Frequently Asked Questions
Why a total abortion ban?
Abortion is the unjust taking of an innocent human life, and the primary purpose of civil government is to protect innocent life. Abortion on demand has only been legal 32 years since the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade and companion Doe v. Bolton. Before the Supreme Court decided the matter for us, abortion was against the law and the medical, religious, and political communities and the public were overwhelmingly against it.
Thirty-two years later-over 46 million babies killed plus countless mothers and fathers wounded emotionally, spiritually, and for some mothers, physically-abortion has contributed no positive good to our country in any way.
If Roe v. Wade is overturned, why would we need an abortion ban?
Overturning Roe v. Wade will give the decision for or against abortion on demand to the voters in the states to decide. When Roe v. Wade is overturned, only a handful of states have legislation in place to prohibit abortion. Ohio does not have such legislation, and until it does, abortion on demand will still be legal.
Would HB 228 penalize a pregnant woman for seeking an abortion?
HB 228 does not penalize pregnant mothers. It does enact penalties against abortion providers. Read more
Won't an abortion ban mean more illegal abortions?
Illegal abortions still occur, through unlicensed abortionists and even attempts by women to self-abort. If you mean so-called "coat hanger" abortions trumpeted years ago, former NARAL head, Bernard Nathanson, has testified that pro-abortion strategists made up the numbers of these illegal abortions to influence elimination of anti-abortion laws.
For more information, see:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/
why_cant_we_love_them_both_27.asp
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/responseargument4.html
We also have several significant benefits that did not exist for women pre-Roe-the technological advances of ultrasound technology that shows human life within the womb, excellent new prenatal care and surgical techniques, and the huge network of pregnancy help and other pro-life organizations available to women and men.
If abortion is banned, much more effort and funding can be directed towards safer pregnancies and assistance for those pregnant mothers who need it, plus post-abortion help and healing for three generations of post-abortive mothers, fathers, and siblings.
Why doesn't HB 228 include exceptions for abortion in cases of rape or incest?
It is inconsistent to have a total abortion ban and include such exceptions. Women who are the victims of sexual assault should not be doubly victimized with an abortion-an easy out for the sexual predator, but an additional, sometimes crushing, burden for the woman.
Legislation should instead be established to ensure that victimized women are protected from the criminal men who violate them, and to be sure that these men pay for their crimes. Some women pregnant through sexual assault have even organized to emphasize that we should not assume abortion is the answer in such circumstances, and no one conceived through rape or incest should ever be labeled one-who-should-not-have-been-born.
For more information, see:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/
why_cant_we_love_them_both_29.asp#rape
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/responseargument5.html
http://www.afterabortion.info/PAR/V8/n4/victimsPR.html
http://www.afterabortion.org/news/WPSApetition.htm
http://www.priestsforlife.org/articles/rapeandabortion.html
What about an exception to save the life of a mother?
HB 228 includes life of the mother protection. This legislation recognizes the full humanity of the unborn child and the mother, and in the event of life-threatening physical health risks during pregnancy to both the unborn child and its mother, physicians are required to deliver equal care to mother and child and attempt to save both lives.
In the rare health instances when only one life can be saved, the death of the mother is to be prevented unless she states a preference for her child's life over hers. In preventing the death of the mother, no intentional direct assault through abortion is to be made on her unborn child to cause the child's death. If in the process of preventing the death of the mother the child tragically dies, the physician is not penalized under HB 228.
For more information, see:
http://www.lifeissues.org/connector/display.asp?page=00jul.html
http://www.all.org/issues/argue14.htm
http://www.all.org/about/policy6.htm
http://www.bfl.org/mothers_health.htm#Six
http://www.factsoflife.org/exceptions.html
Why introduce a bill that the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional?
The Supreme Court was wrong in ruling abortion a constitutional right. Once the Supreme Court ruled in favor of race-based slavery, but that did not make it right for the States to continue to allow such injustice. Unless we bring a law before the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade will never be overturned. The Supreme Court cannot overturn a previous ruling unless they have a specific related case to rule on.
Won't HB 228 give the existing, primarily liberal Supreme Court the opportunity to reaffirm Roe v. Wade and make it more difficult for a future court with new justices to reverse Roe?
This prediction is far from certain, and abortion cannot become any more difficult to abolish than it is now. If HB 228 becomes law, it will probably take two or three years to reach the Supreme Court. By then, the make-up of the court could be very different from today. But in any event, we should not avoid trying to pass a bill that judges might overturn. Many groups and organizations pursue aggressive legislative agendas under this very same possibility - this is part of the political process.
Abortion is the unjust taking of an innocent human life, and the primary purpose of civil government is to protect innocent life. Abortion on demand has only been legal 32 years since the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade and companion Doe v. Bolton. Before the Supreme Court decided the matter for us, abortion was against the law and the medical, religious, and political communities and the public were overwhelmingly against it.
Thirty-two years later-over 46 million babies killed plus countless mothers and fathers wounded emotionally, spiritually, and for some mothers, physically-abortion has contributed no positive good to our country in any way.
If Roe v. Wade is overturned, why would we need an abortion ban?
Overturning Roe v. Wade will give the decision for or against abortion on demand to the voters in the states to decide. When Roe v. Wade is overturned, only a handful of states have legislation in place to prohibit abortion. Ohio does not have such legislation, and until it does, abortion on demand will still be legal.
Would HB 228 penalize a pregnant woman for seeking an abortion?
HB 228 does not penalize pregnant mothers. It does enact penalties against abortion providers. Read more
Won't an abortion ban mean more illegal abortions?
Illegal abortions still occur, through unlicensed abortionists and even attempts by women to self-abort. If you mean so-called "coat hanger" abortions trumpeted years ago, former NARAL head, Bernard Nathanson, has testified that pro-abortion strategists made up the numbers of these illegal abortions to influence elimination of anti-abortion laws.
For more information, see:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/
why_cant_we_love_them_both_27.asp
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/responseargument4.html
We also have several significant benefits that did not exist for women pre-Roe-the technological advances of ultrasound technology that shows human life within the womb, excellent new prenatal care and surgical techniques, and the huge network of pregnancy help and other pro-life organizations available to women and men.
If abortion is banned, much more effort and funding can be directed towards safer pregnancies and assistance for those pregnant mothers who need it, plus post-abortion help and healing for three generations of post-abortive mothers, fathers, and siblings.
Why doesn't HB 228 include exceptions for abortion in cases of rape or incest?
It is inconsistent to have a total abortion ban and include such exceptions. Women who are the victims of sexual assault should not be doubly victimized with an abortion-an easy out for the sexual predator, but an additional, sometimes crushing, burden for the woman.
Legislation should instead be established to ensure that victimized women are protected from the criminal men who violate them, and to be sure that these men pay for their crimes. Some women pregnant through sexual assault have even organized to emphasize that we should not assume abortion is the answer in such circumstances, and no one conceived through rape or incest should ever be labeled one-who-should-not-have-been-born.
For more information, see:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/
why_cant_we_love_them_both_29.asp#rape
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/responseargument5.html
http://www.afterabortion.info/PAR/V8/n4/victimsPR.html
http://www.afterabortion.org/news/WPSApetition.htm
http://www.priestsforlife.org/articles/rapeandabortion.html
What about an exception to save the life of a mother?
HB 228 includes life of the mother protection. This legislation recognizes the full humanity of the unborn child and the mother, and in the event of life-threatening physical health risks during pregnancy to both the unborn child and its mother, physicians are required to deliver equal care to mother and child and attempt to save both lives.
In the rare health instances when only one life can be saved, the death of the mother is to be prevented unless she states a preference for her child's life over hers. In preventing the death of the mother, no intentional direct assault through abortion is to be made on her unborn child to cause the child's death. If in the process of preventing the death of the mother the child tragically dies, the physician is not penalized under HB 228.
For more information, see:
http://www.lifeissues.org/connector/display.asp?page=00jul.html
http://www.all.org/issues/argue14.htm
http://www.all.org/about/policy6.htm
http://www.bfl.org/mothers_health.htm#Six
http://www.factsoflife.org/exceptions.html
Why introduce a bill that the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional?
The Supreme Court was wrong in ruling abortion a constitutional right. Once the Supreme Court ruled in favor of race-based slavery, but that did not make it right for the States to continue to allow such injustice. Unless we bring a law before the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade will never be overturned. The Supreme Court cannot overturn a previous ruling unless they have a specific related case to rule on.
Won't HB 228 give the existing, primarily liberal Supreme Court the opportunity to reaffirm Roe v. Wade and make it more difficult for a future court with new justices to reverse Roe?
This prediction is far from certain, and abortion cannot become any more difficult to abolish than it is now. If HB 228 becomes law, it will probably take two or three years to reach the Supreme Court. By then, the make-up of the court could be very different from today. But in any event, we should not avoid trying to pass a bill that judges might overturn. Many groups and organizations pursue aggressive legislative agendas under this very same possibility - this is part of the political process.