There is a choice and it is whether to kill or not.

this act makes potential life sound like a hair style or just another dress to choose to buy or not to.

Wow. 80,000 deaths annually around the world due to unsafe (to the mother) abortions, versus over one million deaths annually in the US alone due to unsafe (to the baby) abortions. Are we supposed to take this thing seriously?

I must say I am more worried about the innocent babies who have no voice over a woman who makes a choice to have sex in the first place. Where is the personal responsibility?

But if you’re truly worried about the women who die from illegal abortions, does anyone know how many women die as a result of complications due to the abortions since health clinics are not required to adhere to the same rules as hospital (safety)? The clinics also do not have the same tracking requirements so I am guessing it would be hard to calculate. But who is worried about that?

Before laws go into effect, a full investigation should be done into the topic.

The authors of this bill get it wrong from the start. This country was not “founded on core principles, such as liberty, personal privacy, and equality”. It was founded on “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” LIFE is first in that list and an obvious omission from the bill.

Actually, read the text of the bill and you will see that what this is is pathetic attempt to infer that the option of Abortion is already a constitutional right by virtue of the fact that it involves interstate commerce. If succesfully proven and passed, then this all but guarentees Roe v Wade constitutional protection of being over-turned.

Read sections 12-15 of the Bill, and you’ll see that it declares Abortion untouchable from future scrutiny as an issue of being a constitutionally protected, interstate commercial enterprise.

I propose that we require anyone in Washington to observe an abortion in person before passing legislation in support of abortion. Maybe then they will understand the gravity of the decision they are making.

Forget it. The politicians who support this don’t see the red of the blood being spilled. They only see the green the abortionists and NARAL have to offer.

Can we make it 80 million deaths by 2025? Yes we can! Yes we can!

If a pregnant woman is murdered, the murder is charged with double homocide.
If on the other hand a woman decides she made a mistake, and doesn’t want the responsiblity of taking care of a child, she can pay someone to murder her baby before it is born.

“To protect her life or her health” is entirely too general; “prohibits … interfering with a woman’s right to exercise such choices” is also too general; and together with “authorizes an individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to obtain appropriate relief … in a civil action” would allow an abortion clinic counselor to be sued because s/he suggested an alternative to abortion.

Abortion should be illegal period, and this bill makes it dangerous for anyone to even suggest the protection of an unborn child.

This bill demonstrates that the current political leadership has no interest in supporting the will of the American People. The people have spoken loud and clear through State and Local elections and legislation that apply restrictions to abortion. My child can’t get a tooth pulled without my permission, but they should be able to get an abortion without the parents even knowing? You must be kidding! Hospitals and doctors will be forced to perform these procedures that are against their moral and ethical beliefs.

Stop this bill. It is an abomination!

If it weren’t so scary, I’d think they were kidding. They are justifying their right to enact this bill based on abortion being “interstate commerce”. So, because abortionists buy stuff and pay staff, and that stuff and staff may cross state lines to get to the clinic, abortion can’t be regulated except at the Federal level? GIVE ME A BREAK!

The bill simply takes the matter out of government hands. The founding fathers did not want the federal government overly involved in citizens’ lives, and this includes the life of both the mother and child. Abortion truly should be a personal decision, with the input of counselors (secular or not), physicians, and others who are qualified. Not the government.

Actually, it puts the matter IN the (federal) government’s hands. All governmental entities (states/cities, etc) will be REQUIRED TO ALLOW abortions.

This is a federal power grab over state rights. If you want your state to allow or forbid abortion, do so at the state level. Do not impose federal mandates on the states. It is heavy handed NATIONAL mandates that are anti-American. We are a republic of 50 states and we should keep it that way.

For my comment earlier, the ‘matter’ would be the the choice. The bill REQUIRES states TO NOT OUTLAW abortion (allow an individual to choose). It does not require a government to provide clinic. It says that the government can’t discriminate against the individual or the practicing clinic, and allows those who have been discriminated against to take civil action.

Perhaps this shouldn’t be a Federal decision, an argument that goes back to the writing of the Constitution. We still haven’t figured that one out.

Sponsors of this bill believe that abortion should be “safe and rare.” How can it be more rare if we expand abortion? How will fewer people suffer bad outcomes if we expand abortion?

If we expand the availability and reduce the cost of abortions, the result will be MORE abortions. This will, in turn, result in more “botched” abortions. These outcomes are the opposite of the sponsors’ stated intent.

Ridiculous.

Wouldn’t putting regulations in for abortion make them safer. It is arugable that an increase of abortions will result in more ‘botched’ abortions (what about in proportion?). But if a the government (or a state for that matter) outlaws abortions wouldn’t more home-abortions occur? These abortions are exponentially more dangerous than one a doctors perform. In addition providing centers that give information on options will help educate the individual, preventing erratic and irrational decisions.

home-abortions are exponentially more dangerous than one a doctor performs? Thats your arguement to allow abortions? That’s like saying kill my child before I do it myself. Then you say, but you might get hurt too, just let us kill your child for you and then you can go home and watch dancing with the stars and pretend nothing ever happened… Murder is murder. Why can’t a family decide to kill thier elderly members if they decide they no longer contribute society? If that is wrong, why is ok to kill babies? The amount of abortions performed to save a mother’s life or health is 4-6%. So is around 93% of abortions are done for social reasons. IT’S INSANE! My oldest son was born 6 weeks early, so was he not considered a human until 6 weeks later?? The term fetus drives me crazy. Its like calling woman half a person, or calling a black person half a person or part animal. Change the name you call something and it makes if have less moral sting?? Madness.