Amendment to S217

Senators GOLDFINCH, CLIMER, RICE, TIMMONS, and CASH proposed the following amendment (not yet finalized):

Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 2, by striking lines 35 through 37 as contained in SECTION 1, and inserting therein the following:

/ Section 11340. (A) Nothing in this article shall be construed to prohibit a licensed physician from performing a medical procedure or providing medical treatment designed or intended to prevent the death of a pregnant woman. However, the physician shall make reasonable medical efforts under the circumstances to preserve both the life of the mother and the life of the preborn human being in a manner consistent with accepted medical standards. Under such circumstances, the accidental or unintentional injury or death to the preborn human being is not a violation of this article. The threat of the death of a pregnant woman must not be based on a diagnosis or claim of a mental or emotional condition of the pregnant woman or a diagnosis or claim that the pregnant woman will purposefully engage in conduct that she intends to result in her death. The provisions of this section must not be construed to authorize the intentional killing of a preborn human being.

(B) Nothing in this article shall be construed to prohibit contraception. As used in this subsection, ‘contraception’ is defined as the prevention of fertilization.

(C) Nothing in this article shall be construed to prohibit in vitro fertilization or assisted reproductive technology. The authority to regulate in vitro fertilization and assisted reproductive technology procedures is reserved by the Legislature.

Section 11350. This article is enacted pursuant to the power reserved to this State under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” /

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend title to conform.

A Pastor’s Statement

Statement prepared for South Carolina Senate and House of Representatives
Regarding the Personhood Constitutional Amendment (S.719 / H.4093)

June 2, 2015

Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man (Genesis 9:6).

The above verse from the book of Genesis is the basis for Western society’s condemnation and prosecution of the sin and crime of murder. Scripture makes it clear—as did the laws of our land until 1973—that persons born and preborn are to be protected. The personhood legislation that you are considering would bring a resolution to the moral conundrum we’ve been trying to resolve since the US Supreme Court’s infamous Roe v. Wade opinion denied the wisdom found in God’s Word and the hundreds of years of legal precedents derived from it.

Each time personhood for the preborn is debated in the SC legislative assemblies—as it has been for far too long now—those who speak in opposition mention several “difficult situations” that would arise if such legislation became law. Ectopic pregnancies, modern reproductive technologies (such as in vitro fertilization), accessibility to certain abortifacient contraceptives are mentioned as reasons that personhood should not be granted to the preborn.

On the other side, those who support personhood for the preborn—as I do—speak of the humanity, dignity, and inalienable rights of those children peacefully floating around in the amniotic fluid of the wombs of their mothers.

On the pro-abortion side, you have pragmatic arguments and an assortment of answers to the question of when life begins—or the bold assertion that that question does not matter. With amazing sophistication but astonishing myopia, pro-abortion advocates have dehumanized, devalued, and ultimately advocated for the destruction of the baby in the womb, thinking somehow this whole conversation is about the privacy of the mommy. They even tenaciously avoid calling the child a baby, using terms or phrases such as “fetus” or “clump of cells” or “protoplasm”1—unless, of course, the baby is wanted, then somehow that clump of cells is a baby…

Read moreA Pastor’s Statement

Rose’s Story

They Say ‘Except in Cases’ Like My Son by Rose Duncan

I had my son, Daniel, when I was 16 years old. There have been challenges, but he has been my saving grace. Now, at age 6, he is a fantastic student, a loving big brother, and a wonderful son. He has been a huge blessing in my life, as well as the lives of our family members. My son has more love surrounding him than he knows what to do with. He is truly a beautiful, blessed child. And…my son was conceived in rape.

I lived with a family member and my mother as a young teenager. This family member began dating a man much younger than her, who would ultimately turn my world upside down for the worst, yet at the same time, I ended up with the biggest blessing of my life. This 33-year-old man moved in with us shortly after they began dating. At first, he was kind of like a cool uncle. But now I realize that, from the time this man moved in, he had begun grooming me…

Read moreRose’s Story