panelarrow

50 Million+: “It’s a Good Day for Babies!”

| 15 Comments

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) – North Dakota on Friday moved closer to adopting what would be the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, with lawmakers sending the Republican governor measures that could set the state up for a costly legal battle over the U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized the procedure.

The North Dakota Senate overwhelmingly approved two anti-abortion bills Friday, one banning abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy and another prohibiting women from having the procedure because a fetus has a genetic defect, such as Down syndrome. North Dakota would be the first state in the U.S. to adopt such laws.

Supporters said their goal is to challenge the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion up until a fetus is considered viable, usually at 22 to 24 weeks, though anti-abortion activists elsewhere have expressed concern about the strategy.

“It’s a good day for babies,” said Rep. Bette Grande, a Republican from Fargo who introduced both bills. The state’s only abortion clinic is in Fargo, and abortion-rights advocates say the measures are meant to shut it down. Read the rest here.

15 Comments

  1. This is great news! Prayerfully… other states will see the seriousness of this issue and follow suit.

  2. Unless God has another Flood. Or they’re first born Egyptian sons, or enemies of the Hebrews, or born at the same time as Jesus, or . . . well, read the Bible. You’ll see.

  3. If men got pregnant, the morning after pill would be available in government subsidized vending machines, and you’d be able to get an abortion at Walmart while you had the oil changed.

  4. The genetic defect law is a death-sentence to some mothers. What happens if the child happens to die in the womb? Are they still forced to carry it? What if it poses a threat to the mother’s well-being?

    Is an attempt to save babies from being aborted worth the cost of damaging the lives of those who have to carry them?

    This is a disgusting bill, at the very least.

    • And what % of women will be faced with this difficulty?

      • As far as I’m concerned, any percent that’s above 0 is high enough to toss this bill into the waters. There should exist little reason why even the *smallest* amount of women must be subjected to the unintended consequences of this bill.

        (Also, in case you want to know the math, any case that shows that carrying a still-born to term and/or other similar dangerous pregnancy leads to a percentage greater than 0%. Steve, would you be so kind to write a letter to those families that say, “On behalf of those who agree with this law, I’m sorry. We had no intention for your mother/sister/grandmother/aunt/etc. to die, but the law forbid us otherwise, clearly being against common sense and allowing her to terminate a pregnancy that not only ended up with a dead fetus on our hands, but a dead relative in yours?”

      • How many babies does the bill save? (BTW, the percentage of women who experience this unfortunate sitiation number less than 1%, I believe. And I hope there would be a provision for this.)

      • If you can cite a statistic on that <1% claim, please do.

        This bill most likely doesn't take that into consideration, at all. It's only an attempt to counteract Roe vs. Wade in a very disgusting, shallow manner.

  5. Hmmm, abortion as a whole is sick and twisted slaughter.
    The bible saids, He knit you in your mothers womb.
    When u look at the cenus its mostly unmarried females willingly having sex out if marriage using a wicked form of getting rid of a “mistake”. Which if that child had lived he or she would have been playing and learning. There are too many unborn precious babies…why, because Of selfish reasons. So aside from that 1% that die in the womb which is painfully sad, for the rest its just murder.

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.