Latest Headlines
- FDOT Updates Status Of Century Highway 29 Construction Work
- Tate Grad, UWF Standout Darrien McDowell Selected In 2024 MLB Draft
- Suspect, 19, Indicted For Fatal Drive-By Shooting Of 70-Year-Old
- Blue Angels Select Officers for 2025 Show Season
- ECSO: McDavid Woman Claims Crockpot ‘Magically Makes Meth”, Charged With Child Neglect
- Driver’s License, Tag, Tax Collector Services This Week In Walnut Hill, Century
- Florida Gas Prices Hold Steady Over Last Week
- Register Now For Northview Chiefs Football Camp
- Wahoos Drop Back-and-Forth Road Finale
- Walnut Hill Man Was The Boss Of The Pensacola Beach Air Show. Here’s A Behind The Scenes Look.
Abortion Bills Ready For Final House Vote
April 27, 2011
The Florida House is ready Wednesday to approve a sweeping series of abortion restrictions, including a requirement that women undergo ultrasounds before they can terminate pregnancies.
House members took up five bills Tuesday that target issues such as insurance coverage for abortions, teen abortions, state funding of abortions and clinic ownership. A sixth bill would change how money is used from sales of the “Choose Life” license plate.
Republicans rejected a string of Democratic amendments during a four-hour debate. Democrats — who earlier sent out news releases describing the bills as “anti-women” and “anti-female” — repeatedly questioned the abortion focus when many voters are concerned about issues such as jobs and the economy.
“Would this legislation result in any creation of jobs?” Rep. Charles Chestnut, D-Gainesville, asked at one point.
But Rep. Rachel Burgin, a Riverview Republican who sponsored one of the bills, said “you cannot put an economic study on life.”
“I believe the health of women and health of families is really important,” she said.
With Republicans controlling the governor’s office and both chambers of the Legislature for the past dozen years, debates about abortion bills have been common. But the volume of bills moving forward this year has been unusual.
The Senate could take up two abortion bills on the floor Wednesday, and others appear to have a chance at passing before the legislative session ends May 6.
Here are summaries of the House bills that are poised for votes as early as Wednesday:
— HB 1127: This measure would require ultrasounds before women can have first-trimester abortions, a requirement that already is in place for later-term abortions. It would largely reverse former Gov. Charlie Crist’s veto of a similar bill last year.
Women would have to sign forms stating they do not want to see the fetal images or hear descriptions. Supporters said Tuesday that many clinics already perform ultrasounds before abortions, but critics argued it could be a financial burden for some women.
“Will the patient be forced to pay for an ultrasound that she does not wish to be performed?” asked House Minority Leader Ron Saunders, D-Key West.
But Rep. Paige Kreegel, a Punta Gorda Republican who is a physician, said good doctors already are performing ultrasounds.
“All we’re doing with this bill is mandating the good practice of medicine,” Kreegel said.
— HB 97: This proposal is designed to prevent abortion coverage in policies that will be sold through a state health-insurance exchange, which is required in 2014 as part of last year’s federal health overhaul.
Such exchanges will create new marketplaces for individuals and small businesses to buy health insurance, with low-income people able to get federal subsidies.
Tax dollars could not be used to pay for abortions, but the federal law will allow people to pay separately for abortion coverage. The House bill would block such coverage from being available in the Florida exchange.
— House Joint Resolution 1179: This proposed constitutional amendment would go on the 2012 ballot and, in part, make clear that public funds could not be used to pay for abortions — including through health-insurance coverage.
Federal law, known as the “Hyde Amendment,” already bars public funding of abortions through programs such as Medicaid. But resolution sponsor Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, said that law is not part of the Florida Constitution.
The proposed resolution, however, would go further because it also would prevent the Florida Constitution from being interpreted more broadly than the U.S. Constitution when it comes to abortion issues. That is important because a privacy clause in the Florida Constitution has been successfully used in the past to challenge abortion restrictions.
— HB 1247: This measure would change a law that requires parents to be notified before minors can get abortions. It would tighten restrictions on minors who seek judicial approval to have abortions without their parents being notified.
As an example, the bill would require minors to go before judges in the same judicial circuits where they live. That would be more restrictive than the current requirement, which allows minors to go before judges in the appellate-districts where they live — a far-larger number of courts in some regions of the state.
Abortion-rights advocates have long argued that some teens need the judicial-waiver process because they could be endangered if parents find out they are pregnant or seeking abortions. Rep. Jim Waldman, D-Coconut Creek, questioned Tuesday whether minors’ anonymity could be threatened if they have to go to courthouses in the circuit where they live.
But bill sponsor Kelli Stargel, R-Lakeland, said the current process allows minors to be driven up to six hours from their homes to go before judges.
— HB 1397: This measure includes a series of changes to abortion laws, including trying to prevent abortions after fetuses have reached “viability.”
But perhaps the most-controversial part of the bill would require that doctors or groups of doctors own and operate any new clinics after Oct. 1, 2011. The requirement would not apply to currently operating clinics.
Rep. Luis Garcia, D-Miami Beach, said that could be a problem because physicians often need investors to finance clinics. But Burgin, the bill sponsor, said “this is not a job for entrepreneurs.”
— HB 501: This proposal would funnel money collected through sales of the “Choose Life” license plate to a non-profit group called Choose Life, Inc.
The money is supposed to go to programs that help pregnant women who are willing to put babies up for adoption. Under current law, the money goes to counties, which then distribute it to adoption-related programs.
Baxley, the bill sponsor, said the state needs a more “uniform” process for distributing the money, which Choose Life, Inc., would provide. But opponents questioned whether the bill includes enough safeguards to make sure the non-profit uses the money appropriately.
By Jim Saunders
The News Service of Florida
Comments
15 Responses to “Abortion Bills Ready For Final House Vote”
take care, best wishes
David, I’m moving on. LOL I have found our dicussion about abortion and human life very interesting. I’ve actually enjoyed it. You have had my heart racing and my blood boiling at certain points but, that’s not a bad thing. It has actually been comforting to me to be able to express my views in this way. Stay safe my friend.
Janet
REGARDING:
“David, I am completely convinced that the moment of conception is the beginning of human life.”
Fine, you‘re convinced. I thought both of the parent cells were alive too, but we‘ll use your belief as fact. Further, I’ll use your definition for the discussion. That brings us back to the question of how to deal with identical twins, identical triplets, chimeras. Or not, but just remember they happen after the beginning point you cite.
AND
“I knew you were going to skirt the issue of the 93% who use abortion as a form of birth control by choosing to talk about the minority of why women have abortions rather than the vast majority of why women have abortions. By the way, what do you have to say about the 93% of women who use abortion as a form of birth control?”
I say, “BAD GIRL!” Happy now? I’ve never encouraged anyone to have an abortion.
AND
“I also find it interesting that you didn’t have anything to say about that miraculous little fertilized egg that contained everything it needs to make a human.”
I also didn’t talk about the weather, politics, crime and punishment. I’m a man of few words–or at least far fewer than pass through my head.
But if you wish—I find it impressive. I find it fascinating that every cell in the human body holds all the information needed to produce that person, or two of that person, or three of that person. In fact it will be very interesting when some mad scientist clones another person from a skin cell, effectively making a twin decades after the birth of the first. I wonder who all will deny its humanity due to the unnatural history. Should we kill it if it happens?
David discussing
David, I am completely convinced that the moment of conception is the beginning of human life. Period. I will always be ready to defend my position and the life of the unborn no matter the circumstances in which they were conceived.
The reason I wanted to show how the percentages break down on why women have abortions is to show the percentage of women who use abortion as a form of birth control. I have said that I love life, all life. And, I really mean that from the bottom of my heart.
You know, I knew you were going to skirt the issue of the 93% who use abortion as a form of birth control by choosing to talk about the minority of why women have abortions rather than the vast majority of why women have abortions. By the way, what do you have to say about the 93% of women who use abortion as a form of birth control? I also find it interesting that you didn’t have anything to say about that miraculous little fertilized egg that contained everything it needs to make a human. And, it all happened at the moment the sperm penetrated the egg. Remember, the 23 pairs of chromosomes and approximately 50,000 genes from each parent, which combine to determine all of one’s physical characteristics, including sex, facial features, body type, and color of hair, eyes, and skin. I asked myself, why didn’t David have anything to say about all the undeniable scientific proof that the little microscopic fertilized egg is nothing less than amazing? A miracle really.
Janet, lover of life (even yours David)
REGARDING:
“you did say a single cell which by definition is the moment of conception. “
That’s A definition. It isn’t the only definition. That’s why I say use of that term leads to confusion. We could pick and choose, but what would it mean? It would mean we were picking those who agreed and rejecting those who disagreed with our preconceived notions.
For example:
conception
Reproduction biology The onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of a blastocyst in the endometrium, and formation of a viable zygote
McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine. © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
conception [kon-sep´shun]
1. the onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of the blastocyst; the formation of a viable zygote.
2. concept.
Miller-Keane Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Medicine, Nursing, and Allied Health, Seventh Edition. © 2003 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.
AND:
“when I say let’s protect the unborn I’m not speaking of the 1% of women who have abortions as a result of incest or rape. Nor am I talking about the 6% of women who have abortions due to potential health problems that could harm the mother or the child.”
So you believe abortions under those conditions are okay? If it’s ever murder, why isn’t it always murder? And how would you punish the murderer?
Further, what’s to stop the woman from lying and claiming her pregnancy was due to rape? After all, that was the lie the lady told in Roe versus Wade. Why should you murder a child because of the actions of her father?
So either way, if you decide who lives and dies, the blood of those who die is on your hands.
David for truth
David, to avoid confusion, no you didn’t say at the moment of conception, but you did say a single cell which by definition is the moment of conception. After conception the single cell rapidly divides into many cells. As it drifts down the fallopian tube into the uterus it continues to divide. Once the cell is implanted in the uterus it has already divided many times. So, when I read ‘single cell’ I naturally think moment of conception, because that is its definition. Sorry for the confusion.
Now, let your eyes drift down to your last paragraph in your first response. When I mentioned viability I was referring to your response of ‘working brain’, not the different ways in which a fertilized egg can divide. I saw your point in cell division perfectly clear.
Finally, when I say let’s protect the unborn I’m not speaking of the 1% of women who have abortions as a result of incest or rape. Nor am I talking about the 6% of women who have abortions due to potential health problems that could harm the mother or the child. So, David there is no blood on my hands. I have killed no one. I’m talking about the women who use abortion as a form of birth control. 93% of women who have abortions have them due to social reasons. (47% of the 93% have had a previous abortion) Ending a baby’s life for social reasons is heart breaking and should never happen. My heart goes out to the woman who has an unwanted pregnancy and feels she has no where to turn. We, in America, have so many agencies and options to help these women without endangering the child at all. I love life. All human life.
REGARDING:
“you are correct in saying that at the moment of conception it is only one single cell.”
I can’t be correct because I never used the term “conception.” For some it means the union of sperm and egg but for others it means implantation of the fertilized egg. I’m trying to avoid confusion.
AND
“I believe what you are speaking of is viability. “
Again, no, I’m not talking about viability. I thought for sure I made it clear I was talking about how that single fertilized cell may become: a dead cell, a single person, two people, three different people, or half of a single person.
AND
“Suppose a person is brain dead. Does that make them less human? No, less viable. They are still human.”
See, there’s where I don’t think we can agree. If a person’s head could be cut off without killing the rest of the body, I wouldn’t consider that headless body a person anymore. If the severed head could be kept alive, I’d consider that head a person.
AND
“–just for argument sake, let’s say I’m wrong. Who have I hurt? No one.”
If you’re wrong and you force women to remain pregnant against their will, some of them will die in childbirth. Therefore, you will have killed them. In fact whether you’re right or wrong, you’ll have killed some. You’re figuring their deaths are justified to save the lives of the children they would have aborted. If you’re right, you’ll have saved many children; if you’re wrong, you’ll just have killed a few women.
“Let’s now say you are wrong. Who have you hurt?”
If I’m wrong, I’ll’ve stood back and allowed the killing of many children by their mothers.
Should I decide for them based on my opinion?
David wondering
Bryan, I am as far right when it comes to protecting human life as one can get. When it comes to abortion what we are talking about is the unborn. So, we right wingers are concerned for the unborn. If not me speaking for them, then who? Who will be their witness? Their advocate? As a right winger I am able to believe in protecting human life and also have strong beliefs in educating our youth about unprotected sex. I believe in sex education, and pregnancy prevention. I also care deeply about the plight of children who live in poverty and neglect. I am active in providing for those who are less fortunate. It never fails that when abortion is mentioned people automatically start talking about over population and those who are born into abusive and neglectful homes. I can care about these precious children and about the precious unborn children at the same time. My heart aches for these children. Abortion that is rare would be wonderful. Abortion that no longer exists – miraculous! But, I believe in miracles.
David, you are correct in saying that at the moment of conception it is only one single cell. But, what does that cell contain? That little microscopic cell contains 23 pairs of chromosomes and approximately 50,000 genes from each parent, which combine to determine all of one’s physical characteristics, including sex, facial features, body type, and color of hair, eyes, and skin. In which case is a human. I believe what you are speaking of is viability. Is this single cell that contains so many miraculous things viable outside of its host? No. Should it then be considered less human because it can not sustain life on its own? Again, no. To a geneticist one does not have to have a “working brain” to be human. Being a human is so much deeper than a “working brain.” Suppose a person is brain dead. Does that make them less human? No, less viable. They are still human. I believe the same holds true for a single fertilized egg. It is human. You and I will have to agree to disagree. I’m certain that I will never convince you otherwise, as you will never convince me that I am wrong. But, just for argument sake, let’s say I’m wrong. Who have I hurt? No one. Let’s now say you are wrong. Who have you hurt? I would rather err on the side of life, than the alternative.
If our society can reduce the demand for abortions then, by default, the number of abortions will be reduced. As long as we continue to pretend that our young people do not need access to contraceptives and do not need to be educated about sex then we will continue this see-saw battle over abortion.
The liberals want free and unfettered access to termination services while the right wingers seem to be more concerned with unborn children instead of children who are already here living in poverty and neglect. Where is the middle ground? I think it is leaving abortion legal, imposing sane restrictions on when it is appropriate to have access to an abortion, and making sure our population is educated about procreation. Those steps would lead to what many saw as the ultimate goal back in the 60s and 70s: Abortion that is legal, safe, and most importantly, RARE.
It is very crazy that in one place we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to save a one pound baby. And in another we destroy it and throw it away. The only difference between the two is that one is wanted and one is not. With all our educated human mind we can justify alot of things, abortions, gay marriage, porn and that time out really works. Remember when you were a child things that adults did looked wrong because we saw things in black and white. As adults we tend to make things gray then we have choices. I hope we haven’t aborted the person who was destin to cure cancer. There may very well be kids in heaven asking Jesus, What was I suppose to be.(The title of a christian song) If you still want “Choice” you have that when you decide to sleep with someone. It is funny that we can dodge responsibility with choices.
A fertilized egg may grow into a human. It’s alive but not a person.
It may die before the woman carrying it ever knew it existed. It may never attach to the uterus and die.
It may divide into identical twins, each of whom will be a separate living human if they survive to birth.
It may divide and produce identical triplets, each of whom will be a separate human.
Sometimes two fertilized eggs grow into fraternal twins.
Sometimes two fertilized eggs merge to form a single human at birth. This is called a chimera and is far outside of normal but is still a person.
The destiny of any given fertilized egg is unknown to people at the time of fertilization.
There is a time at which only the most determined would refuse to call human what the fertilized egg has grown into, the ones who believe in late term abortions of viable fetuses. (Or else they don’t care.)
I don’t understand their thinking any more than I do those who think a single cell is definitely a person, but that’s just because I know the multiple possible results and that a single cell lacks a working brain. To me, a working human brain makes a human. To me, a person isn’t a person without a working brain, but I know plenty who disagree there too. It’s a theological question.
David in a world of certain people
who disagree with certainty
dgh, I would hope you would see this as an intelligent rebuttal to your belief that a fertilized egg in the early stages is not human and not take the stance that I am one of the “fringe elements” you were speaking of.
I believe as well as many in the medical field that a fertilized egg is human. When humans procreate, they don’t make non-humans. Take a fertilized egg for genetic testing and you will find human cells. So, when you say, “On the other you have those who think a fertilized egg in the early stages is ‘human’, which is not the case.” I take great offense to that.
Quotes from world renowned geneticist: “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion… it is plain experimental evidence.” The “Father of Modern Genetics”, Dr. Jerome Lejeune, University of Descarte, Paris. Further, “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.” Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic. Finally, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart.” God, Creator of the Universe, Jeremiah 1:5 NIV
Life should be protected.
This is an issue that seems to have no middle ground, especially when the extreme on both sides seem to throw logic out the window.
On one hand you have those who want no restrictions on abortions and are unwilling to talk about any options.
On the other you have those who think a fertilized egg in the early stages is ‘human’, which is not the case. And there is the issue of what are the circumstances which in this issue can be medical problems, incest or rape. I think to force a woman, and in some cases an adolescent to go through with a pregnancy after incest or rape is just immoral. Are we really prepared to step into a doctor’s office and stand between a woman and her doctor during a very trying time and tell them what to do?
And the sad fact is most who would make all abortions illegal are usually the same ones who don’t care about those in poverty who struggle with issues of prenatal care or the welfare of the children after they are born. They don’t want viable sex education, no discussion of contraception, and no discussion on problems in our country of how low we rank as an industrialized nation in child care and health. The lack of rational discussion on family planning and contraception is especially troubling since over population of our world is probably the biggest problem we face; even above global warming, pollution of our waters and air, over consumption of our resources, etc.
So viable, intelligent discussions on this issue are blanketed by the fringe elements.