Finally, A Real Pro Life Bill

In Iowa Politics on February 14, 2011 at 11:15 pm

History was made in the Iowa Legislature today.

For the first time ever, real pro life legislation that might actually save babies and uphold the inalienable right to life made it out of a subcommittee in the Iowa House. HF 153, authored by State Rep. Kim Pearson and co-sponsored by 27 other Republicans, is the first “life at conception” bill to make it out of subcommittee.

The bill states:

The sovereign state of Iowa recognizes that life is valued and protected from the moment of conception, and each life, from that moment, is accorded the same rights and protections guaranteed to all persons by the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Iowa, and the laws of this state. The Iowa Supreme Court shall not have appellate jurisdiction over the provisions of this section. This Act, being deemed of immediate importance, takes effect upon enactment. This bill establishes that the sovereign state of Iowa recognizes that life is valued and protected from the moment of conception and each life is accorded the same rights and protections guaranteed to all persons by the constitutions of the state of Iowa and the United States, and by the laws of the state. The bill also provides that the Iowa Supreme Court does not have appellate jurisdiction over the provisions of the bill.

That is perhaps the most righteously-worded piece of legislation I’ve ever read. Imagine where the fight for the sanctity of life would be in this country if we had started the battle here the day after Roe v. Wade in state legislatures all across the country with bills worded exactly like this? Instead, we spent a generation fighting on the legal positivists and baby butchers’ terms, accepting their unconstitutional and immoral premise that courts make law and then reinforcing it ourselves fighting for abortion mills regulatory reform bills that ended with the hellish phrase “and then you can kill the baby.”

Perhaps no institution in America has fought harder and longer for the sanctity of human life than has the Catholic Church, which is why it’s surprising to find that the two lobbyists at the Iowa Statehouse from the Iowa Catholic Conference are registered as “undecided” as of now on HF 153.

Not only does this bill begin with the most righteous and American premise about the sanctity of life, but its wording also asserts a dually important premise that courts don’t make law and have no authority to try and do so not granted to them by the other two branches refusing to assert their constitutional authority.

“We had absolutely riveting personal stories from two women who had had abortions,” State Rep. Pearson said. “They spoke of the physical pain of the abortion and the sound of the vacuum. Both cried out for the ‘doctors’ to stop. One woman was held down by a handful of staff. The guilt and shame of the abortions lead them down a path of further destruction (suicide attempts, drug/alcohol abuse) until they felt the forgiveness and healing from Jesus Christ. They were so brave!  When they realized that the bill had passed its first hurdle they cried and thanked the Lord.”

Opposing the bill in subcommittee was Democrat State Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell. Republican State Rep. David Heaton was the deciding vote that sent HF 153 to the full 21-member Iowa House Human Resources Committee. A majority of that committee’s members must approve of the personhood measure before it can be voted upon for passage out of the Iowa House and sent to the Democrat-controlled State Senate.

Neither of Iowa’s twin governors, Terry Branstad and Mike Gronstal, has indicated whether or not they would allow the legislation to move forward should it pass the Iowa House. Hopefully the language limiting the jurisdiction of the Iowa Supreme Court found in the bill will become a mainstay in all legislation made by those attempting to restore America’s constitutional and natural law foundations.

  1. I like that part where the bill removed the “Judicial Review” from the legislation. That should be incorporated into EVERY bill. Since Judicial Review is NOT in the Constitution anyway and it was a power the Courts gave themselves in 1803 in Marbury vs Madison. (Although some States have given their state courts such powers in their state Constitutions.)

  2. What is the use of having a majority if you can’t get what you want through? Give the State Senators a chance to fight over details, and put them on notice to live up to their platform and the party beliefs. To paraphrase Patton, let the other man have a chance to die for beliefs or at least judged for them by man or God.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: