Wyoming Kills Heartbeat Bill While Arkansas Proposes Their Own


Wyoming’s attempt to ban abortion at the point in which an embryonic heartbeat can be detected – in some cases before a woman even knows she is pregnant—has already drawn to a conclusion, as the bill failed to make it out of committee.

Via the Billings Gazette:

A House committee struck down a bill on Monday that would have made it illegal to have an abortion after a fetus or embryo heartbeat was detected…Legislators said they couldn’t support the bill because it was too constitutionally or medically vague.

That would seem like a very good reason not to create such a law, yet it’s not stopping legislators in Mississippi from bringing back their own constitutionally questionable and likewise failed Heartbeat ban, which was also blocked in committee last year. And now Arkansas is joining into the fray as well, with a Heartbeat ban of their own.  According to the Associated Press, Senator Jason Rapert has proposed the ban, which will effectively put abortion out of reach for nearly all women in the state.

Rapert, R-Conway, said he may bring the legislation before the Senate Public Health Committee as early as this week. Eighteen of the Senate’s 35 members have signed onto his proposal as co-sponsors.

“When there is a heartbeat there, you have a living human being,” Rapert said. “I believe in this nation we need to take a stand for life.”

Add Arkansas’s legislature to the ranks of states already considering the obviously unconstitutional ban this year—Ohio, Mississippi and now North Dakota, and you can truly see that for every state that stops to consider the unlikelihood that such a law will ever be put into effect, a handful more simply don’t care and will take up the “cause” anyway.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Follow Robin Marty on Twitter: @robinmarty

To schedule an interview with Robin Marty please contact Communications Director Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • rncox01gmailcom

    Let’s Solve Problems Rather Than Spout Rhetoric -Resolving the “Pro-Life” / “Pro-Choice” issue

    I don’t usually comment on such being 59 and without children myself through exercising my own responsibility, but there is a POLITICAL solution.

    I’m going to start out by saying this is a POLITICAL solution and by all means NOT a MORAL or RELIGIOUS one. The purpose is to put a legal end to the endless debate on the subject of pro-life vs pro-choice and the energies and funds it wastes, freeing them to be devoted to issues that can more readily be solved like jobs and the economy (
    http://signon.org/sign/lets-solve-problems-rather-1?source=c.fwd&r_by=5254576 and
     http://signon.org/sign/lets-solve-problems-rather?source=c.fwd.in&r_by=5254576).

     Enact “Sovereignty of the Womb” legislation that makes a woman of adult age the absolute sovereign of her womb, declaring that the laws of our nation do not apply to any unborn until a live birth occurs without the sovereign’s consent.

    Note that if this law is in place what happens inside the womb amounts to what happens in another country. Whether right or wrong in any other sense, it is left to the decision of the sovereign of that country, in this case the mother, as to handle matters inside that country. Only if live birth occurs, effectively a border crossing, would national laws apply.

    Like I said, no moral or religious values apply here nor are they meant to, any more than they would apply to another nation. This is purely a political solution but a “Solomonistic” one that we should enact.
    Will you sign my petition? Click here to add your name: http://signon.org/sign/resolving-the-pro-lifepro?source=c.fwd&r_by=5254576

    Now the most ideal way to avoid the abortion issue is to avoid unwanted pregnancies to begin with, and this is how I explain it.
    Every time a man and a woman decide to get together it is a threesome:
    1) There is what the man wants,
    2) there is what the woman wants, and then
    3) there is what the candidate unborn third party wants.

    No one considers the third party’s view, which I see as follows:
    If you’re going to bring me into the world, raise me on love as kind caring parents and give me a decent start in life then count me in. Otherwise take the pill, wear the rubber and Leave Me Out! Do not be irresponsible by  bringing me into a life where I will not be loved, cared for or guided!

    Kindly review this petition, sign if wanting to, then forward as appropriate:
    http://signon.org/sign/resolving-the-pro-lifepro?source=c.fwd&r_by=5254576

     See also: http://rncox.newsvine.com/_news/2013/01/26/16714065-pro-choice-vs-pro-life-resolving-the-issue

    Thanks!