Skip to comments.Ohio Abortion Ban Hinges on Heartbeat (heartbeatbill.com)
Posted on 02/08/2011 10:28:19 AM PST by ph12321
An unborn child's heartbeat can be detected as soon as 18 days after conception, and supporters of a bill slated to be unveiled in the Ohio Legislature Wednesday say that women should be prohibited from ending pregnancies beyond that milestone.
State Rep. Lynn Wachtmann is planning to unveil the "Heartbeat Bill" and a legislative aide for the Republican tells Fox News that 42 of the 99 representatives in the Ohio state House have signed on to the bill, which would make an exception to the heartbeat rule only in emergency medical situations.
According to 2009 data from the Ohio Department of Health, 56.6 percent of abortions in that state occur in the first nine weeks of pregnancy. And since the fetal heartbeat appears on monitors by six weeks into gestation in most cases, supporters of the bill believe that it could prevent thousands of abortions.
"When the Heartbeat Bill passes, it will be the most protective law in the nation," Janet Folger Porter, president of conservative advocacy group Faith2Action, said in a release. Porter helped craft the bill, and was also instrumental in passing the nation's first ban in partial-birth abortion when she was legislative director of Ohio Right to Life.
While the legislation must still be proposed in the state Senate and a court challenge could derail the plan, advocates for the bill hope that if the Ohio measure is successful, other states will follow suit with similar laws. A website created to tout the bill urges supporters to send heart-shaped balloons to the governor and state representatives by Valentine's Day. A music video on the site features babies dancing to the tune of Nena's "99 Red Balloons" -- retooled with pro-life lyrics.
But pro-choice group NARAL has equated the bill to "political interference" into a private medical issue...
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I honestly believe they would rather have another thirty years of the current abortion rate, rather than vote for a compromise which would reduce abortions by 90+ percent.
And such a compromise would NOT rule out the possibility of working on the remaining few percent.
I am glad to see that the law will finally make people accountable for their actions. Pregnancy is no accident, it’s what is supposed to happen if you decide to have sex with a person.
Let us pray that this passes.
Other states need to propose similar measures!
doesn’t brainwave activity determine medical death?
why not the same for birth?
“IMO, no legitimate pro-lifer will look at this bill with disdain”
On that we agree.
Some will, but those of us with a brain will look at it as a big step in the right direction. Just as God knew Jeremiah even before He formed him in the womb, so he knows us all.
Many of us get some comfort from knowing, as C.S. Lewis said "You don't have a soul, you are a soul. You have a body." When a child of God is aborted, the child gets an express trip to Heaven without the layover most of us have to abide by.
For anyone claiming to be pro-life to be opposed to this significant step in saving lives, there must be other factors involved. It's tragic that keeping one's job may be among them.
...and here are the words so you can sing along:
Some time ago, we don't know why
The court ruled
to make babies cry
But now we can stop their decree
And protect children like me
When they hear our hearts, they'll care
Send the message
"Someone's in there!"
Show them that we are alive
with 99 red heart ball
oons for life!
99 red heart balloons
Floating in the winter sky
Wouldn't it be really neat?
To protect us from
our first heartbeat?
Ohio babies spring to life
Opens up one eager eye
Focusing it on the sky
Where 99 red heart balloons go by
99 on High Street
Where 99 State Reps meet
The heartless worry, we must scurry
Call the troops out in a hurry
This is what we've waited for
This is it boys, win the war!
The governor is on the line
As 99 red heart balloons go by
Now you can be a voice for me
And send them something they will see
You can be a super-hero
Have a heart don't let them kill!
Help us pass the Heartbeat Bill
Come on now, give it a try
Our delivery's drawing nigh
As 99 red heart balloons go by
As 99 red heart balloons go by
Will you be a voice for me?
And help us make history?
When we defeat the heartless ones,
I'll give you lots and lots of hugs
Then it will be really great
To protect kids in your state
So please send a red balloon
Think of me, please don't say no!
The abortuaries would have to close. As it is, they have trouble keeping nurses. If their revenues dropped 90%, they couldn’t pay staff. And even Judas insisted on his thirty pieces of silver.
Of course, the abortuary supporters have no qualms about taking other people’s money. But few of them will choose to spend their own money to pay idle abortionists.
Tune in to CSpan 2. Now. Taking up abortion.
Unfortunately I don’t see it happening because of legal challenges and court decisions against it, but it would be great if it did.
Wow, this is great news!
By the illogic of the dogmatists, then, nobody should have done anything to help any of the Jews escape during WWII, because their methods could not enable them all to escape?
I understand that if we deal with something once in the Legislative Branch, there will be twice the resistance if we go back and try to address that same issue again anytime soon, and I understand that creates an intense desire to take as much ground on an issue in the first effort.
But, I marvel that people fail to see that even a 10% victory on abortion would save 400 unborn lives every single day in America, and are — by all indications — willing to continue sacrificing all 4000 lives every day until they find a way to save them all in one sweeping change.
How much blood do pro-life dogmatists have on their own heads owing to their stubborn refusal to stand up and support every opportunity to gain partial victories on this issue?
I will, however, caution that this line of reasoning is not applicable to those who catagorically refuse to ever vote for anyone who is not demonstrably pro-life. Imaintain that there is a difference between rejecting a given piece of compromise legislation that represents a real shot at a partial win, and rejecting a compromising candidate. In the first case, the possibility of victory is imminent; the legislation is in play, and support could effect its passage, which would actually save lives. In the second case, there is no immediate, life-saving benefit that is being rejected; only a philosophy that is willing to negotiate the absolute right to life.
What sort of leader — and what moral vacuity — is embodied in a candidate who has an easier time speaking in absolute terms about economic policy than in absolute terms about the transcendant right to life?? I fault no man for withholding his vote from such a candidate; the candidate is a moral cripple, and unfit for office in our Constitutional Republic; founded, as it is, upon the idea that men possess certain, unalienable rights that devolve to him from a transcendant, immutable source of moral certitude.
Or would we have men of uncertain convictions attempting to uphold that which our Constitution deems certain?? Indeed, this is exactly what we have had, and we see where it has taken us; how near to ruin we have come. So, as it is a moral failure to reject legislation that really would save lives, so it is also a moral failure to support a candidate who holds man’s right to life in such low regard as to be willing to compromise it.
So, if we would restore the Right to Life to its plce of Primacy (and we must, lest we be irrecoverably lost), then we must elect absolutists, forcing all moral compromise to arise from the other side of the aisle; and we must make the most of every partial legislative victory, taking ground at every crevice of opportunity to do so.
Murder, a "private medical issue".
Thanks for the ping . . . and you’re right, this is BRILLIANT!