Ohio Senate Passes Bill to Ban All Abortions After an Unborn Baby’s Heartbeat Begins

[footballfanatic]

If you are pro-life and believe in the sanctity of life, this is very good news. I'm often amazed that people who consider themselves "prochoice" (abortion is about the only thing that democrats are prochoice on), seem so flippant and exercise no caution on abortion. I'm glad Ohio seems to be.

The Ohio State Senate today passed legislation that would ban all abortions after an unborn baby’s heart begins to beat. An unborn child’s heart begins to beat at 22 days after conception or earlier.

Should the measure be approved by the full Ohio State Legislature and be signed into law, the legislation would likely be struck down in court as has been the case and two other states — Arkansas and North Dakota.

As the Ohio General Assembly considers bills in these last days of lame duck session before the year’s end, significant amendments are being added to various laws to pass additional legislation. Today the Ohio Senate added Ohio’s Unborn Heartbeat Protection bill, which has been before the legislature for several years, as an amendment to House Bill 493 child abuse reporting law. The Senate has approved H.B. 493 with Heartbeat protection amendment 21-10. STORY
​

 

[Arcangl86]

Yes, because what needs to happens is for legislatures spending time debating and passing laws that they know will be struck down.

 

[Desk trauma]

Yes, because what needs to happens is for legislatures spending time debating and passing laws that they know will be struck down.

It appeals to their supporters even if it's doa.

 

[Paulos23]

If they where serous about pro-life they would tie it too increased care and daycare costs for the women that can't afford a baby.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[PeachyKeane]

If they where serous about pro-life they would tie it too increased care and daycare costs for the women that can't afford a baby.

Why would they do that? The child is already born by then? Who cares?

 

[footballfanatic]

If they where serous about pro-life they would tie it too increased care and daycare costs for the women that can't afford a baby.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

So someone can't be against killing a baby unless they pay money or want the taxpayers to pay money for his or her life? Just because the baby is not my responsibility, doesn't mean it's okay to kill - and that's what it is or else it wouldn't be stopping a beating heart.

 

[PeachyKeane]

So someone can't be against killing a baby unless they pay money or want the taxpayers to pay money for his or her life? Just because the baby is not my responsibility, doesn't mean it's okay to kill - and that's what it is or else it wouldn't be stopping a beating heart.

Exactly! Who cares about the child, or the woman for that matter, once the baby is pushed out?

 

[Poppyseed78]

I think it's silly to try to push legislation that will inevitably be struck down. What's the point?

 

[Desk trauma]

So someone can't be against killing a baby unless they pay money or want the taxpayers to pay money for his or her life?

If you want to reduce abortions supporting things that help women go through with unplanned pregnancys would seem to make sense.

 

[wayfaring man]

Exactly! Who cares about the child, or the woman for that matter, once the baby is pushed out?

I figure there's quite a few couples / agencies now a days who would like to adopt and those who would also help the birth mother through the pregnancy and beyond.

Christian Adoption Services | Christian Adoption Services

Home - Nightlight Christian Adoptions

Domestic Adoption | Christian Adoption Services

Adoption - Bethany Christian Services

Texas: Christian Homes & Family Services | Abilene, TX

An Open Door Adoption Agency

National Christian Adoption Fellowship About Us

And there's many more....

 

[wayfaring man]

I think it's silly to try to push legislation that will inevitably be struck down. What's the point?

It's somewhat for the same reason people run for office who don't stand a chance of winning....to have what's important to them be brought up into the public eye, so to speak.

And while such may not have the majority on their side, they still act as a voice for those who are in the minority.

 

[Poppyseed78]

It's somewhat for the same reason people run for office who don't stand a chance of winning....to have what's important to them be brought up into the public eye, so to speak.

And while such may not have the majority on their side, they still act as a voice for those who are in the minority.

That makes sense, ty.

 

[PeachyKeane]

I figure there's quite a few couples / agencies now a days who would like to adopt and those who would also help the birth mother through the pregnancy and beyond.

Christian Adoption Services | Christian Adoption Services

Home - Nightlight Christian Adoptions

Domestic Adoption | Christian Adoption Services

Adoption - Bethany Christian Services

Texas: Christian Homes & Family Services | Abilene, TX

An Open Door Adoption Agency

National Christian Adoption Fellowship About Us

And there's many more....

Yes. I actually used to volunteer at an orphanage (not a home, but a group), and now just donate.

What I learned there is that most orphanages are overwhelmed by children who were abandoned or orphaned at a later age.

But there aren't as many orphanages left now, and instead are put in group homes and alternative care.

The system now is primarily government run, and are fairly inadequate.

So, that's about as good an option.

 

[Paulos23]

So someone can't be against killing a baby unless they pay money or want the taxpayers to pay money for his or her life? Just because the baby is not my responsibility, doesn't mean it's okay to kill - and that's what it is or else it wouldn't be stopping a beating heart.

I am pointing out the problem with the pro-life position. If you want to force a woman to have an unwanted pregnancy, but don't do anything to make it easier to raise the child, you are making both the life of the child and mother miserable.

And I don't see the good in that.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[NorthernWarrior]

Yes, because what needs to happens is for legislatures spending time debating and passing laws that they know will be struck down.

So doing the right thing shouldn't be done, if it isn't likely to be immediately successful?
I know of many resistence cells in Nazi Germany occupied Europe who would disagree with this.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Exactly! Who cares about the child, or the woman for that matter, once the baby is pushed out?

Unless you can demonstrate the at the taxpayers impregnated the mother I do not see how they are responsible for the welfare of the child. I wish people would argue for or against abortion on the merits or evils of abortion and the rights of the parties involved and quit using arguments that are illogical and irrelevant.

 

[LoAmmi]

Unless you can demonstrate the at the taxpayers impregnated the mother I do not see how they are responsible for the welfare of the child. I wish people would argue for or against abortion on the merits or evils of abortion and the rights of the parties involved and quit using arguments that are illogical and irrelevant.

I'd say that we, as a whole, are responsible for the welfare of children. It's why we take them from homes when they are being mistreated, right? It's why we provide education for children, right? It's in our best interest as a society to be responsible for their welfare.

 

[NorthernWarrior]

I'd say that we, as a whole, are responsible for the welfare of children. It's why we take them from homes when they are being mistreated, right? It's why we provide education for children, right? It's in our best interest as a society to be responsible for their welfare.

It is their parents' responsibility to care for the children they bring into the world. Society only takes over if it becomes obvious that the parents can't handle the responsibility. Until then, it's the parents' responsibility, and no one else's.

 

[LoAmmi]

It is their parents' responsibility to care for the children they bring into the world. Society only takes over if it becomes obvious that the parents can't handle the responsibility. Until then, it's the parents' responsibility, and no one else's.

So, we shouldn't have school lunch programs for children so that the poorest children can be ensured a lunch everyday?

 

[grasping the after wind]

Yes, because what needs to happens is for legislatures spending time debating and passing laws that they know will be struck down.

The law will be struck down but let's not pretend the Ohio Legislature was going to be doing something important or even helpful instead. The more time legislatures spend passing laws that will get struck down, the less time they have to write pass laws that won't might not get struck down and make things worse for us.