South Carolina Christians Beware ! FAKE “PRO-LIFE” [sic] BILL H5399 DE-HUMANIZES THE UNBORN; H5399 PRESERVES “ABORTION” IN THE SC CODE OF LAWS

Published by:

Original Posted August 27, 2022; Revised and Edited August 28, 2022

South Carolina Christians Beware !
FAKE “PRO-LIFE” [sic] BILL H5399 DE-HUMANIZES THE UNBORN; H5399 PRESERVES “ABORTION” IN THE SC CODE OF LAWS
_______________________________________________

As the Recommended Language which became H5399 was passed by the SC House Ad Hoc Committee, and by the House Judiciary Special Laws Subcommittee, and by the full House Judiciary Committee, unchanged at each step, H5399 presently contains the following as it comes out onto the Floor of the SC House of Representatives on Tuesday, August 30 for debate:

1) “Permitted Abortion”
Section 44-41-830.(B) [ IAW the circumstances specified in Section 44-41-830. ]
INSTEAD OF A TOTAL BAN ON INTENTIONALLY KILLING THE UNBORN

        See 2012 Dublin Declaration on Maternal Healthcare

Note: Incredibly, H5399 even explicitly requires in new proposed Section 44-41-890. the preservation of the SC Legislature’s material codification in 1974 of the Roe v. Wade “Abortion” framework which exists TODAY in the current SC Code of Laws,
in Section 44-41-20., which is entitled “Legal” [sic] “Abortions.”. 

 
2) Protection only at point of “Clinically Diagnosable Pregnancy”
Section 44-41-810.(1)

INSTEAD OF PROTECTING ALL HUMAN LIFE BEGINNING AT CONCEPTION

 
3) “Organism of the Species Homo Sapiens
Section 44-41-810.(7)

DETESTABLE TERMINOLOGY COMPATIBLE WITH ANTI-CREATOR, ANTI-CREATION, DARWINIAN EVOLUTION


_______________________________________________

The H5399/SC House Ad Hoc Committee/Judiciary Committee/SCCL/Rep McCravy Bill is a BIG LIE.

PRETENDING in the UNENFORCEABLE Legislative Findings to Recognize the Unborn as Persons whose Life Begins at Conception, BUT NOT DOING SO WHERE IT MATTERS, IN THE ACTUAL PROPOSED CHANGES TO CODE SECTIONS IN TITLE 44, CHAPTER 41 – “Abortions“.

MESSAGE TO CHRISTIAN PRO-LIFERS:
H5399 DOES NOT PROTECT ALL UNBORN CHILDREN. DO NOT BE FOOLED BY THE NICE-SOUNDING WORDS
OF THE UNENFORCEABLE LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS. THAT IS A SMOKESCREEN. WHAT MATTERS ARE THE ACTUAL PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SC CODE OF LAWS, TITLE 44, CHAPTER 41 – “Abortions“.

 

FAKE AND FRAUDULENT “PRO-LIFE” [sic] BILL H5399 PRESERVES “LEGAL” [sic] “ABORTION” IN THE NEW PROPOSED SECTION 44-41-890., WITH THIS LANGUAGE IN H5399:

[ H5399 ] “Section 44-41-890. This article must not be construed to repeal, by implication or otherwise, Sections 44-41-630 through 650, 44-41-20 or any otherwise applicable provision of South Carolina law regulating or restricting abortion.”
[ emphasis added ]



As the South Carolina State Supreme Court recently explained in its August 17, 2022 Order temporarily enjoining the SC Heartbeat Law, the SC Legislature in 1974 essentially codified the Roe v. Wade “Abortion” framework, and that “… the codification of Roe in section 44-41-20 remains part of the public policy of this state, …”.  [ emphasis added ]

So, just as the Heartbeat Law preserves the Roe v. Wade framework of SECTION 44-41-20. ( which is entitled “Legal” [sic] “Abortions.” ) of the CURRENT SC CODE OF LAWS, SO ALSO DOES THE NOW PROPOSED FAKE, FRAUDULENT H5399 BILL, FALSELY AND DECEPTIVELY NAMED, THE “SOUTH CAROLINA HUMAN LIFE PROTECTION ACT”, continue to preserve the Roe v. Wade framework in SECTION 44-41-20. ( “Legal” [sic] “Abortions.” ) AS PER THE LANGUAGE IN THE NEW PROPOSED SECTION 44-41-890. OF H5399.

So H5399 explicitly REQUIRES in the new proposed Section 44-41-890. the PRESERVATION of the SC Legislature’s material codification in 1974 of the Roe v. WadeAbortion” framework which exists TODAY in the current SC Code of Laws, in Section 44-41-20., which is entitled ‘Legal [sic] “Abortions.” ‘.

H5399 PRESERVES “ABORTION” IN THE SC CODE OF LAWS !

H5399 IS NOT A PRO-LIFE BILL, IT IS A FAKE AND A FRAUD AND A DECEPTION.

H5399 DOES NOT ESTABLISH IN LAW PERSONHOOD AT FERTILIZATION; AND THEREFORE DOES NOT GUARANTEE “DUE PROCESS” OR “EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS” FOR ANY UNBORN CHILDREN AT FERTILIZATION; AND THEREFORE DOES NOT ESTABLISH JUSTICE.

 
Being “Pro-Life” means AGREEING WITH GOD regarding the Sanctity of Human Life which HE HAS CREATED !

 
The Creator-God says,
“Thou shalt not kill (murder).
Exodus 20:13, KJV

 
Are the Unborn People ?

Are the Unborn “Persons” ?


ANYTHING LESS THAN PERSONHOOD IS NOT “Equal Justice Under Law”.

 

“Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees,…”
Isaiah 10:1, KJV

H5399 is an unrighteous, unjust, iniquitous decree.

 

ESTABLISH JUSTICE.

CONTACT YOUR SC HOUSE MEMBER TO SUPPORT AMENDING H5399
ON THE SC HOUSE FLOOR AUGUST 30 WITH THE LANGUAGE OF
PERSONHOOD BILL H5401.
(scstatehouse.gov)
__________________

ChristiansforPersonhood.com

 

[]

G3 Ministries Article / May 12 “Pro-Life” [sic] Industry Open Letter / Pre-1970 “Abortion” Law in SC / NRLC’s Romish Origin / Roman Catholicism Is Why “Abortion” Stayed “Legal” /  Personhood Vision for All 50 States and the United States

Published by:

Revised August 27, 2022

G3 Ministries Article / May 12 “Pro-Life” [sic] Industry Open Letter / Pre-1970 “Abortion” Law in SC / NRLC’s Romish Origin /
Roman Catholicism Is Why “Abortion” Stayed “Legal” / Personhood Vision for All 50 States and the United States
____________________________________________

‘The Debate over Criminalizing Abortion Has Reached Its ‘Council of Trent’ Moment’
Article by G3 Ministries Leadership
MAY 17, 2022
https://g3min.org/the-debate-over-criminalizing-abortion-has-reached-its-council-of-trent-moment
_______________________________________________

Christian Life and Liberty:

May 12 Open Letter from “Pro-Life” [sic] Industry Establishment opposing Louisiana Personhood Abolition Bill HB 813 because it criminalized women who have their babies killed
____________________________________________

May 12, 2022
“An Open Letter to State Lawmakers from America’s Leading [sic] Pro-Life [sic] Organizations”
https://www.nrlc.org/uploads/communications/051222coalitionlettertostates.pdf
“To all State Legislators in the United States of America, …”
_______________________________________________

Among the 80+ signers of this May 12 Open Letter opposing the Louisiana Personhood Abolition Bill HB 813 were:

Lisa Van Riper
President

Holly Gatling
Executive Director

South Carolina Citizens for Life

(SC chapter of National Right to Life]

________________________________________________

PRESS RELEASE
‘Joint Open Letter: Criminalizing Women Who Have Abortions is Not Pro-Life’
May 12, 2022
https://www.nrlc.org/communications/releases/2022/051222openletter/
JOINT LETTER FROM MORE THAN 70 LEADING [sic] PRO-LIFE [sic] ORGANIZATIONS:
Criminalizing women who have abortions is not pro-life
[sic]

________________________________________________

Pre-1970 “Abortion” Law in SC

See below the pre-1970 South Carolina Law code sections criminalizing “abortion” with no exceptions in the case of pre “quickening” babies [SC Code Section 16-83]; and with one exception in the case of post “quickening” babies [SC Code Section 16-82]. There was also a separate, specific code section criminalizing the woman who solicits for an abortion, with one exception [SC Code Section 16-84].

Code of Laws Of South Carolina – 1962
Title 16.  –  CRIMES AND OFFENSES.
Chapter 3.  –  OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON.
Article 4.  –  Rape, Abortion, etc.

 
Code of Laws of South Carolina, 1962
Pre-1970 “Abortion” Law in South Carolina
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/Code-Of-Laws-Of-South-Carolina-1962-Volume-4-Title-16-Abortion.pdf
________________________________________________

National Right to Life Committee’s Romish Origin

National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) was originally organized in 1968 under the auspices of the then-National Conference of [Roman] Catholic Bishops; NRLC became officially autonomous in 1973.
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2010-07-26-National-Right-to-Life-Comm-originally-founded-1968-under-auspices-of-Natl-Conf-of-Catholic-Bishops.doc
________________________________________________

‘This Is Why “Abortion” Is Still “Legal”:
Roman Catholicism’

End Abortion Now
Feb 5, 2018
https://endabortionnow.com/video_posts/this-is-why-abortion-is-still-legal-roman-catholicism

Video (5:49)
ENDABORTIONNOW.COM
#ThisIsWhy Abortion Is Legal: Catholic gospel
https://youtu.be/n-9zuB6tO-4
Feb 1, 2018  

________________________________________________

ESTABLISH JUSTICE !

PASS PERSONHOOD NOW !

H5401, S1335
(scstatehouse.gov)

 

God says,

“Thou shalt not kill (murder).”

Exodus 20:13, KJV

 

This battle in the United States of America for the Sanctity of the Creator God-given, inherent, unalienable, right to life of ALL human beings as natural persons, beginning at fertilization, was not over on June 24, 2022 when the US Supreme Court issued the Dobbs ruling and Opinion; and it will not be over until Creator God-given, inherent, unalienable, natural PERSONHOOD, at fertilization, with no exceptions, is recognized and established in the State Constitutions of all 50 States, and in the Constitution of the United States,
SO HELP US GOD; because God says, “Thou Shalt Not Kill (Murder).” Exodus 20:13, KJV.

Christians for Personhood
Columbia, South Carolina

ChristiansforPersonhood.com

 

[]

ROE v. WADE OPINION (1973) Footnote #54: 1) Life of the Mother Issue and 2) Criminalization

Published by:

ROE v. WADE OPINION (1973)
Footnote #54: 1) Life of the Mother Issue and 2) Criminalization
_____________________________________________

Roe v. Wade Opinion (1973)
Footnote #54
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2022-08-09-Roe-v-Wade-complete-FN-54.pdf

_____________________

United States Supreme Court
ROE v. WADE (1973)
No. 70-18
Argued: December 13, 1971  [ Second Oral Argument October 11, 1972  – Audio at oyez.org]
Decided: January 22, 1973
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/410/113.html

[ Footnote 54 ] When Texas urges that a fetus is entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection as a person, it faces a dilemma. Neither in Texas nor in any other State are all abortions prohibited. Despite broad proscription, an exception always exists. The exception contained [410 U.S. 113, 158]   in Art. 1196, for an abortion procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother, is typical. But if the fetus is a person who is not to be deprived of life without due process of law, and if the mother’s condition is the sole determinant, does not the Texas exception appear to be out of line with the Amendment’s command?  [ emphasis added ]

There are other inconsistencies between Fourteenth Amendment status and the typical abortion statute. It has already been pointed out, n. 49, supra, that in Texas the woman is not a principal or an accomplice with respect to an abortion upon her. If the fetus is a person, why is the woman not a principal or an accomplice? Further, the penalty for criminal abortion specified by Art. 1195 is significantly less than the maximum penalty or murder prescribed by Art. 1257 of the Texas Penal Code. If the fetus is a person, may the penalties be different?
[ emphasis added ]
_______________________________

Science Photos
https://thelifeinstitute.net/learning-centre/life/science-photos

______________________

‘Re: ECTOPIC PREGNANCIES
– Unethical versus Ethical Methods of Treatment’
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2022/07/29/re-ectopic-pregnancies-unethical-versus-ethical-methods-of-treatment

______________________

Bookmark
– 6 Week Unborn Child
– Life Cycle Books
https://www.lifecyclebooks.com/usa/product/bookmark-6-week-unborn-child-pack-of-100

_____________________________________________

Dublin Declaration on Maternal Healthcare
(Sept 2012)
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2022/07/18/dublin-declaration-on-maternal-healthcare-september-2012

DUBLINDECLARATION.COM

Over 1,000 Medical Field Signers

Three sentences:

1) “As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion — the purposeful destruction of the unborn child — is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.”

2) “We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion, and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child.”

3) “We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.”
___________________________________________________

Christians for Personhood Note:

The Dublin Declaration affirms it is NOT MEDICALLY NECESSARY to purposefully destroy the baby by direct “abortion” to save the life of the mother.

However, above and beyond this thankful medical consideration that we NEED NOT, is the moral and ethical consideration that we MUST NOT ever intentionally destroy an innocent life; and therefore, under God, we CAN NOT, and SHALL NOT, do so,
because…

God says,
“Thou shalt not kill (murder).”
Exodus 20:13, KJV

ChristiansforPersonhood.com

Video Archives: SC House Judiciary Special Laws Subcommittee and full SC House Judiciary Committee (“Abortion” Ban Legislation) – August 16, 2022

Published by:

Video Archives: SC House Judiciary Special Laws Subcommittee
and full SC House Judiciary Committee (“Abortion” Ban Legislation)
– August 16, 2022
__________________________________________

Video Archive:

SC House Judiciary Special Laws Subcommittee
(“Abortion” Ban Legislation)

Subcommittee Meeting and Vote
( 3 to 1 to Adopt Recommended Language as an Amendment to H5399 )
August 16, 2022

Blatt House Office Building
Room 110

State House Grounds
Columbia, South Carolina

https://scstatehouse.gov/video/archives.php?key=12484&part=1
Video – 51:35 ( Begin 49:10 for Voting on Adoption of Recommended Language as an Amendment to H5399 )
______________________________________________

Video – Begin 7:20
Special Laws Subcommittee Chairman Representative John McCravy:
“As stated earlier, the current Fetal Heartbeat Bill as well as this proposed language allowed any legitimate healthcare procedure necessary to prevent the death or serious bodily impairment of the mother. In this proposed language, the Committee takes this clarity to a new level, by giving examples of medical conditions that are presumed to threaten the life or serious health of the mother.”  [ emphasis added ]

 

Video – Begin 7:45
Special Laws Subcommittee Chairman Representative John McCravy:
“At the same time, the proposed language makes it perfectly clear that anytime a live in utero preborn child must be separated from the mother to preserve her life or health, the child may not be killed in the womb before being separated, unless there’s no other way to save the mother’s life or serious health.”  [ emphasis added ]

 

Christians for Personhood Note: The 2012 Dublin Declaration on Maternal Health ( DublinDeclaration.com ) affirms it is NOT MEDICALLY NECESSARY to purposefully destroy the baby by direct “abortion” to save the life of the mother [ abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn child – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.” Dublin Declaration ]. However, above and beyond this thankful medical consideration that we NEED NOT, is the moral and ethical consideration that we MUST NOT ever intentionally destroy an innocent life; and therefore, under God, we CAN NOT, and SHALL NOT, do so, because God says, “Thou shalt not kill (murder).” Exodus 20:13, KJV.

Therefore, the Recommended Language for H5399, as adopted by the Ad Hoc Committee by a 9 [8R,1D] to 3 [3D] vote on July 19, 2022; and as adopted unchanged as an Amendment to H5399 by the House Judiciary Special Laws Subcommittee by a 3 [3R] to 1 [1D] vote on August 16, 2022; and as passed favorably unchanged as H5399, as amended, by the full House Judiciary Committee by a 13 [13R] to 7 [7D] and 5 Not Voting [3R, 2D] vote later on August 16, 2022, in this particular of allowing the INTENTIONAL KILLING OF AN INNOCENT PREBORN CHILD, IS UNETHICAL, IMMORAL, UNJUST, AND UNBIBLICAL. No Bible-believing Christian should support this Recommended Language which is now the language for the amended form of H5399 with this provision for INTENTIONAL KILLING. Where in the Holy Scriptures is mankind given the authority under God to intentionally take a judicially innocent life ?

 

From Recommended Language:
Section 44-41-830.

(C) It is presumed that the following medical conditions constitute a substantial risk of death or substantial risk of a substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of a pregnant woman: molar pregnancy, partial molar pregnancy, blighted ovum, ectopic pregnancy, severe preeclampsia, HELLP syndrome, abruptio placentae, severe maternal trauma, uterine rupture, intrauterine fetal demise, and miscarriage. However, when an unborn child is alive in utero, the physician must make all reasonable efforts to deliver and save the life of an unborn child during the process of separating the unborn child from the pregnant woman, to the extent it does not adversely affect the life or health of the pregnant woman, and in a manner consistent with reasonable medical practice. The enumeration of the medical conditions in this subsection is not intended to exclude or abrogate other conditions that satisfy the exclusions of subsection (A) or prevent other procedures that are not included in the definition of abortion in Section 44-41-810.
[ emphasis added ]
_______________________________________________

Video – Begin 14:40
Special Laws Subcommittee Chairman Representative John McCravy:
“All preborn lives matter in this bill, and all innocent lives are protected, regardless of the circumstances of conception or disability.”

Christians for Personhood Note: FALSE. ALL innocent lives are absolutely NOT protected in this bill.
– Human Life begins at conception/fertilization, NOT at the point of “clinically diagnosable pregnancy” which is the point at which protection begins in this bill (Section 44-41-810.).
– While giving priority to delivering and saving the life of the unborn child in the circumstance of the mother’s life/serious health being at risk, this bill nevertheless still allows for a “permitted abortion” (Section 44-41-830.(B)).

____________________________________________


Video Archive:

SC House Full Judiciary Committee
(“Abortion” Ban Legislation)

Committee Meeting and Vote
( 13 [13R] to 7 [7D] and 5 Not Voting [3R, 2D] on Favorable Passage of H5399 as amended with the Recommended Language )
August 16, 2022

Blatt House Office Building
Room 110

State House Grounds
Columbia, South Carolina

https://scstatehouse.gov/video/archives.php?key=12485&part=1
Video – 1:52:48 ( Begin 1:50:10 for Voting on Favorable Passage of H5399 as amended with the Recommended Language  )

Video – Begin 6:35
Representative John McCravy:
“At the same time, the proposed language makes it perfectly clear that anytime a live in utero preborn child must be separated from the mother to preserve her life or health, the child may not be killed in the womb before being separated, unless there’s no other way to save the mother’s life or serious health. In other words, these procedures may not be used as an excuse to kill a living preborn child. This language is consistent with the position of … pro-life [?] OB/GYN’s who state there is almost never a reason to terminate the life of a child before separating it from the mother.”  [ emphasis added ]

 

Christians for Personhood Note: The 2012 Dublin Declaration on Maternal Health ( DublinDeclaration.com ) affirms it is NOT MEDICALLY NECESSARY to purposefully destroy the baby by direct “abortion” to save the life of the mother [ abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn child – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.” Dublin Declaration ]. However, above and beyond this thankful medical consideration that we NEED NOT, is the moral and ethical consideration that we MUST NOT ever intentionally destroy an innocent life; and therefore, under God, we CAN NOT, and SHALL NOT, do so, because God says, “Thou shalt not kill (murder).” Exodus 20:13, KJV.

Therefore, the Recommended Language for H5399, as adopted by the Ad Hoc Committee by a 9 [8R,1D] to 3 [3D] vote on July 19, 2022; and as adopted unchanged as an Amendment to H5399 by the House Judiciary Special Laws Subcommittee by a 3 [3R] to 1 [1D] vote on August 16, 2022; and as passed favorably unchanged as H5399, as amended, by the full House Judiciary Committee by a 13 [13R] to 7 [7D] and 5 Not Voting [3R, 2D] vote later on August 16, 2022, in this particular of allowing the INTENTIONAL KILLING OF AN INNOCENT PREBORN CHILD, IS UNETHICAL, IMMORAL, UNJUST, AND UNBIBLICAL. No Bible-believing Christian should support this Recommended Language which is now the language for the amended form of H5399 with this provision for INTENTIONAL KILLING. Where in the Holy Scriptures is mankind given the authority under God to intentionally take a judicially innocent life ?
________________________________________________


Video – Begin 14:20
Representative John McCravy:
“All preborn lives matter in this bill, and all innocent lives are protected, regardless of the circumstances of conception or disability.”

Christians for Personhood Note: FALSE. ALL innocent lives are absolutely NOT protected in this bill.
– Human Life begins at conception/fertilization, NOT at the point of “clinically diagnosable pregnancy” which is the point at which protection begins in this bill (Section 44-41-810.).
– While giving priority to delivering and saving the life of the unborn child in the circumstance of the mother’s life/serious health being at risk, this bill nevertheless still allows for a “permitted abortion” (Section 44-41-830.(B)).
________________________________________________

SC House Ad Hoc Committee’s fake, wicked, unbiblical, unjust “Pro-Life” [sic] Bill: In Practice, Affirms Some “Abortion” IS Healthcare [sic]

Published by:

SC House Ad Hoc Committee’s Fake, Wicked, Unbiblical, Unjust “Pro-Life” [sic] Bill: In Practice, Affirms Some “Abortion” IS Healthcare [sic]

Do not be deceived by the fine-sounding name: “South Carolina Human Life Protection Act.”

Describes “Permitted Abortion”; and Does NOT Protect Sanctity of Human Life at Conception: So, the Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation does NOT Protect ALL Preborn Human Beings, and Protects NO Preborn Human Beings Beginning at Conception !

The SC House Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation for H5399 is NOT a Pro-Life Bill !

THE BIG LIE. Despite several rightly-stated, principled, Legislative Findings in SECTION 2., (which shows the authors know what the Bill should say), they are Unenforceable because they do not revise actual Sections of the SC Code of Laws. They are a Smokescreen; betrayed by the egregiously compromised, unbiblical, and unjust actual Statutory Revisions [SECTION 3.] to Chapter 41, Title 44 of the SC Code of Laws
_______________________________

This Posting Supplements These Previous Postings:

‘SC House Ad Hoc Committee Fails to Establish Justice in Recommended Language for “Abortion” Legislation; Adopted July 19, 2022’
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2022/07/21/sc-house-ad-hoc-committee-fails-to-establish-justice-in-recommended-language-for-abortion-legislation-adopted-july-19-2022/
July 21, 2022, Revised July 24, 2022; Revised July 25, 2022; Corrected and Revised July 26, 2022; Corrected and Revised August 14, 2022

and,

Video Archive: SC House Ad Hoc Committee (“Abortion” Ban Legislation) – July 19, 2022
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2022/07/24/video-archive-sc-house-ad-hoc-committee-abortion-ban-legislation-july-19-2022/
July 24, 2022
____________________________

The Ad Hoc Committee Recommended Language for H5399 adopted July 19, 2022 by the Ad Hoc Committee on a 9 [ 8R, 1D ] to 3 [ 3D ] Roll Call vote allows for the “Abortion” of certain children in the womb. However “Abortion” is Child-Murder, and it is ALWAYS Murder.

The explicit language of the SC House Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation for H5399 allows for [ medically unnecessary – see DublinDeclaration.com ] “permitted abortion” in the circumstance described in Section 44-41-830. when the life/serious health of the mother is at risk. Although priority is given to delivering and saving the life of the unborn child in this context of the life/serious health of the mother; nevertheless, the Ad Hoc Committee Recommended Language still also allows for “permitted abortion”.

The Ad Hoc Committee Recommended Language allows the [ medically unnecessary – see DublinDeclaration.com ] intentional killing of unborn children in certain cases involving the life/serious health of the mother, IAW circumstances described in Section 44-41-830. However, it is never necessary to intentionally kill the baby to save the mother’s life. If necessary, premature delivery is not an “abortion”.

See the statement by Dr. C. Everett Koop, pediatric surgeon, former United States Surgeon General, here and here.

Pro-“abortion” advocates have taken up the perverse messaging: “Abortion is Healthcare.” However, isn’t the SC House Ad Hoc Committee erroneously and unnecessarily saying the same thing in the context of the life/serious health of the mother, by allowing for “permitted abortion” ?

Isn’t the SC House Ad Hoc Committee saying that in the circumstance described in Section 44-41-830., that “Abortion” IS Healthcare [sic] ???

However “Abortion” IS NOT Healthcare. “Abortion” IS Murder.

So the SC House Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation for H5399 allows for what is termed “permitted abortion” in Section 44-41-830.(B), (erroneously) supposedly for the life/serious health of the mother. However, if “abortion” is murder, is there ever such a thing as “permitted murder” ?

No. “Abortion” is murder. There is no such thing under God as “permitted murder”.  Exodus 20:13; Matthew 19:18, KJV

The right-thinking Christian understands the term is impossible, there is no such thing as “permitted murder” under God, it is oxymoronic.

God has already spoken:
“Thou shalt not kill (murder).”

Exodus 20:13, KJV

How many people must someone murder to be a murderer ?

Answer: ONE.
(e.g., Genesis 4:10, KJV)

Even from a medical standpoint, “abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn child – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.” Quoted from the 2012 Dublin Declaration on Maternal Healthcare.

See DublinDeclaration.com with over 1,000 medical field signatories.


The Lord Jesus Christ, God the Son, says, “Thou shalt do no murder.” Matthew 19:18, KJV


Apparently the Ad Hoc Committee chose to follow National Right to Life and their General Counsel James Bopp instead of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Bible, or to receive the counsel of the 1,000+ medical signatories of the Dublin Declaration on Maternal Healthcare.

National Right to Life/General Counsel James Bopp, et al., Post-Roe “Model” [sic] “Abortion” Law
https://www.nrlc.org/wp-content/uploads/NRLC-Post-Roe-Model-Abortion-Law-FINAL-1.pdf

So, the Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation does NOT protect ALL Preborn Human Beings.

Neither does this Ad Hoc Committee Recommended Language protect the Sanctity of Human Life beginning at conception, but only at the time of “clinically diagnosable pregnancy”. [Section 44-41-810.(1)]

So, the Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation protects NO Preborn Human Beings beginning at conception !

And while in Section 44-41-810.(7), the Ad Hoc Committee Recommended Language suitably refers to a Pre-birth Human Being as either “‘Unborn human being’ or ‘unborn child’ or ‘preborn child’ or ‘preborn human being’ or ‘fetus'”, NOTICE THE ONE THING THE PREBORN ARE NOT REFERRED TO AS IS A PERSON“; EVEN THOUGH PREBORN CHILDREN WERE REFERRED TO AS PERSONS IN THE UNENFORCEABLE LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS in SECTION 2. !!!

Without recognition of the Creator God-given, inherent, unalienable natural personhood of pre-birth human beings, they have no “due process” or “equal protection of the laws” guarantees of their right to life, under the 5th and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution, or Article I, Section 3. of the South Carolina Constitution.  The

So, the Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation provides NO Preborn Human Beings with “due process” or “equal protection of the laws”as “Persons”.


And Section 44-41-810.(7) even uses the Creator and Creation-denying term “species homo sapiens“, which is compatible with Darwinian Evolution, to refer to a Pre-birth Human Being as “an individual organism of the species homo sapiens“.


The Bible warns those who follow false leadership that it leads to destruction (Isaiah 3:12, 9:16, KJV). In this present matter, because our SC Legislative leaders are they themselves (once again) following unrighteous leadership, we all who are under their authority as citizens in South Carolina will suffer as well, as we have been, for years (Sword/violence, Pestilence/COVID), and now the approaching threat of food shortage/Famine). Read some of the many verses in which the Bible reveals how God judges peoples and nations with the Sword, Pestilence, and Famine. We are living it in South Carolina.
[ Jeremiah 24:10, 27:8, 32:24,36, 34:17, 38:2, 42:17,22, 44:13; Ezekiel 5:12, 7:15, 12:16, 14:12-23, KJV ]

The wicked, unbiblical, unjust, and even blasphemous Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation for H5399 is an unrighteous, iniquitous decree. The Bible says “Woe unto them” that decree such a thing. Isaiah 10:1, KJV.

Just as the Serpent (Devil) tempted Eve in the Garden with “Yea, hath God said,…” (Genesis 3:1, KJV), to doubt and disobey God’s Word, so National Right to “Life”, the SC House Ad Hoc Committee, and SC Citizens for “Life” do likewise with their commendation of this unrighteous legislation.

At a minimum, no faithful, obedient, professing Christian who truly loves and fears God (Proverbs 1:7, 8:13, 9:19, KJV) should support it, neither those who are regular citizens, nor those holding office in the SC Legislature.
____________________________

Media Reports from July 19, 2022

‘South Carolina Panel Votes to Ban Abortions, Protect  Lives of Unborn Babies’
LifeNews.com
by Holly Gatling [ exec. dir. of SC Citizens for “Life”, the SC chapter of National Right to “Life” ]
Jul 19, 2022
https://www.lifenews.com/2022/07/19/south-carolina-panel-votes-to-ban-abortions-protect-lives-of-unborn-babies/


[ Excerpts, comments, emphasis added ]

‘The South Carolina House Judiciary Committee’s Ad Hoc Committee appointed to study potentially outlawing most abortions in the Palmetto State, made its 9-3 recommendation today to protect the lives of babies waiting to be born while strongly protecting the life of the mother.’ [sic]

‘Committee Chairman, pro-life [?] Representative John McCravy, R-Greenwood, said the goal of the recommendation is “ending the practice of using abortion as birth control.” ** He said, “South Carolina took a big step forward in protecting all [sic] life – not just people preferred by society. Everyone’s life is valuable today.” ‘

** FALSE. The rightful goal of legislation is to Establish Justice, IAW the Oath of Office of SC Legislators, which concludes with the words “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of this State and of the United States, So Help me God.” The Preamble of the U.S. Constitution includes among the purposes for which the Constitution was ordained and established, that of to “establish Justice”. The McCravy Ad Hoc Committee Recommended Language FAILED to do that.

‘Lisa Van Riper, President of South Carolina Citizens for Life,
the oldest and largest single-issue pro-life [sic] organization in the state, praised the committee for its vote.I commend the Ad Hoc Committeefor its overwhelming vote to recommend legislation that will protect the life of the unborn child [sic] while protecting the life of the mother throughout all nine months [sic] of pregnancy.” ‘
[ highlighting, emphasis, and comments added ]

‘ “For almost 50 years, the unborn’s life has gone with little legal recognition or protection,” *** Mrs. Van Riper said. “For almost five decades, women have been left vulnerable to pressure from boyfriends, parents and employers. For too long, society has been asked to address its social and economic problems by discarding the unborn child. Today, the Ad Hoc Committee gives us a better way forward for the unborn, the mother, and society.” ‘

*** Personhood legislation has been on file in the SC Legislature every year since 1998. In those 24 years, “abortion” incremental regulationists SC Citizens for “Life”, has never publicly supported this Personhood legislation to END “abortion” in South Carolina, and in fact SCCL incremental child-murder regulation bills have repeatedly been a hindrance and obstruction to the SC Legislature’s interest and attention to principled Personhood legislation. To paraphrase Oswald Chambers from “My Utmost for His Highest”, “Good” is the ENEMY of God’s Best.  SCCL incremental child-murder regulation bills have repeatedly been the Enemy of principled Personhood legislation. When the Supreme Court Dobbs ruling/Opinion was announced on June 24, 2022, South Carolina was NOT among the 18 States which already had either trigger law, pre-Roe, or despite-Roe legislation on their books.  As of this posting on August 15, 2022, South Carolina has therefore continued to kill unborn babies over these last 52 days. This is a fruit of incrementalism as espoused for the last 25+ years by SCCL and those who have aligned themselves similarly, including Palmetto Family (Council), the public policy “leaders” of the SC Baptist Convention, and the Roman Catholic Diocese of South Carolina (Charleston).

‘PERSONHOOD IS ABOLITION / History of Personhood Legislation in South Carolina ( 1998 – 2021 )’
Christians for Personhood
July 12, 2022
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2022/07/12/personhood-is-abolition-history-of-personhood-legislation-in-south-carolina-1998-2021/

2022 “Personhood Act of South Carolina”
H5401, S1335
(scstatehouse.gov)


LifeNews.com article continued…

‘A proposal by Representative Magnuson to impose criminal penalties on women who procure drugs for the purpose of an abortion was tabled. Representative McCravy said the issue could be discussed later when the House Judiciary sets its next meeting, possibly in mid-August, to advance the bill. The Ad Hoc Committee language does not subject women to prosecution, he said; the language “seeks to err on the side of mercy and understanding.” ‘ ****

**** Yet more unbiblical, pious-sounding, error.  Without justice, there can be no mercy. Under God, and according to Scripture, the purpose and duty of the civil minister is to establish justice ( Romans 13:1-4; 1 Peter 2:14; Amos 5:15; Proverbs 21:3, KJV ).  As explained above, this is consistent with the Oath of Office taken by SC Legislators. Yes, “mercy rejoiceth against judgment” (James 2:13, KJV), but without justice and judgment first, there can be no mercy. There must be justice FIRST before mercy can be given. This is properly left to the courts and juries, not legislators. What about mercy upon the unborn children murdered because a woman knows she will not be punished ?
__________________________________
_______________________________

The State [ Columbia, SC ]
‘Rape, incest exceptions should not be included in abortion bill, SC House panel suggests’
UPDATED JULY 21, 2022
https://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article263575318.html
__________________________________

WISTV10 [ Columbia, SC ]
‘SC House Ad Hoc Committee on Abortion meets, teases draft of legislation’
Jul. 19, 2022
https://www.wistv.com/2022/07/19/watch-live-second-meeting-sc-house-ad-hoc-committee-abortion/
_______________________________________

Greenville News [ Greenville, SC ]
‘Proposed SC abortion ban does not include exceptions for survivors of sexual assault’
July 19, 2022
https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/south-carolina/2022/07/19/sc-abortion-ban-under-consideration-house-representatives-committee-meets-again/10067517002/

___________________________________

ARE THE UNBORN PEOPLE ?

ARE THE UNBORN PERSONS ?

ESTABLISH JUSTICE !

PASS PERSONHOOD NOW; WITH NO EXCEPTIONS !

Personhood Act of SC
H5401, S1335

(scstatehouse.gov)

God says,
“Thou shalt not kill (murder).”
Exodus 20:13, KJV

ChristiansforPersonhood.com
Columbia, South Carolina