Is Anybody There?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit,' says Yahweh Sabaoth" Zach 4:6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dio di Signore, nella Sua volontà è nostra pace!" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin 1759

Friday, June 10, 2011

Don't Like a Ban On Abortion at 20 Weeks, Then How About 18

Tuesday I posted about the Iowa House Republicans response to the attempt by Senate majority leader Gronstal's attempt to welcome late term abortions while making it look like he was trying to keep Carhart out of Council Bluffs. On Monday the House Ways & Means Committee said the Senate bill was unacceptable & suggested some amendments to restore it to the original intent.

On Wednesday the Iowa House voted on the amendment & passed them. The amended bill passed 54-37. The result, a bill that now bans abortions after 18 weeks instead of 20. It does so by basing the time line on the "gestation period of twenty completed weeks". Gestation period is based on when a woman had her last period, which is usually 2 weeks before the child is conceived.

The revised bill calls those abortions that result in the death of the unborn child "feticide" & makes it a class C felony. The abortionist would face up to 10 years in prison & a $10,000 fine. Should the child survive the abortion attempt it will be labels "attempted feticide" & is defined as a class D felony.

The bill does include a "life of the mother" exception. Life, not health, which also closes the loophole of finding any excuse to do an abortion thus sidestepping the law. The life exception says that every reasonable effort must be made to save the life of both. Given that medicine has come far enough along that usually both lives can be saved, this law virtually bans all abortions after 18 weeks. (Note: This seems to be an attempt to apply the principle of double effect, although not perfectly.)

When the leader of the bill, Rep. Dawn Pettengill, R-Mount Auburn was told that this bill would ultimately create the toughest abortion restrictions in the nation, she was pleased. “I believe life begins at conceptions so, to me, I say great. I’m glad that is true,” Pettengill said to the Des Moines Register about the terminology.

Another supporter of the amended bill, Rep. Dwayne Alons, R-Hull, told the Register that every House member should have viewed an abortion (I assume a video like Silent Scream). “Seeing the dismembered bloody bodies taken out before their time, seeing the insertion of an instrument in the skull of a baby and suctioning out the brains would leave us aghast.” While I doubt that it would have changed many votes on the Democratic side, it would at least force them to face what it is they are saying they support.

1 of thos opposed to this bill is Rep. Janet Petersen, D-Des Moines. She told the Register “It disgusts me. . . . Their approach is to criminalize doctors of these loving young mothers who are facing horrific, heart-wrenching decisions.” I wonder what she would say about what an abortion actually does to the child if she saw the video of one? I aslo wonder how willing she is to support Crisis Pregnancy Centers that would provide true alternatives to abortions? I suspect she wouldn't. In fact I am willing to bet that Petersen is simply trying to play on people's emotions & that she really doesn't care about the women like she claims.

Of course Planned Parenthood of the Heartland CEO Jill June wasn't happy with this bill either. She said those supporting it “seem to be on a reckless attack of Iowa women.” Given her willingness to lie about the dangers of "telemed abortions" & what Planned Parenthood does or doesn't do (including a piece in Thursday's TH where she lies about how PP follows all the guidelines for "telemed abortions"), she is the one guilty of leading a reckless attack on women, not these lawmakers.

It will be interesting to see what happens next. I am sure Gronstal is not to happy with this latest development as it puts an unwelcome spotlight back on him. I am not going to hold out much hope that this will get through the Iowa Senate. But it will now make it more difficult for Gronstal to hide behind the Senate bill that was merely a smoke-screen. & make it more likely he will be out after next year's election.

Labels: , ,


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home Headlines

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

Get this widget!
Visit the Widget Gallery