Tag Archives: Fetal Heartbeat

Columbia Christians for Life ( CCL )
aka Christians for Life and Liberty ( CLL )
Columbia, South Carolina
May 16, 2019 / Revised May 17, 2019

 

April 24 Columbia, SC

Republican-Super-Majority SC House adopted Mace rape and incest ‘exceptions’ amendment to incremental Child-Murder Regulation ‘ Heartbeat‘ Bill which bans NO ‘abortions’ before heartbeat detected

Human Life begins at CONCEPTION NOT HEARTBEAT !!!

Note: The Republican-Super-Majority SC House passed H3020 Heartbeat Bill on Second Reading April 24 with Mace rape and incest “exceptions” amendment, and on Third Reading April 25, and sent bill to SC Senate, where H3020 was assigned to Medical Affairs Committe April 25.
_____________________________________
_____________________________________

living unborn baby at eight weeks
http://clinicquotes.com/abortion-at-8-weeks-pictures/

________________________________
________________________________

“Republicans” who voted against tabling Mace rape and incest “exceptions” amendment to incremental Child-Murder Regulation ‘ Heartbeat‘ Bill, which already bans NO ‘abortions’ before heartbeat detected:

Bailey, Ballentine, Bannister, Blackwell, Bradley, Chellis, Clary, Clemmons, Cogswell, Collins, W. Cox, Daning, Davis, Felder, Finlay, Hewitt, Hixon, Huggins, Hyde, Kimmons, Lowe, Mace, Martin, McCoy, McGinnis, D. C. Moss, Murphy, B. Newton, W. Newton, Sottile, Spires, Taylor, Wooten  [ 33 “Republicans” total ]

Note: SC House Representatives districts and contact information.

After the attempt to table the Mace rape and incest “exceptions” amendment failed on a 38 – 62 vote, the Mace rape and incest “exceptions” amendment was then adopted on a voice vote.  So of the 62 votes against tabling the Mace rape and incest “exceptions” amendment, 33 of those 62 were the “Republicans” listed above.  In other words, the
Mace rape and incest “exceptions” amendment would have failed without the support of Republicans.

______________________________
______________________________

Mace rape and incest ‘exceptions’ amendment added to unjust incremental Child-Murder Regulation ‘ Heartbeat‘ Bill; unjust Mace amendment insures children conceived in cases of rape and incest can still be murdered even after heartbeat detected:

Note 1: In addition to being fundamentally flawed as an incremental bill regulating child-murder by allowing the murder of all children in the womb prior to a heartbeat being detected (approx. 6 weeks gestation), the ‘ Heartbeat‘ Bill ( H3020) as initially filed also already contained “exceptions” for performing an “abortion” (which this bill euphemistically includes among what it terms “a medical procedure” [ sic – intentional murder of a child in the womb is not “a medical procedure” !!! ] “to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.” [ Re: H3020 as pre-filed Dec 18, 2018 – Section 44-41-700. (A) and Section 44-41-710. (A) ]

However, it is never necessary to intentionally destroy the child in the womb.  See written Statement below prepared by Dr. Patrick Johnston, presented to a SC Senate Judiciary Subcommittee by Dr. Henry Jordan, on March 13, 2014:

Dr. Patrick Johnston, Director, Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians, Statement S.457 Senate Judiciary Subcomm. Hearing
March 13, 2014

Note 2:  The Mace amendment adding rape and incest exceptions to the ‘ Heartbeat‘ Bill ( H3020) was approved by the full SC House Judiciary Committee [ April 4, 2019 Report ], and later adopted by the full SC House on April 24:

SC House Journal – April 24, 2019
https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess123_2019-2020/hj19/20190424.htm#p61
Excerpts [ edited, emphasis added ]

The Committee on Judiciary proposed the following Amendment No. 1 to H. 3020 ( Word version)
(COUNCIL\VR\3020C001.CC.VR19):
Amend the bill, as and if amended, SECTION 2, by striking Section 44-41-680 in its entirety and inserting:

/   Section 44-41-680.   (A)   Section 44-41-670 does not apply to a physician who performs or induces the abortion if the physician determines according to standard medical practice that a medical emergency exists that prevents compliance with that section or that the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.

(B)   A physician who performs or induces an abortion on a pregnant woman based on an exception in subsection (A) shall make written notations in the pregnant woman’s medical records of the following:

(1)(a)   the physician’s belief that a medical emergency necessitating the abortion existed; and

(b)   the medical condition of the pregnant woman that assertedly prevented compliance with Section 44-41-670; or

(2)   the physician’s belief that the pregnancy resulted from rape of [ sic – or ] incest.

(C)   For at least seven years from the date the notations are made, the physician shall maintain in the physician’s own records a copy of the notations.   / amend the bill further, as and if amended, SECTION 2, by striking Section 44-41-710 in its entirety and inserting:

/   Section 44-41-710.   (A)   Section 44-41-700 does not apply to a physician who performs a medical procedure that, in reasonable medical judgment, is designed or intended to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman or is designed or intended to terminate a pregnancy that resulted from rape or incest.

(B)(1)   A physician who performs a medical procedure as described in subsection (A) shall declare, in a written document, that the medical procedure is necessary, in reasonable medical judgment, to:

(a)   prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman; or

(b)   terminate a pregnancy that resulted from rape or incest.

(2)   In the document, the physician shall:

(a)   specify the pregnant woman’s medical condition that the medical procedure is asserted to address and the medical rationale for the physician’s conclusion that the medical procedure is necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman; or

(b)   specify the medical rational for the physician’s conclusion that the medical procedure is necessary to terminate a pregnancy that resulted from rape or incest.

(C)   A physician who performs a medical procedure as described in subsection (A) shall place the written document required by subsection (B) in the pregnant woman’s medical records. For at least seven years from the date the document is created, the physician shall maintain a copy of the document in the physician’s own records.   /

Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.

Rep. MACE explained the amendment.

Rep. MCCRAVY spoke against the amendment.
Rep. RIDGEWAY spoke against the amendment.

continued…

Rep. RIDGEWAY continued speaking.

Rep. MAGNUSON spoke against the amendment.
Rep. KING spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. KING spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. RUTHERFORD spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. RUTHERFORD spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. RIDGEWAY spoke against the amendment.
Rep. MACE spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. LONG spoke against the amendment.
Rep. MACK spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. THIGPEN spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. THIGPEN spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. R. WILLIAMS spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. R. WILLIAMS spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. CLEMMONS spoke in favor of the amendment.

continued…

Rep. MCCRAVY moved to table the amendment.

Rep. MACE demanded the yeas and nays which were taken, resulting as follows:

Yeas 38; Nays 62

Those who voted in the affirmative (38) are:
[ voting AGAINST ADDING MACE RAPE AND INCEST EXCEPTIONS AMENDMENT ]

Alexander, Allison, Bales, Bennett, Burns, Calhoon, Chumley, B. Cox, Crawford, Elliott, Forrest, Forrester, Gagnon, Gilliam, Hardee, Hayes, Hill, Hiott, Johnson, Long, Lucas, Magnuson, McCravy, Morgan, V. S. Moss, Pope, Ridgeway, Sandifer, Simrill, G. R. Smith, Stringer, Tallon, Thayer, Trantham, West, Whitmire, Willis, Yow

Total–38

Those who voted in the negative (62) are:
[ voting IN FAVOR OF ADDING MACE RAPE AND INCEST EXCEPTIONS AMENDMENT ]

Anderson, Atkinson, Bailey, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Blackwell, Bradley, Brawley, Chellis, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cogswell, Collins, W. Cox, Daning, Davis, Felder, Finlay, Garvin, Gilliard, Govan, Henderson-Myers, Henegan, Hewitt, Hixon, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Hyde, Jefferson, Kimmons, King, Kirby, Lowe, Mace, Martin, McCoy, McDaniel, McGinnis, Moore, D. C. Moss, Murphy, B. Newton, W. Newton, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pendarvis, Rivers, Robinson, Rutherford, Simmons, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Taylor, R. Williams, S. Williams, Wooten

Total–62

So, the House refused to table the amendment.

The question then recurred to the adoption of the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

____________________
____________________

Additional reports:

PERSONHOOD ACT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
AND SCRIPTURAL BASIS OF HUMAN LAWS
Christians for Personhood newsletter
Steve Lefemine, Christian pro-life missionary
exec. dir., Christians for Personhood
December 31, 2018

ALL Heartbeat bills have a huge “EXCEPTION”
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2019/04/08/all-heartbeat-bills-have-a-huge-exception/
April 5, 2019

Personhood Report: In Law, No Exceptions to Human Personhood
November 30, 2018 / Edited December 4, 2018

Personhood Report: No Exceptions to Personhood
January 27, 2018

No Exceptions
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/no-exceptions/

Pro-Life Without Exception
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=zwazODlTOBk
Is abortion helpful in cases of rape or incest? What about fetal deformity? What about threats to the life or health of the mother? Hear the stories of those who have actually been involved in these difficult circumstance.

Dr. Patrick Johnston, Director, Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians, Statement S.457 Senate Judiciary Subcomm. Hearing
March 13, 2014