Latest Headlines
- ECSO: Truck Stolen In Bratt, Note Left Behind Claims Woman Was Attacked, Kidnapped
- Special Election To Replace Matt Gaetz In Congress Set For April Fools’ Day
- Food Distribution Held Friday In Walnut Hill, Saturday In Cantonment
- Escambia Schools Announce Top 10 Teachers Of The Year
- Still Time To Sign Up! Let The Miracle League Fry Your Thanksgiving Turkey
- Tate Aggies Beat Atmore Blue Devils 71-68 In Nailbiter Home Opener (With Gallery)
- FDLE Charges Escambia Man With Child Porn Possession
- Cantonment Man Charged With Sexual Battery, Molestation Of 5-Year-Old
- Truck Driver Airlifted After Crash On Quintette Road
- Two Newly Elected Escambia School Members Installed
Hill Files ‘Fetal Heartbeat’ Abortion Bill In Florida House
January 11, 2019
Rep. Mike Hill, R-Pensacola filed a proposal Thursday that would block physicians from performing abortions if fetal heartbeats have been detected.
Hill filed the measure for consideration during the legislative session that starts March 5.
The proposal would lead to third-degree felony charges for any “person who knowingly or purposefully performs or induces an abortion on a pregnant woman with the specific intent of causing or abetting the termination of the life of the unborn human being whose fetal heartbeat has been detected,” though it would include limited exceptions in situations such as when a woman’s life is in danger.
So-called “fetal heartbeat” legislation has drawn heavy debate in other states and, in some cases, has led to legal battles about whether it violates abortion rights. For example, Iowa lawmakers last spring passed a fetal-heartbeat bill, and a judge heard arguments in December about its constitutionality, according to numerous news reports.
Comments
22 Responses to “Hill Files ‘Fetal Heartbeat’ Abortion Bill In Florida House”
Good work Mr Hill.
I can hear Moloch and the Democrats cursing.
@just saying, so you had to coach or educate a 19 year old female where babies come from? And you want us to believe that during all 3 pregnancies not one person, family member,friends or any medical staff had informed her of where babies come from. Not one person gave her any words of warning? Hard to believe this story. I’ve often wondered, under an act of both parties consent, why dose the female have the last word when it was an act performed by two. What if the father wanted to take the child and raise it by himself, why isn’t there an option for him. And birth control is everywhere and anyone can get it for free.
Just saying, I am just asking. So, you aren’t the one that is pregnant and you are not the potential father. At what point in time do you get to say anything about the murder of the child with the beating heart. Do you think the mother or potential father has the right to murder their child at any time? Some pro-choice advocates now want to legalize Infanticide, but they want to call it “after-birth abortion.
“Partial-birth abortion” is a term invented by pro-lifers. But “after-birth abortion” is a term invented by two philosophers, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva. In the Journal of Medical Ethics, they propose:
[W]hen circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. … [W]e propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide,’ to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus … rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk.
Is this next?
Pro choice 100%. It’s a woman’s body and if she wants an abortion it’s her business. Not your body, not your business.
Here are some questions to ask yourself before you start spouting your opinions:
Are you the one who is pregnant?
Are you the potential father?
If the answer to those is “no”, answer these:
Why do you feel it’s your right to speak on THEIR BUSINESS in any way?
Are you volunteering to pay any and all costs relating to this pregnancy and the child itself until the age of 18?
If the answer to the former is your religious views and the latter is no:
The Bible doesn’t tell you to force your opinions on anyone. It tells you that your greatest commandment is simply to LOVE! That means, plain and simply, support them emotionally but BUTT OUT!
Until birth control is 100% effective and FREE and easily accessible for all, rape and incest do not exist, and joblessness, homelessness, etc no longer exist, this subject is quite literally NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!!!!!
And, btw, shockingly enough, everybody does NOT know where babies come from. I had to explain it to a 19 year old who was pregnant with her THIRD child because: I know it has something to do with sex, but I don’t know what!?!
So being a woman who was raped at 12 and had to have an abortion here’s how I feel.. Abortion in rape cases and also when medically needed should be aloud but it should be aloud to be used as a form of birth control ever!!! I know some women who have had multiple abortions and that just not right… I do however feel that birth control should be mandatory(some how). It’s great they are trying to stop the mass murder of unborn HUMANS. But there are things that have to be worked out in the bill… I’m all for it but not to completely abolish it
Any mother who wants to stop her child’s beating heart should be willing to chance her own heath. (supposing she goes to a back alley to kill her child) Yes she has the right to choose what’s best for her but not someone else. A beating human heart has rights too even though they can’t. speak for themselves at this point.
Thank you Mr. Hill. I pray this will pass.
I feel sorry for people who want to kill their own children. This will follow them forever. You can’t just kill and go about your business. There will be an account one day.
BOTH PARTIES don’t do what they need to do to prevent unwanted pregnacies, yet it’s the woman who has to deal with the result while male legislators decide what they’re allowed to do. Abortions will occur no matter the law; the only difference is whether it’s medically safe or not.
I’m all for Mr.Hill doing what he’s doing, I just hope it passes. Everyone knows how a female gets pregnant, so don’t do that and one won’t have to worry about being pregnant. AND A BABY DOESN’T HAVE TO DIE!
@ Rex S: You wrote: “This is an attempt to test the boundaries of Roe V Wade for sure. You cannot legislate morality.”
Roe vs Wade is bad case law because, by it, the federal government usurped power from the states and the People. There is no such power authorized to the federal government by the Constitution.
Yes, of course morality can and is legislated (ex. murder), constitutionally through the States and the People, not the federal government. In fact, the federal government not only has no constitutional authority to legislate morality, it also has no authority to have a national police force to enforce morality, nor do they have the authority to brainwash our children with their version of morality via public education.
John Q, if you read the article again you will see, ” though it would include limited exceptions in situations such as when a woman’s life is in danger.’ So John Q, you think you have to have a uterus to care about a tiny baby’s life?
THANK YOU!
I don’t believe abortions are right in some cases. Being a man though I can’t support legislation outlawing it. This is an attempt to test the boundaries of Roe V Wade for sure. You cannot legislate morality.
So thankful that Mr. Hill is standing up for the helpless. It’s murder, no way around
it .
Thank you!
So thankful that Mr. Hill is standing up for the helpless. It’s murder, no way ariundbit
@Adam
Who cares about the rights of mothers in potentially life threatening pregnancies? Not Rep. Hill.
A collection of cells forming into a fetus does not an unborn child make. Many women do not even realize they’re pregnant until after the fetus has a heartbeat.
This is another attempt to undermine the rights of women under the guise of “morality.” If you think Mike Hill cares about the sanctity of human life, then why is he trying to repeal post-Parkland firearm legislation?
At least someone cares for the tiny unborn child.
Wow. The hits keep coming. Mike Hill continues his mission to bring FL back to the Middle Ages.
Is Mr. Hill a medical professional? Is he a woman? Does he have a uterus? If the answer to any of these questions is “no,” then he should not be introducing legislation that governs decisions regarding a woman’s body.
Our rule of law is not regulated by religious ideology.
They had better outlaw wire coat hangers too. Hill can zip up and walk away. Destroying a safe option for women is the goal.
if it has a heartbeat it is a living human being conscience thought or not it is still a little human and murder is murder. Call it what ever you want and justify it how ever you want so you can live with it and sleep at night but all abortion is murder.
Mke Hill is certainly keeping his word about trying to bring morality back into government! Go Mike! Keep up the great work!!!