The week before “crossover “ at the General Assembly (the last day for bills to be heard in the House or the Senate before they cross over to the opposite chamber) is always busy as many committees in both the House of Delegates and Senate push to wrap up business. This is a short legislative session, so the pressure has been on since opening day three weeks ago. And it never lets up!

On Monday Jan. 27, three pro-abortion bills got their hearing in the House Courts of Justice subcommittee.

Both sides were allowed time to speak to the bills and VSHL was among those that spoke against them.

Most important, all three were defeated and that is reason to cheer. The current pro-life majority, although very slim, made sure that Virginia’s reasonable and protective laws were not in danger of being overturned. That’s very good news for the women of Virginia and their precious unborn children.

The bills in question would have stripped women of much needed protections before obtaining an abortion in the Commonwealth. One could have required that abortion drugs such as RU-486 be [mis]recognized as a form of birth control!

One bill mirrors the recently enacted radical New York law. It would have removed all protections in the second and third trimester of pregnancy that currently exist under Virginia law.

HB 1863 (Delegate Debra Rodman) would have repealed Virginia’s Informed consent law and the requirement that an ultrasound be performed before an abortion. This law has been saving lives and helps bring down the number of abortions in Virginia every year. The subcommittee voted on party lines, 5 -3, to defeat it.

HB 2491 (Delegate Kathy Tranwas a bill that was also very similar to the heinous bill that just passed in New York last week and signed into law by their pro-abortion governor. This bill would have removed all provisions under Virginia Code in the later stages of pregnancy that determine when or how an abortion can occur. That includes written informed consent, an ultrasound, and the need for a second opinion if the abortion may be done on the grounds of imminent death or impairment.

Read more at Life News. 

Comments are closed.