News & Articles

Lawmakers told that bill on life is constitutional

February 15, 2008

Lawmakers told that bill on life is constitutional

 

It does not supercede federal ruling regarding a woman's rights

Published: Thursday, February 14, 2008 - 1:15 pm
Updated: Thursday, February 14, 2008 - 6:40 pm

By Tim Smith
CAPITAL BUREAU
tcsmith@greenvillenews.com

COLUMBIA -- State Attorney General Henry McMaster told a House subcommittee Thursday that a bill that would declare that life begins at fertilization is constitutional and wouldn't impact abortions in South Carolina .

The legislation, in similar form, has come up four times since 1998 but has yet to pass the Legislature. The subcommittee heard from several supporters of the bill, who prayed beforehand for its passage, and heard briefly from one opponent, after women who came to oppose the bill insisted lawmakers hear at least one of them.

McMaster said the bill, no matter what its ramifications on other state statutes, cannot supercede what the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled regarding a woman's right to abortion.

"This has no ramification for abortion law," he said.

He was unable to answer questions about the bill's potential impact on birth control methods that could destroy a fertilized egg or on what a judge should do when faced with a situation in which a pregnancy is threatening the life of the mother.

"Those are very good questions," he told House Judiciary Chairman Jim Harrison.

The panel adjourned without making a decision on the bill, pending answers by McMaster to those questions.

Although McMaster said the bill has no impact on abortion, several speakers in support of the legislation spoke against abortion. They said the bill would stop abortions should the U.S. Supreme Court overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling.

Steve Lefemine, director of Columbia Christians for Life, told House members that more than 324,000 fetuses were destroyed by abortions in the state since 1973.

"Their blood cries out from the ground for God's vengeance," he said.

Kathy Finger of Columbia called the bill an "outrage." She said several years ago she was diagnosed with cancer while pregnant, and had to face the decision of whether to abort her child since there was little knowledge then about the impact of cancer treatments on a fetus.

She said she kept the child, who is now three, but believes such decisions should be left to parents, not government.

Brandi Parrish , who represents the S.C. Coalition for Healthy Families, called the bill unnecessary and said it could result in the banning of some types of birth control, such as the morning-after pill.

"We should be working to prevent unplanned pregnancies," she said.