Abortion Restriction Roadblocked By Those Who Oppose Abortion

Iowa’s pro-life politicians are trying very hard to pass a ban on abortion after 20 weeks conception.  But they’ve got some people standing in their way: Iowa’s even more extreme anti-abortion politicians.

Via the Des Moines Register:

An ideological difference among Iowa House Republicans has sidelined their push to narrow the state’s abortion laws and keep a Nebraska doctor from opening a Council Bluffs abortion clinic.

The disagreement: Two key Republicans say the bill does not go far enough. Instead of stopping abortion after 20 weeks, they want to enact a law to end all abortions in Iowa.

The two representatives – Kim Pearson of Pleasant Hill and Glen Massie of Des Moines – sit on the Human Resources Committee, and their votes are needed to move the legislation, House File 5, out of the committee.

“It would codify deaths of babies from zero to 19 weeks, and I’m not willing to do that,” Pearson said. “I want to protect all life, not just some.”

Rather than a 20 week “fetal pain” abortion ban, which would mirror the legislation passed in Nebraska last year and serve as a buffer to keep Dr. Leroy Carhart, a provider of late-term abortions who announced he will be working a new clinic in Council Bluffs in the near future, the Representatives are pushing for a total abortion ban.  They have also proposed a ban after 12 weeks, and a “personhood” constitutional amendment like the failed effort in Colorado in 2010.

Although incremental abortion restrictions like the 20 week ban may have had a slight chance of passing the Senate, where Democrats still hold a majority, radical bans would be much less likely to make it into law, making the move to propose the most extreme measures possible somewhat counterproductive.

Abortion in Iowa is currently allowed past the point of viability only when a women’s life or health is in danger.

wikimedia commons

Love This? Never Miss Another Story.

65 comments

Robby C.
Past Member 4 years ago

"It would codify deaths of babies from zero to 19 weeks, and I'm not willing to do that," Pearson said. "I want to protect all life, not just some"

What an idiot! She's about to make progress for her cause, yet throws it away for an all or nothing verdict. Well, she'll get it! I'd have no prob w/a ban down to ~17wks (4 months)- well before the earliest of viability. Those wanting later abortions can have the "baby" removed at 25wks (or whatever) & send it to an anti-choicer to raise ;-) EXCEPT in cases jeopardizing the woman's life & rape, of course. But, in cases of rape, anything before viablity should normally be plenty of time to decide- most would choose imediately & get a morning-after pill- something which should be REQUIRED of hospitals when requested, no matter what the staff's beliefs. Of course, some adamant anti-choicers are too disgusting to even allow this much.

Come on! Everybody now- "We are the world!!! We are the..."

pam w.
pam w.5 years ago

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=12812466

Amber...you'll believe anything, won't you? This was a SCAM by anti-choice mobs....Planned Parenthood cooperated with authorities to expose it. Do a little more research.

Amber M.
Amber Beasley5 years ago

http://liveaction.org/blog/planned-parenthood-aids-sex-ring/

Tina Stump
Tina Stump5 years ago

First of all, God is one of the biggest baby killers there ever was. Read your Bible. Next: no birth control, not even sterilization, is 100% effective. You gonna try to tell me, after having a tubal ligation and deciding I don't want any more children, that I HAVE to carry a child at 43 years of age or older? Hehe, good luck...

John C.
John C.5 years ago

The Christian Taliban are alive and well in Iowa. I wonder how many of them have adopted any unwanted children and how many of them talk the "anti-regulation and complaining about the government interfering in our private lives" talk?

Doug D.
Doug D.5 years ago

Those who oppose abortion and get cancer should be denied treatment. If a women does not want something growing inside her, she should not be forced to gestate it.

Tina L.
Tina L.5 years ago

really hope no parts of the bill will pass

Janet G.
Janet G.5 years ago

When are people ever going to learn that they can't continue to dictate what others do? Just because someone doesn't believe in abortion, doesn't give them the right to make that decision for all women.

Although I personally would not have an abortion unless it was a life or death situation, I still believe in the freedom of choice, when it comes to a woman's own body. If it is your moral belief not to have an abortion, so be it. But don't force your morals on others. Everyone has a reason for what they choose to do. But until you walk in that other person's shoes, you have no right to mandate what that person can or cannot do when it comes to a personal choice like that.

And the men who are against abortion! Grrrrrrr! How DARE they! That REALLY ticks me off!

The bottom line is this...abortion is a moralistic/religious issue, plain and simple. There is supposed to be separation of church and state. So that means that the law should not mandate whether a woman can or cannot have an abortion. Period!

It's my right to choose what's right for me and my body. It is NOT anyone else's right to choose what's right for me and my body. And I would thank you to leave my body alone.

Barbara Erdman
Barbara Erdman5 years ago

noted :0

Dan B.
Dan Brook5 years ago

Pro-choice is pro-democracy and women's rights are human rights!