Tag Archives: Personhood

SC Governor Henry McMaster Signs Personhood Pledge !

Published by:

Personhood SC has secured the commitment of SC Governor to sign the Personhood Act of SC ( S.719 / H .3530 ) into South Carolina Law !

Presently S.719 is in the SC Senate Judiciary Committee after passing a SC Senate Judiciary Subcommittee favorably April 26, 2017

_________________________
_________________________

SC Governor Henry McMaster’s letter of commitment to sign Personhood Act of SC ( H.3530/S.719) into SC Law:

SC Governor Henry McMaster (R):

“Please know that I strongly support the Personhood Act (H.3530 and S.217) and look forward to signing it into law.

 

 

_____________________________
_____________________________

E-mail below from Personhood South Carolina:

[ Edited ]

From: Personhood South Carolina <mkclark8@gmail.com>
Date: October 10, 2017 at 9:35:55 AM EDT
Subject: McMaster Signs Personhood Pledge!

PERSONHOOD SC

View this email in your browser

 

 

Governor McMaster Signs Personhood Pledge…

We heard from another candidate in the upcoming race for SC Governor! Current SC Governor Henry McMaster affirmed our questions and has pledged his support of S.217/H.3530 and personhood legislation. Thank you, Gov. McMaster!

The Governor also sent us a wonderful letter, a portion of which we share with you:

“I believe human life begins at conception. Life should be protected and defended from conception to death. As governor I will vigorously defend the rights of the unborn…. Please know that I strongly support the Personhood Act and look forward to signing it into law.”

We are thankful for Gov. McMaster’s solid commitment to personhood legislation!

Two Republican candidates have yet to respond to our pledge: McGill and Templeton. As soon as we hear anything, we will let you know. Please share this email and let others know what is going on with the Republican candidates for SC Governor.

Sincerely in Christ,

Personhood SC Board

www.personhood.sc

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2017 Personhood South Carolina, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is: [ This has been edited ]
Personhood South Carolina
PO Box 1414
Gaffney, SC 29342

__________________________
__________________________

Christians for Personhood Note / Update:

Personhood SC has since confirmed the positions on the Personhood Act of two more Republican candidates for SC Governor:  Yancey McGill supports the Personhood Act, however Catherine Templeton supports “exceptions” to a ban on murdering unborn children, and therefore does not support the Personhood Act.

In Summary, three of the four Republican candidates for SC Governor support the Personhood Act:

– Governor Henry McMaster
– Lt Governor Kevin Bryant
– Former SC Senator Yancey McGill

Only Catherine Templeton does not support protecting all human beings in the womb.

_____________________________________

See also:

SC Gov. McMaster pledges to sign bill that could ban abortion

http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article179327106.html

Glory to God ! – SC PERSONHOOD ACT ( S.217) passes Senate Judiciary Subcommittee favorably by 3Y-2N vote – April 26, 2017

Published by:

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
April 27, 2017 / Revised April 28, 2017 / Revised July 5, 2017

Glory to God !SC PERSONHOOD ACT ( S .217) passes Senate Judiciary Subcommittee favorably by 3Y-2N vote – April 26, 2017

________________________________________
________________________________________

– The SC Personhood Act ( S .217) passed favorably out of a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Wednesday shortly before 11am, April 26, by a vote of 3 Yeas ( Rice , Gambrell, Talley) to 2 Nays (Bright Matthews, McLeod).

– The bill now goes to the full Judiciary Committee, which presently has 22 members (1 vacancy), of which 13 are Republicans and 9 are Democrats; however only nine Republican members of the Judiciary Committee are co-sponsors of S .217 [ Climer, Gambrell, Goldfinch, Rice , Shealy, Talley, Turner, Timmons, Young ].  There are four Republicans on the Judiciary Committee who are not co-sponsors of S .217 [ Massey (Senate Majority ( Republican ) Leader; Chairman Senate Rules Committee), Rankin (Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman), Senn , and the only presently openly, repeatedly, long-term, declared opponent of S.217, Campsen (Senate Fish, Game and Forestry Committee Chairman) ].  None of the 9 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee are presently co-sponsoring S .217.

– The April 26 meeting was scheduled to convene at 9am, but was started about 15 minutes late.  The full Senate was scheduled to go into session in the Senate chamber over at the State House at 11am, which placed a specific time limit on the length of the S .217 Subcommittee hearing.

– The hearing room was changed only the day before ( 4/25 ) to Room 209, which is the same size as the prior Room 207, with an audience seating capacity of just 50 ( The March 30 S .217 hearing was held in Room 308 with an audience seating capacity of 90, and there were people standing along two walls and overflowing out into the hallway at the March 30 S .217 hearing. ).  On Wednesday, Room 209 was filled including a few spots for standing room, and then there were many other people still out in the hallway.

Senate Gressette Building Room 209 filled for SC Personhood Act ( S .217) Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing  

– The Subcommittee chairwoman Senator Bright Matthews [ D – appointed by “Republican” Senator Luke Rankin (R-Horry) ] explained at the beginning of the meeting that time would have to be allowed at the end of the meeting for the Subcommittee to vote on the bill, and so speakers would not be called beyond a certain time ahead of the end of the meeting to allow that vote to take place.

– Four of those who were allowed to speak in support of the SC Personhood Act ( S .217) were Eva Edl, Johnny Gardner, Rolf Baghdady, and Richard Cash.  The videos of their testimonies are available below:

Eva Edl –  82 years old, survivor of a Communist death camp in Yugoslavia at end of WW2

Eva Edl Personhood Bill testimony – April 26, 2017
https://youtu.be/_nV3PMlewEc
Video – 5:51

Eva Edl testifies before SC Personhood Act ( S .217) Judiciary Subcommittee:  Members present at the time from Left to Right: Senator Scott Talley (R), Judiciary Committee Senior Staff Attorney Paula Benson, Senator Margie Bright Matthews (D), Senator Mike Gambrell (R), Senator Rex Rice (R).  [ Not present yet, Senator Mia McLeod (D), seat empty between Senator Talley and Benson, Esq. ].    

Also:

Johnny Gardner – director of Voice of the Unborn

Johnny Gardner Personhood Bill testimony – April 26, 2017
https://youtu.be/WxFJmZ_iREM
Video – 6:28

Rolf Baghdady, attorney – addressed legal issues, including importance of personhood as identified in Roe Opinion

Rolf Baghdady Personhood Bill testimony – April 26, 2017
https://youtu.be/_iJ8j5mpii8
Video – 6:24

Richard Cash – executive director of Personhood SC; Winner of Republican SC Senate District #3 Anderson Primary Runoff on April 25

Richard Cash Personhood bill testimony – April 26, 2017
https://youtu.be/IunEZWKaWzs
Video – 5:50

Richard Cash testifies before SC Personhood Act ( S .217) Judiciary Subcommittee:  Members present at the time from Left to Right: Senator Scott Talley (R), Senator Mia McLeod (D), Judiciary Committee Senior Staff Attorney Paula Benson, Senator Margie Bright Matthews (D), Senator Mike Gambrell (R), Senator Rex Rice (R).

 

( Several other supporters of the SC Personhood Act ( S .217) were present who were also signed up to speak, but who were not afforded that opportunity by the Subcommittee chairwoman Senator Bright Matthews [ D – appointed by “Republican” Senator Luke Rankin (R-Horry) ]. )

After the conclusion of the SC Personhood Act ( S .217) Judiciary Subcommittee, and the vote to pass S .217 favorably: From Left to Right, Pat Hunter, wife of Dr. Johnny Hunter, and  Eva Edl.  Dr. Johnny Hunter is the national director of the Life Education and Resource Netwlork (L.E.A.R.N.), a Christian, pro-life organization which focuses on reaching Christian black pastors to become involved in pro-life efforts ( Dr. Hunter was signed up to speak and had a short, one-page statement prepared, but was not afforded the opportunity to address the S .217 Subcommitee during the hearing.)
[ See  http://BlackGenocide.org ]

 

‘For the Murdered Unborn, Incrementalism is Not Justice’
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2017/04/11/for-the-murdered-unborn-incrementalism-is-not-justice/
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2017-04-10-Incrementalism-is-Not-Justice-Incrementalism-is-Evil.pdf

‘GOD Has Shown US Great MERCY…What Will We Do with the OPPORTUNITY?
Letter to the Editor / Opinion Editorial
Steve Lefemine, Christian pro-life missionary
dir., Columbia Christians for Life
exec. dir. Christians for Personhood
November 12, 2016 / Edited, Revised November 14, 2016
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2016-11-12-GOD-Has-Shown-US-Great-MERCY-Letter-to-the-Editor.pdf

LEGAL EXPERTS SUPPORTING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF STATE-LEVEL PERSONHOOD LEGISLATION
IN SC (2001), MISS (2009), ALA (2011), and OK (2012):
 – Herb Titus is an attorney, constitutional scholar, author, the founding Dean of College of Law/Gov’t at Regent University
Mathew Staver is former Dean of the School of Law at Liberty University; and Liberty Counsel founder and chair
– Judge Roy Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, is President Emeritus of Foundation for Moral Law
   April 5, 2016
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2016-04-05-Legal-experts-supporting-constitutionality-of-State-level-Personhood-legislation-SC-MISS-ALA-OK-edited-Jan-27-2017.pdf

_____________________________________
_____________________________________

Senator Luke Rankin (R – Horry) has still not signed on as a co-sponsor of S .217 SC Personhood Act.

Senator Luke Rankin (R – Horry) has still not committed to vote for S .217 SC Personhood Act with no amendments in full Senate Judiciary Committee which he chairs.

______________________________________
______________________________________

– Please continue to call and request Senator Luke Rankin, Chairman Judiciary Committee:

1) Sign on to co-sponsor S.217 as soon as possible.

2) Commit to vote in support of S.217 without any amendments in the full Judiciary Committee.

Senator Luke Rankin (R-Horry)
Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee
District 33 – Horry County – Map

Contact Information:
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/member.php?code=1511363455

(Columbia ) Senator Rankin Senate office Phone (803) 212-6610

(Conway ) Senator Rankin Law office Phone (843) 248-2405

( Myrtle Beach ) Senator Rankin Home Phone (843) 626-6269


Send webmail message to Senator Luke Rankin (R-Horry)

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/email.php?T=M&C=1511363455


When calling/leaving messages/e-mailing, remind Senator Luke Rankin he voted in 2016 for the S.719 SC Personhood Amendment on April 12, 2016 ( Minutes p.5 ) in the full Senate Judiciary Committee; and remind Senator Rankin he also voted in 2016 for Special Order for the S.719 SC Personhood Amendment on the floor of the full SC Senate on May 11, 2016[ At the time 23-year incumbent Senator Rankin was facing Republican opposition from a Myrtle Beach Republican in the June 2016 Primary ]. 

 

Click here for a printable version (.docx)

Personhood is Abolition

Published by:

I understand there has been quite a bit of discussion online recently addressing the subjects of Personhood and the Abolitionist’s approach.

Let me begin by stating, Personhood is abolition.  Here in South Carolina, we have advocated passage of State personhood legislation continuously for the last 19 years since 1998 [ History of Personhood Legislation in South Carolina ( 1998 – 2016 )  ].

The current 2017 legislation in the SC Legislature is called the Personhood Act of South Carolina (S.217 / H.3530).

South Carolina Personhood legislation recognizes the Creator God-given, unalienable right to life of every human being as a “person” beginning at fertilization, in SC law.

In my opinion, we will need to pass Personhood legislation, and then we will very likely need interposition of Lesser Magistrates to enforce it once the law is codified and on the books if the passage of Personhood legislation occurs first at the State level.

Personhood and Interposition are NOT mutually exclusive.  Quite the contrary.

The way I see it, Personhood is needed first to establish contemporaneous statutory or State constitutional legal legitimacy in the eyes of the citizens of whatever State jurisdiction is involved which has determined in their day, to take a righteous stand against child-murder; and then interposition of Lesser Magistrates would likely be needed to enforce it ( keeping in mind none have so far enforced marriage though over 30 States have constitutional bans against sodomite/lesbian so-called “marriage” [ sic ] ).

If Federal Personhood legislation is passed, such as US Rep. Jody Hice’s ( R-GA ) re-introduction of his ( formerly US Rep. Paul Broun’s ) good bill, HR 586 ( https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/586 ), then perhaps interposition by State officials would not be necessary.  If however, SCOTUS “Justices” further violate their Oaths and Constitutional function by overthrowing legislation such as HR 586, there is the further step available of US Constitution, Article III, Section 2 legislation in which the US Congress has the authority and power to restrict the appellate jurisdiction of the US Supreme Court, such as in HR 2761 which was introduced in the 114th Congress [ https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2761/text ].

For those opposed to Personhood efforts, I wonder how many have listened to, or read the transcript of, the October 11, 1972 Second Oral Argument of Roe v Wade, where the “basic constitutional question, initially“, “critical to this case, was [ and is ] whether or not an unborn child is recognized in law as a “person”.  Once that is done, then the matter becomes legally inarguable; establishing legal recognition of the Creator God-given unalienable right to life of all human beings here in the United States, according to our Federal and State Constitutions, beginning at fertilization, with no “exceptions”.

It is simple, short legislation, applying a present day, inarguably recognizable legal standard, if there is the WILL to do it !

October 11, 1972 Second Oral Argument of Roe v Wade
Audio – http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1971/1971_70_18/reargument

[ with moving transcript ]

Links to alternate edited transcript – http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2014-02-23-Landmark-Briefs-and-Arguments-of-the-SCOTUS-Roe-v.-Wade%281973%29-Second-Oral-Argument%28Oct.%2011,%201972%29.docx

Posting and excerpts below from www.ChristianLifeandLiberty.net website [edited]:

[ Posted on the ‘Personhood Act’ page as Item #117. ]

  1. LEGAL EXPERTS SUPPORTING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF STATE-LEVEL PERSONHOOD LEGISLATION IN SC (2001), MISS (2009), ALA (2011), and OK (2012):
           – Herb Titus is an attorney, constitutional scholar, author, the founding Dean of   College of Law/Gov’t at Regent University
    Mathew Staver is former Dean of the School of Law at Liberty University; and Liberty Counsel founder and chair
    – Judge Roy Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, is President Emeritus of Foundation for Moral Law
           April 5, 2016
    http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2016-04-05-Legal-experts-supporting-constitutionality-of-State-level-Personhood-legislation-SC-MISS-ALA-OK-edited-Jan-27-2017.pdf

“PERSONHOOD” is the key to ENDING child-murder-by-“abortion”A plain reading of the 5th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution, and analogous due process and equal protection language in the State Constitutions [ for example, Article I., Section 3. of the South Carolina Constitution ], indicates that legal status and therefore protection of constitutional rights, is granted to “PERSONS” in these provisions. The issue of personhood for the “fetus” as being the preeminently critical issue was specifically addressed by a US Supreme Court Justice during the October 11, 1972

Roe v. Wade Oral Reargument.  [ Go to these internet links to both a transcript and the actual audio of the October 11, 1972 Roe v. Wade Oral Reargument. ]

THE KEY, BASIC, AND INITIAL CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE IN ROE V. WADE (1973), CRITICAL TO THE CASE, WAS WHETHER OR NOT THE “FETUS” ( PRE-BIRTH HUMAN BEING ), WOULD BE RECOGNIZED IN LAW AS A LEGAL “PERSON”:

Excerpt from transcript (edited) of Reargument ( October 11, 1972 ) of Roe v. Wade before the US Supreme Court:

US Supreme Court Justice:
“And the basic constitutional question, initially, is whether or not an unborn fetus is a person, isn’t it ?” 
[ p. 827 ]

Mr. Robert Flowers (Assistant Attorney General, State of Texas):
“Yes, sir, and entitled to the constitutional protection.” 
[ p. 827 ]

US Supreme Court Justice:  “And that’s critical to this case, is it not?”  [ p. 828 ]

Mr. Robert Flowers (Assistant Attorney General, State of Texas):  “Yes, sir, it is. … (continued).”  [ p. 828 ]

 

Child-murder-by-“abortion” could have been ENDED in America 44+ years and 59+ MILLION dead children ago with FEDERAL Personhood Legislation.

 

Pass Personhood now !

Jesus Christ is King of kings, and Lord of lords;” ( 1 Timothy 6:15, KJV )

 

Steve Lefemine

exec. dir., Christians for Personhood

PO Box 12222

Columbia, South Carolina 29211

CP@spiritcom.net

March 15, 2017

‘GOD Has Shown US Great MERCY…What Will We Do with the OPPORTUNITY?’

Published by:

Subject:  Letter to the Editor / Opinion Editorial

From:  Steve Lefemine, November 12, 2016 / Edited, Revised November 14, 2016

‘GOD Has Shown US Great MERCY…What Will We Do with the OPPORTUNITY?’

The 2016 Presidential Election is over. The transition has begun.  The Trump Inauguration is January 20, 2017.

GOD Has Shown US Great MERCY.  “Mercy” is when we are not given what we would be rightly judged to receive.

For our national sin of 43+ years of government-protected-and-funded child-murder-by-“abortion” alone, a just and righteous Divine Judgment visited upon the nation corporately, as revealed in Scripture, is for the LORD to give this people “into the hand of the heathen”, such that “they that hated them ruled over them”, and such that “[t]heir enemies also oppressed them, and they were brought into subjection under their hand.” (Psalm 106:37-42, KJV).

In a word, such a wicked, bloody people will be given over, by God Himself, to TYRANNY.  On the eve of Tuesday, November 8, we were looking into the face of an even greater level of tyranny than we are already under – make no mistake – we are already under Divine Judgment for the unrecompensed shedding of innocent blood of 59+ Million (reported) pre-birth children.  Many Christians rightly feared what further oppression might ensue if Jezebel was given the reins of presidential power in the White House.  Many Christians cried out to God for mercy, praying and fasting.  By 3 am or so early Wednesday morning, with the State of Pennsylvania decided, the news came: GOD Had Indeed Shown US Great MERCY.  Now the question is, especially for born-again Christians (Matthew 5:13-16; Matthew 28:18-20, KJV), What Will We Do with the Opportunity?  This Opportunity is also a Responsibility.  Will we truly Repent of our national sin of government-protected-and-funded child-murder-by-“abortion” – and the national corporate bloodguiltiness which is in our midst? (Nehemiah 1:4-11; Daniel 9:3-19; Numbers 35:1,33; Deuteronomy 21:7-9, KJV).

In addition to the US Presidency, Republicans also control the US House and the US Senate.  All three law-making components of the US Federal Government will be in Republican hands by January 20, 2017.  There is NO EXCUSE for the US Congress not to hold House and Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings to pass principled Personhood Bills (such as HR 426 in the current 114th Congress, or if necessary to overthrow US Supreme Court oath-breaking judicial activism and tyranny, HR 2761 – see www.Congress.gov) to establish Justice (as Preamble of the US Constitution purposes) for pre-birth human beings; recognizing the God-given, unalienable right to life of every human being as a person, at fertilization, in law, and without “exception”; because God says, “Thou shalt not kill (murder).” Exodus 20:13, KJV.  Senate Republicans will have 51 or 52 seats, although current Senate Rules require 60 votes to stop a filibuster.

Concurrently, States’ Personhood Bills such as South Carolina’s 2015-2016 Personhood Constitutional Amendment (S.719, H.4093 – see www.SCStateHouse.gov) and/or such as South Carolina’s 2013-2014 Personhood Act (S.457) must also continue to be pursued [ History of Personhood Legislation in South Carolina ( 1998 – 2016 ) ].

The Bible says, “Where there is no vision, the people perish: …” (Proverb 29:18, KJV).  We Christians need the spiritual and prophetic vision to call for the establishment of Justice, and the END of child-murder-by-“abortion”, now !

We Christians need the faith, vision, courage, obedience, knowledge, wisdom, and will; to go forth in Christ’s Name (Colossians 3:17, KJV), to do His Work (Proverb 24:10-12; Proverb 31:8,9; Psalm 82:3,4; Isaiah 1:16,17; Amos 5:15; Matthew 22:37-39; Luke 10:29-37; Matthew 25:31-46; James 1:27, KJV), in His Way (John 14:6; Psalm 89:14; Psalm 97:2; Proverb 8:13, KJV), according to His Word (Matthew 4:4; Proverb 14:34; Psalm 9:17; 2 Samuel 23:3; Romans 13:1-4; 1 Peter 2:14; Psalm 33:12, KJV), for His Glory (1 Corinthians 10:31; Isaiah 48:11; Isaiah 42:8, KJV) !!!

PASS PERSONHOOD NOW !!!

The Lord Jesus Christ is “the King of kings, and Lord of lords”, now !  ( 1 Timothy 6:15, KJV ),

Steve Lefemine, Christian pro-life missionary

dir., Columbia Christians for Life

exec. dir./ board member, Christians for Personhood

PO Box 12222

Columbia, South Carolina  29211

http://ChristianLifeandLiberty.net

http://ChristiansforPersonhood.com

www.RighttoLifeactofSC.net

www.LefemineForLife.net

[ Note: This letter is posted on the “Personhood Act” page of the http://ChristianLifeandLiberty.net website (# 134). ]

Oklahoma Bill is NOT a Personhood Bill; S.B. 1552 Bans Most “Abortions”, but with Unbiblical “Exception”

Published by:

Christiansfor Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
May 20, 2016

Oklahoma Bill is
NOT a Personhood Bill; S.B. 1552 Bans Most “Abortions”, but with Unbiblical “Exception”

_____________________
_____________________

Oklahoma Ban Most “Abortions”Bill S.B. 1552:

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20ENR/SB/SB1552%20ENR.PDF


Oklahoma’s S.B. 1552 is NOT a personhood bill.  It is a bill that bans most “abortions”, but unfortunately S.B. 1552 has a so-called life of the mother “exception”.

This 11-page bill does NOT acknowledge that human life begins at fertilization/conception.

This bill does not acknowledge the God-given, unalienable right to life and personhood of ALL unborn human beings.

Christians for Personhood opposes this bill.

God has said, “Thou shalt not kill ( murder ).”  Exodus 20:13, KJV – no exceptions to the command not to commit murder.

We do not have the right to commit murder.

Go to the Christians for Personhood website, click on “No Exceptions” for video and articles dealing with this subject

[ http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/no-exceptions/ ]

___________________
___________________

Oklahoma Bill S.B. 1552

An Act

ENROLLED SENATE
BILL NO. 1552
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20ENR/SB/SB1552%20ENR.PDF

Passed the Senate the 19th day of May, 2016.
Passed the House of Representatives the 21st day of April, 2016.

[ Excerpts ]

SUBJECT: Physician licensure
BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:

SECTION 1. AMENDATORY 59 O.S. 2011, Section 509, is amended to read as follows:

ENR. S. B. NO. 1552 Page 2 Section 509. The words “unprofessional conduct” as used in Sections 481 through 514 of this title are hereby declared to include, but shall not be limited to, the following:

continued…

20. Performance of an abortion as defined by Section 1-730 of Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes, except that an abortion necessary [CP – sic]  to preserve the life of the mother shall not be grounds for denial or revocation of a medical license. No such condition may be determined to exist if it is based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman may engage in conduct
which she intends to result in her death; or

continued…

SECTION 2. AMENDATORY 59 O.S. 2011, Section 637, is amended to read as follows:

Section 637. A. The State Board of Osteopathic Examiners may refuse to admit a person to an examination or may refuse to issue or reinstate or may suspend or revoke any license issued or reinstated by the Board upon proof that the applicant or holder of such a license:

continued…

14. Has performed an abortion as defined by Section 1-730 of Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes, except that an abortion necessary [CP – sic] to preserve the life of the mother shall not be grounds for denial or revocation of a medical license. No such condition may be determined to exist if it is based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman may engage in conduct which she intends to result in her death; and

continued…

SECTION 3. AMENDATORY 63 O.S. 2011, Section 1-731, is amended to read as follows:

Section 1-731. A. No person shall perform or induce an abortion upon a pregnant woman unless that person is a physicianlicensed to practice medicine in the State of Oklahoma. Any person violating this section shall be guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not less than one (1) year nor more than three (3) years in the State Penitentiary.

B. Any physician participating in the performance of an abortion shall be prohibited from obtaining or renewing a license to practice medicine in this state. The State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision shall revoke the license of an allopathic physician performing an abortion in this state. The State Board of Osteopathic Examiners shall revoke the license of an osteopathic physician performing an abortion in this state. For the purposes of this section, “abortion” shall have the same meaning provided by Section 1-730 of this title, except that an abortion necessary [ CP – sic ] to preserve the life of the mother shall not be grounds for denial or revocation of a medical license. No such condition may be determined to exist if it is based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman may engage in conduct which she intends to result in her death.

C. No person shall perform or induce an abortion upon a pregnant woman subsequent to the end of the first trimester of her pregnancy, unless such abortion is performed or induced in a general hospital.

continued…

SECTION 5. This act shall become effective November 1, 2016.

______________________
______________________

New York Times

Oklahoma Passes Bill That Would Subject Abortion Doctors to Felony Charges
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/us/oklahoma-bill-abortion-doctors.html?_r=0
MAY 19, 2016

[ CP Note: comments, emphasis added; portion omitted ]

The Oklahoma Legislature on Thursday passed a bill that would effectively ban abortions by subjecting doctors who perform them to felony charges and revoking their medical licenses ­ the first legislation of its kind.

In a year in which states have tried to outlaw abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy, to ban the main surgical method used in the second trimester and to shut down abortion clinics with onerous regulations, Oklahoma’s bill is the most far-reaching.

The measure, which passed the Republican-dominated Senate by a vote of 33 to 12, will be presented to Gov. Mary Fallin, a Republican, who will have five days to sign it, veto it or allow it to take effect without her signature.

If it becomes law, it is certain to face a quick challenge in state or federal court. And because the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that women have a right to obtain abortions until the fetus is viable outside the womb, legal experts say, it will soon be declared unconstitutional.

That has not deterred anti-abortion politicians in a state dominated by conservative Republicans. Some say they welcome the chance to make a strong statement and to engage the issues in court.

“Most people know I am for defending rights,” Senator Nathan Dahm, the author of the bill and a software developer from Broken Arrow, Okla., told The Oklahoman. “Those rights begin at conception.”

Mr. Dahm told reporters that he knew the measure would be challenged but expressed hope that the case would lead the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Ms. [ CP – sicMrs. ] Fallin, who has signed several anti-abortion bills that were later blocked by the courts, will not comment on the new bill “until she and her staff have had a chance to review it,” Michael McNutt, her communications director, said in an email.

[ Photo omitted ]
State Senator Nathan Dahm, the sponsor of the bill in Oklahoma City on Tuesday, expressed hope that it would lead the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Credit Sue Ogrocki/Associated Press

continued…

The bill would strip doctors who perform abortions of their medical licenses unless the procedure was necessary [CP – sic] to save a woman’s life. The felony provision does not include that exception.

Currently, only two clinics in Oklahoma, one in Norman and one in Tulsa, provide abortions. A third, owned by Trust Women, a foundation based in Wichita, Kan., is under construction and is to open next month. Julie Burkhart, Trust Women’s chief executive, expressed dismay at the bill and urged Ms. [ CP – sicMrs. ] Fallin to veto it.

Oklahoma’s proposal to criminalize abortion may be the most stringent, but it is one of many new measures that continue in conservative states. This year, South Dakota joined 12 other states in banning abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy, with a similar bill in South Carolina awaiting the signature of Gov. Nikki R. Haley.

Alabama, Mississippi and West Virginia have passed laws to ban the use of the second-trimester surgical technique even though courts in Oklahoma and elsewhere have previously overturned such laws.

Texas regulations that could force a majority of the state’s abortion clinics to close are the subject of a major Supreme Court case. The rules require that doctors have admitting privileges at local hospitals and that abortion clinics meet the stringent building and staffing standards of ambulatory surgery centers. The decision, expected in June, could have major effects on access to abortion in several other states.

But the Supreme Court, while it is debating how far states may go in regulating abortion, has given no sign that it will overturn the basic right of women to obtain the procedure, which is at stake in the new Oklahoma bill.

A version of this article appears in print on May 20, 2016, on page A10 of the New York edition with the headline:

Oklahoma Abortion Bill to Punish Providers. Order Reprints| Today’s Paper | Subscribe

__________________
__________________