Sam Brownback Introduces Abortion-Ultrasound Bill in the Senate

Life News ^ | 9/21/07 | Steven Ertelt

[wagglebee]

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Sam Brownback, the Kansas senator and Republican presidential candidate, has introduced a new bill that would require abortion practitioners to perform an ultrasound and allow women contemplating an abortion to see the pictures of their unborn child. The hope is that it will persuade many women to keep their baby.

The Ultrasound Informed Consent Act is similar to bills lawmakers in states like Texas, South Carolina and Georgia have proposed.

Pregnancy centers routinely show women ultrasound photos and a high percentage of women decide against having an abortion.

"It is necessary and right to provide a woman seeking an abortion with all the available information so that she may make the most informed decision possible," Brownback told LifeNews.com.

"The [bill] would ensure that women have access to important information," he added.

Brownback said the requirements of the legislation are placed solely on the abortion practitioner and not the pregnant mother. A woman seeking an abortion may refuse to view the images of the ultrasound after the results are made available to her

"I am hopeful that this bill will inform women and will cause a deeper reflection on the humanity of unborn children. It is important to promote a culture that values life in all stages," Brownback said.

Some of the Republican candidates for president have commented on this kind of pro-life bill.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who has signed pro-life bills into law as governor in his state, says he backs the idea.

"I'm pro-life and my attitude has always been if we're going to take a position, take it on the side of preserving life," he said. "Anytime we can help to highlight what an abortion is, that would be a good thing."

Arizona Sen. John McCain says he, too, favors the abortion-ultrasound requirement.

"Given the profound nature of a decision to end the life of an unborn child," he said. "I believe the more information that can be provided to a woman struggling with the decision of whether or not to have an abortion, the better."

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney endorsed the measure as well, according to spokeswoman Gail Gitcho.

"Gov. Romney is pro-life," Gitcho explained adding that "(He) believes that states should be free to place restrictions on abortion, and favors measures that protect the sanctity of life."

But a representative of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani hedged on whether he would support the pro-life bill.

"The ultrasound proposal currently under consideration is a good example of a matter best left to the states to decide," Elliott Bundy said about the pro-abortion mayor's views.

[wagglebee]

But a representative of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani hedged on whether he would support the pro-life bill.

"The ultrasound proposal currently under consideration is a good example of a matter best left to the states to decide," Elliott Bundy said about the pro-abortion mayor's views.

Yep, even if states are allowed to ban abortion Rooty Toot still wants to make sure it's available.

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[samiam1972]

I doubt this goes anywhere but it seems like common sense to me!

[jonathanmo]

Thompson will be mad...Rudy’s stealing his position!

[SoConPubbie]

Another slur from the anti-Fred crowd.

While Fred is a federalist, every vote that was considered Pro-Life that he had a chance to vote on in the Senate he voted for.

Nice try at the negative spin, however, it don’t wash.

[jonathanmo]

Uh, no negative spin. I know Fred is a Federalist. If you asked him if he would approve of this measure, he would say the exact same thing as Rudy, wouldn't he?

[hinckley buzzard]

This bill appears to be well positioned as there is a body of case law protecting "informed consent" for medical procedures. The problem will be getting it passed by congress. The liberals will claim it places "undue hardship on the mother." No one in the media will comment on the irony.

[cpforlife.org]

Pro-Life PING

Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

[Kevmo]

A bill that saves lives. Possibly millions of them.

[Harrius Magnus]

Senator Switchback, trying to become relevant. Sorry, Senator Zero-Conviction, ain’t buying.

I couldn’t vote for him as Senator, let alone President.

[dschapin]

I have some question about the constitutionality of this bill if it is based on the commerce clause and is challenged for exceeding Congress’s delegated powers under that clause. However, that said, I think this legislation is a great idea and one of the most effective ways to save lives. My sister assisted in a pregnancy care center last year and she said that when they had mothers come in who where seriously considering having an abortion they would show them ultra sound pictures of their babies. She said that once a woman was shown the ultra sound pictures of her baby something clicked and virtually every time she left the care center excited about being a mother. So, God bless Senator Brownback for being willing to fight the good fight on this issue.

[dschapin]

Not only that, but it capitalizes on some of the language from the recent Gonzales v. Carhart decision. Justice Kennedy talked in that decision about the states interest in ensuring that women had good information before getting an abortion so that they wouldn’t later suffer from guilt and depression when they realized what they had done. Ginsburg’s response (which I am sure she didn’t really mean) was that if we were concerned about women we should provide more information rather than banning the procedure. So, this bill is simply taking her at her word. And given Justice Kennedy’s expressed position on this issue we almost certainly have five votes to uphold this law on the merits (if it were challenged under the commerce clause that would be a different matter because we would probably lose Thomas and Scalia). So, this is a great chance to save hundreds of thousands of lives and carve a bigger hole in Roe v. Wade at the same time.

[Pinkbell]

This is wonderful. I believe allowing abortion is unconstitutional, so anything to curb it is awesome. It will be interesting to see the NARAL, NOW, and Planned Parenthood folks fighting this. Of course it will once again prove they don’t want women to have an “informed” choice. They want to kill babies.

[Anita1]

According to an attorney friend of ours -

Up to the first trial in Roe v Wade, the child was considered a child (human being).

During the trial, the child’s rights were never represented! The child was never appointed an attorney to represent him.

“Henry Wade was the Dallas County district attorney who was enforcing the Texas abortion laws when he was named as a defendant in the Roe vs. Wade lawsuit. As such, he represented the state of Texas in the case.”

Attorneys for the plaintiffs were Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington and attorney Linda Coffee filed the Roe vs. Wade class-action lawsuit on behalf of U.S. women. Weddington convinced Norma McCorvey to become the lead plaintiff as “Jane Roe.”

After McCorvey converted to the anti-abortion camp in 1995, Weddington said she wished she had chosen a different representative for the cause.

Now 52, Weddington is an attorney in Austin, Texas, and teaches undergraduate courses in the Government and American Studies Department at the University of Texas. She wrote the book “A Question of Choice,” is a public speaker and raises money for groups that support a woman’s right to a legal abortion, such as Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. “I never thought I was walking into history when I started this case,” she said.”

Before and After the ruling of Roe v Wade, there was no consideration for the POC (Product of Conception as the feminists love to call their child) - who was/is a child.

So - from the begining - the ruling was flawed and SHOULD be overturned!!

Duncan Hunter for President - ‘08 A man of Integrity and Honor!
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm

[8mmMauser]

Pinged from Terri Dailies

8mm

[Hardastarboard]

The bill seems reasonable to me. Since abortion is a right enshrined in the constitution, it should be subject to the same restrictions that certain other constitutional rights are subjected to. Based on that, waiting periods, instant background checks, fingerprinting, and mental health testing should all be perfectably acceptable.

[kevinw]

Abortion is a right enshrined in the Constitution? That’s bull. Abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution, but the right to life is (5th and 14th Amendments).

[Kickass Conservative]

Informed CHOICE. Those libs love the word choice. Unless it includes schools, guns, smoking, eating, driving, health care, light bulbs, talk radio, etc. You get the point.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

I appreciate Brownback for doing this, but you know what’s going to happen. The pro-abortion groups are going to tie this up in court and some liberal judge will strike it down as “unconstitutional.” It’ll then go to the Supreme Court where the justices will either refuse to hear it or if they do, they’ll issue another stalemate ruling. Besides, this bill doesn’t stand a chance in the Senate, not even the Blue Dog Dims will vote for it, and getting the Dims to be “on the record” for the bill is a moot point since the Dims are flat-out pro-abortion. I would rather see state legislatures continue taking the lead in passing these types of bills, not the U.S. Senate.