passed the Legislature in South Dakota last year, but was defeated by voters.
Rep. Gerald Allen, R-Tuscaloosa, has prepared a bill that would ban abortion, except to save the life or prevent serious harm to the mother or in cases of rape or incest.
Erwin said he also may introduce the amendment defining life as beginning at conception, which he believes could lead to a ban on abortions.
"It would be a first step. When you define life as beginning at conception you are forced to look at all the applications of that concept and you have to deal with the issue of abortion," Erwin said.
One lawmaker opposed to the proposed amendment, Rep. Patricia Todd, D-Birmingham, said she isn't surprised that both parties included the measure on their campaign agendas, but are not rushing to the House or Senate floors to introduce a bill.
"This issue appeals to the right wing vote. ... I resent people using women's reproductive rights as a political issue," Todd said.
Todd said she supports the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe vs. Wade that legalized abortion.
"This legislation would limit the options for many women who may need to terminate a pregnancy for medical reasons," Todd said.
A leading opponent of abortion in Alabama, Birmingham attorney Eric Johnston, said defining in the Constitution that life begins at conception would put the state in position to ban abortions if the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Roe vs. Wade decision.
He said if that happens, it will then be up to the states to come up with their own laws concerning abortion.
"It would give us a constitutional provision that an unborn child is a person," said Johnston, president of the Alabama Pro Life Coalition.
Johnston said he doubts his organization will make the measure a priority during the upcoming session, because they don't believe the proposal will be seriously considered by House and Senate leadership.
House Minority Leader Rep. Mike Hubbard, R-Auburn, said House Republicans support the proposal.
"We tend to be pro life and believe life begins at conception and that it's a sin to take a life," Hubbard said.
Senate Majority Leader Sen. Zeb Little, D-Cullman, said he's not sure if the proposed amendment will come up for a vote in the upcoming session, but said he believes lawmakers have already staked a position on the issue -- referring to a bill passed last year that says if a pregnant woman is killed or assaulted a crime has been committed against two people rather than one.
"I think that implies that life begins at conception," Little said.
The sponsor of that bill last session was Rep. Spencer Collier, R-Bayou La Batre. He said defining life as beginning at conception would not ban abortions, but would be a step in that direction.
"Roe vs. Wade would still be the law of the land, but we would be on record as saying life begins at conception," Collier said.
You use insults to evade the issue. You would not recognize logic if it whacked you across the face. So the question remains, do you have a problem with the courts defining with life begans or are you just being a hypicrit.
I was not insulting you! Here's an insult: You are too touchy and immaturely over-sensitive to carry on a logical and adult discussion.
I'm done. Goodbye.
The word you were trying to strike at me with is hypocrite.
:D You really are too amusing. Almost endearingly amusing.
But not quite.
Hey too late to correct my spelling, you already said goodbye. It's just puzzling that you imply that the courts are acting illegally and immorally, but yet you are disturbed that the legislature is trying to correct illegal and immoral rulings. There is a disconect on logic, but it is not on my end. BTW, I left a new spelling error in so you would have something to correct.
Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
I don't think Shimmer is "evading" anything. I'll add to her point:
The government does NOT have the right to legislate everything they feel like legislating. I, as most here, DO believe life begins at conception. Last time I checked, that was God's law, and scientific law, not yet another piece of government legislation.
Wanna stop abortion? Then require that clinics let women see the ultrasounds beforehand. THAT's what kind of thing has to be done, not this. Change the hearts and minds.
Oh, and it's spelled H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E.
The government has a responsibility to protect life.
And my way gets it done in a way that people understand the what abortion actually is.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Change that to "A new, living individual begins at conception".
Life is already there before conception. It doesn't begin. It continues.
It's obvious that it's a developing human, a baby.
Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping list...
Hello Mark O'Malley. It's a pleasure to respond to another O'Malley to this Pro-life post, and for grins, I'l ping even one more O'Malley. I'll be adding the keyword of Duncan Hunter, who is the best pro-life candidate in the presidential race.
Kevin O'Malley
O'Malleys for Duncan Hunter!
Thanks for the ping!
woohoo:-)
you know I think there is another omalley-komalley maybe? Ive seen a few of us wondering these parts:)
The problem is, some clinics do allow women to see the ultrasounds and they either choose not to or don't care. I've seen some of the people who support the pro-choice position, and they could care less that there is a growing human being there or not. They want that human being removed from their body as they feel that human being is using their body against their will. Therefore, many of them would proceed with the abortions.
Obviously if life is protected from conception, some women will still attempt illegal abortions. However, murder is illegal, and people still commit murder. Drugs are illegal, and people still do drugs. Nonetheless, there would be a significant amount of lives saved with this legislation.
This is the answer that govt. should give as an agent of God.
And the truth shall set you free.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.