{"id":592,"date":"2019-04-23T12:35:51","date_gmt":"2019-04-23T17:35:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/?p=592"},"modified":"2020-03-07T16:39:25","modified_gmt":"2020-03-07T22:39:25","slug":"sc-senate-votes-against-stopping-state-funding-of-certain-abortions-through-sc-state-health-insurance-plan-peba","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/2019\/04\/23\/sc-senate-votes-against-stopping-state-funding-of-certain-abortions-through-sc-state-health-insurance-plan-peba\/","title":{"rendered":"SC Senate votes against stopping State-funding of certain “abortions” through SC State Health Insurance Plan (PEBA)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Columbia<\/a> Christians for Life<\/a> ( CCL<\/a> )
\naka Christians for Life and Liberty ( CLL )
\nColumbia, South Carolina
\nApril 18, 2019 \/ Correction\/Revision February 27, 2020<\/span>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/span>(SC) Wed., April 17, 2019<\/p>\n

SC Senate votes against stopping State-funding of rape, incest, and some ( but not all ) so-called life-of-the-mother “abortions” ***\u00a0 through the SC State Health Insurance Plan (PEBA)<\/p>\n

<\/b><\/span>*** This Correction\/Revision is necessary because:
\n
\n<\/span>1) As written, the Amendment No. 22 proposed on April 17, 2019 to stop State-funding of certain “abortions” would not have stopped all “abortions” had it been adopted; and
\n
\n<\/span>2) The fact that State-funding of all “abortions” would not have been stopped by Amendment No. 22, as written, was inadequately reported and incorrectly evaluated by Columbia Christians for Life back on April 18, 2019.\u00a0 The intent of this Correction\/Revision is to correct that error, and to give a much-needed clarification to the “abortion” debate in SC on what has been a difficult subject\u00a0to both comprehend and articulate, i.e., the so-called life-of-the-mother “exception” [sic]<\/i> to a ban on “abortion”.\u00a0 Such an “exception” [sic]<\/i> does not exist.<\/b><\/p>\n


\n<\/span>Note<\/u>: This Report initially sent out by text on April 17, 2019; the SC Senate is still debating\u00a0 SC State Budget for FY 2019-2010 (H.4000) as of April 18, 2019
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>_____________________
\n<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

_____________________
\n<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/b>[ Edited ]
\n
\n<\/span>Amendment (No. 22) offered by Senator Cash to stop State-funding of rape, incest, and some ( but not all ) so-called life-of-the-mother
\n<\/b>“abortions” in State Health Insurance Plan was tabled (defeated) by vote of 24 to 21 on April 17 in the “REPUBLICAN”-majority Senate (27 R – 19 D).<\/p>\n

These five “REPUBLICANS” [sic]<\/i> below voted to table the Cash Amendment designed to stop State-funding of rape, incest, and some ( but not all ) so-called life-of-the-mother<\/b> child-murders<\/b> by “abortion” in the State Health Insurance Plan (PEBA) in the FY 2019-2020 SC State Budget:<\/p>\n

– Sen Greg Gregory<\/p>\n

– Sen Hugh Leatherman
\n(Finance Comm Chairman)<\/p>\n

– Sen Shane Massey
\n(Majority “Leader”)<\/p>\n

– Sen Luke Rankin
\n(Judiciary Comm Chairman)<\/p>\n

– Sen Sandy Senn
\n—–<\/p>\n

ALL 19 Democrats also voted to table Cash Amdt No.22,
\nincluding:<\/p>\n

– Sen Darrell Jackson
\n(“pastor”)<\/p>\n

– Sen Glenn Reese<\/p>\n

– Sen Kent Williams<\/p>\n

___________________________
\n<\/span>
\n<\/span>(Search for “No. 22”)<\/p>\n

SC Senate Journal for 4\/17\/2019
\n<\/b>https:\/\/www.scstatehouse.gov\/sess123_2019-2020\/sj19\/20190417.htm<\/a><\/p>\n

Amendment No. 22<\/p>\n

<\/b>Senator CASH proposed the following amendment (4000R001.KMM.RJC.DOCX), which was tabled:<\/p>\n

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part IB, Section 108, PUBLIC EMPLOYEE BENEFIT AUTHORITY, page 466, proviso 108.4, by striking the proviso in its entirety, and inserting \/\u00a0\u00a0 108.4. (PEBA: Funding Abortions Prohibited)
\nNo funds appropriated for employer contributions to the State Health Insurance Plan may be expended to reimburse the expenses of an abortion, except in cases of rape, incest or where the mother’s medical condition is one which, on the basis of the physician’s good faith judgment, so complicates the pregnancy as to necessitate an immediate abortion to avert the risk of her death or for which a delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of major bodily function<\/s> in which the life of the mother is at risk and the termination of the pregnancy is incidental to the lifesaving intervention<\/u><\/i>, and the State Health Plan may not offer coverage for abortion services, including ancillary services provided
\ncontemporaneously with abortion services or services incidental to abortion except as permitted by this provision<\/u><\/i>.
\nPhysicians shall act in accordance with the standard of care to preserve both the life of the mother and the life of the pre-born child.<\/u> <\/i>The Public Employee Benefit Authority must determine the amount of the total premium paid for health coverage necessary to cover the risks associated with reimbursing participants in the plan for obtaining an abortion in the circumstances covered by this provision. The determination must be based on actuarial data and empirical study in the same manner and by the same method that other risks are adjusted for in similar circumstances. The plan must report this determination annually to the respective Chairmen of the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee.\/
\n<\/span>
\n<\/span>____________________________
\n
\n<\/span>Here is the beginning of the flawed language in Amendment No. 22 above:<\/p>\n

<\/b>“No funds appropriated for employer contributions to the State Health Insurance Plan may be expended to reimburse the expenses of an abortion, except<\/u> … <\/b><\/span>in which the life of the mother is at risk and the termination of the pregnancy is incidental to the lifesaving intervention<\/u><\/i>, …”\u00a0 [ emphasis added ]
\n
\n<\/b><\/span>A significant part of what is problematic about the Amendment No. 22 language is that “abortions” are never<\/u> “incidental” to a medically necessary life-saving procedure\/intervention.\u00a0 Use of the term “abortion” is erroneous because a truly medically necessary life-saving procedure\/intervention ( e.g., in the case of a medically necessary removal of an ectopic pregnancy to prevent severe hemorrhaging )<\/b> is not<\/u> an “abortion”.
\n
\n<\/span>“Abortion \u2013 the direct killing of the preborn child \u2013 is never necessary to save the mother\u2019s life.”
\n<\/i><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/i>Dr. Patrick Johnston, Director, Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians,
\nStatement S.457 Senate Judiciary Subcomm. Hearing
\n<\/a><\/b>March 13, 2014<\/p>\n

“Abortion” is the direct, intentional killing of the preborn child.\u00a0 See the definition of “Abortion” in the SC Code of Laws, Title 44, Chapter 41, below:<\/p>\n

“SECTION 44-41-10. <\/b>Definitions. As used in this chapter: (a) “Abortion” means the use of an instrument, medicine, drug, or other substance or device with intent to terminate the pregnancy<\/u><\/b> of a woman known to be pregnant for reasons other than to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, or to remove a dead fetus.”
\n[ emphasis added ]
\n
\n<\/span>_____________________________
\n
\n<\/span>“Abortion” is Murder because it has the purpose<\/u> of intentionally destroying the unborn child.
\n
\n<\/span>Furthermore, there are no exceptions to the Biblical ban on murder ( Exodus 20:13, KJV<\/a> ).
\n
\n<\/span>See “ No Exceptions<\/a>” tab at ChristiansforPersonhood.com<\/a>
\n
\n<\/span><\/b>Christians for Personhood
\nPersonhood Report: No Exceptions to Personhood
\n<\/b>http:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/2018\/01\/29\/personhood-report-no-exceptions-to-personhood\/<\/a>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/span>Christians for Personhood
\nPersonhood Report: In Law, No Exceptions to Human Personhood
\n<\/b>http:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/2018\/01\/30\/personhood-report-in-law-no-exceptions-to-human-personhood\/<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/span>_____________________
\n
\n<\/span>Notes:<\/p>\n

1) All 46 SC Senate seats are up for Re-election in 2020, beginning with Primaries in June 2020.<\/p>\n

2) Based upon the voting records\/positions of the 24 Senators (5 R, 19 D) voting to “Table” Cash Amendment No. 22, all 24 (5 R, 19 D) of these SC Senators who voted today against stopping State-funding of rape, incest, and some ( but not all ) so-called life-of-the-mother <\/b>child-murders in the State Health Insurance Plan (PEBA) did so because they do not want to ban even<\/u><\/i><\/b> only<\/u><\/i><\/b> just State-funding of rape and incest “abortions”, not<\/u><\/i><\/b> because they had any principled pro-life objection to not also banning State-funding of all<\/u><\/b> so-called life-of-the-mother “abortions”.\u00a0 So, in principle, their vote may not be able to be scored, since Amendment No. 22 itself was flawed; however, properly evaluated, their vote is certainly instructive: These Senators did not want to ban even<\/u><\/i><\/b> only<\/u><\/i><\/b> just State-funding of rape and incest “abortions”, and they deserve opposition next year at the polls, especially PRIMARY opposition against the five “REPUBLICANS” [sic] <\/i>in June 2020.\u00a0 See scstatehouse<\/a> .gov<\/a>, click on “Senators” and then each Member to identify the location of each Senate District of these 24 SC Senators who voted today to continue funding the shedding of innocent blood of preborn children at the expense of SC taxpayers.
\n
\n<\/span>__________________________
\n
\n<\/span>The SC Senate meets @ 9:30am Thurs., April 18, 2019 to continue debate on the SC State Budget [ FY 2019-2020 ].
\n
\n<\/span>__________________________
\n
\n<\/span>Hosea 4:2, KJV<\/a><\/p>\n

Hosea 4:6, KJV<\/a><\/p>\n

Ezekiel 35:6, KJV<\/a><\/p>\n

Columbia Christians for Life
\nChristianLifeandLiberty<\/a> .net<\/a><\/p>\n

____________________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>CCL Note<\/u>:\u00a0 All content below until the beginning of the original e-mail as sent out on April 18, 2019 has been added as of this February 27, 2020 Correction\/Revision:
\n<\/p>\n

<\/span>There are no exceptions to the Biblical ban on murder ( Exodus 20:13, KJV<\/a> ).
\n
\n<\/span>See “ No Exceptions<\/a>” tab at ChristiansforPersonhood<\/a> .com
\n<\/a>
\n<\/span>“Abortion \u2013 the direct killing of the preborn child \u2013 is never necessary to save the mother\u2019s life.”
\n<\/i><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/i>Dr. Patrick Johnston, Director, Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians,
\nStatement S.457 Senate Judiciary Subcomm. Hearing
\n<\/a><\/b>March 13, 2014
\n
\n<\/b><\/span>IT IS NEVER NECESSARY TO INTENTIONALLY DESTROY THE UNBORN CHILD TO SAVE THE MOTHER’S\u00a0 LIFE; THE PROPER PROCEDURE IS TO MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO SAVE THE LIVES OF BOTH THE MOTHER AND THE CHILD, AND LEAVE THE RESULTS\u00a0 IN THE HANDS OF GOD, BUT NEVER, TO INTENTIONALLY KILL EITHER THE MOTHER OR THE CHILD.\u00a0 GOD SAYS, “THOU SHALT NOT KILL (MURDER).”\u00a0 EXODUS 20:13, KJV
\n<\/span>
\n<\/span>NOTE<\/u>: PREMATURE DELIVERY OF AN UNBORN CHILD TO SAVE THE MOTHER’S LIFE IS NOT<\/u> AN “ABORTION”. LIKEWISE, MEDICALLY NECESSARY REMOVAL OF AN\u00a0 ECTOPIC PREGNANCY IS NOT<\/u> AN “ABORTION”.\u00a0 IN NEITHER OF THESE TWO CASES, OR IN SIMILAR CASES, IS THE PURPOSE OF THE PROCEDURE TO INTENTIONALLY DESTROY THE UNBORN CHILD.\u00a0 THESE ARE NOT “ABORTIONS”.\u00a0 UNINTENTIONAL LOSS OF THE CHILD’S LIFE IN THESE CASES MAY BE CONCOMITANT WITH A TRULY MEDICALLY NECESSARY LIFE-SAVING PROCEDURE\/INTERVENTION WHOSE INTENDED PURPOSE<\/u> IS NEVER THE INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION OF THE UNBORN CHILD; HOWEVER THESE ARE NOT<\/u> ‘ABORTIONS”.<\/p>\n

__________________
\n__________________
\n<\/span>
\nNo Exceptions
\n<\/a>
\n<\/span>Dr. Patrick Johnston, Abortion and Healthcare
\n<\/b>https:\/\/youtu.be\/7uQn6Z0A7eg<\/a>
\nVideo \u2013 6:18
\n
\n<\/span>Dr. Patrick Johnston discusses why doctors might proscribe abortion in cases where the life or health of the mother is in danger.<\/p>\n

_________________
\n_________________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>Pro-Life Without Exception
\n<\/b>[ Video documentary of multiple testimonies ]
\nhttps:\/\/youtu.be\/zwazODlTOBk<\/a>
\nVideo \u2013 58:33
\n
\n<\/span>Is abortion helpful in cases of rape or incest?
\nWhat about fetal deformity?
\nWhat about threats to the life or health of the mother?
\nHear the stories of those who have actually been involved in these difficult circumstances.<\/p>\n

Thomas Smith, Ectopic Pregnancy Survivor
\n<\/b>https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=9-Wd5PaUWk8<\/a>
\n<\/span>Video – 3:56<\/p>\n

___________________
\n___________________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>South Carolina Senate Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing on SC Personhood Bill S.457<\/a> – March 13, 2014<\/p>\n

Dr. Patrick Johnston, Director, Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians,
\nStatement S.457 Senate Judiciary Subcomm. Hearing
\n<\/a><\/b>March 13, 2014<\/p>\n

“Abortion \u2013 the direct killing of the preborn child \u2013 is never necessary to save the mother\u2019s life.”
\n<\/i><\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>[ Written statement of Dr. Patrick Johnston introduced during testimony by Dr. Henry Jordan before SC Senate Judiciary Subcommittee at public hearing on SC Personhood Bill S.457<\/a> on March 13, 2014 \u2013 video<\/a> (begin 8:00) ]\u00a0 [ Video unavailable ]<\/p>\n

______________
\n______________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>Life of the Mother \u201cException\u201d by American Right to Life<\/b>
\nhttp:\/\/americanrtl.org\/life-of-the-mother-exception<\/a><\/p>\n

______________
\n______________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>Are There Rare Cases When an Abortion Is Justified?<\/b>
\n\u2013 By Dr. Patrick Johnston, D.O., Dir., Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians
\nhttp:\/\/mucciolo.net\/app\/?p=59<\/a><\/p>\n

_____________
\n_____________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>Does an ectopic pregnancy justify intentionally killing the baby?
\n<\/b>by Dr. Patrick Johnston<\/a>, D.O., Dir., Assn. of Pro-Life Physicians
\nhttps:\/\/www.clmagazine.org\/topic\/medicine-science\/does-an-ectopic-pregnancy-justify-intentionally-killing-the-baby\/<\/a><\/p>\n

_____________
\n_____________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/b>Christians for Personhood
\nNo Exceptions
\n<\/b>https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/no-exceptions\/<\/a><\/p>\n

_____________
\n_____________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/b>Christians for Personhood
\nPersonhood Report: No Exceptions to Personhood
\n<\/b>http:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/2018\/01\/29\/personhood-report-no-exceptions-to-personhood\/<\/a><\/p>\n

_________________
\n_________________
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n<\/span>Christians for Personhood
\nPersonhood Report: In Law, No Exceptions to Human Personhood
\n<\/b>http:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/2018\/01\/30\/personhood-report-in-law-no-exceptions-to-human-personhood\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Columbia Christians for Life ( CCL ) aka Christians for Life and Liberty ( CLL ) Columbia, South Carolina April […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":587,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[84,61],"tags":[90,91,35],"class_list":["post-592","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-2019-sc-legislature","category-legislative-update","tag-abortion-funding","tag-peba","tag-sc-senate"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/592","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=592"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/592\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":668,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/592\/revisions\/668"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/587"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=592"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=592"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiansforpersonhood.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=592"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}