Surprisingly, the Guam Heartbeat Act (Bill 291-36) was passed by the 36th Guam Legislature. The Guam Heartbeat Act aims to ban abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, or within about six weeks. The bill made exceptions for medical emergencies or when it endangers the life or health of the mother. Nevertheless, abortion has often been used as a birth control method rather than as a women's health care issue. Statistics show that most abortion are done due to other factors other than medical reasons, rape, or incest. Results in one study in the United States, dated 2005, stated:
The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third were not ready to have a child. Fewer than 1% said their parents' or partners' desire for them to have an abortion was the most important reason. Younger women often reported that they were unprepared for the transition to motherhood, while older women regularly cited their responsibility to dependents.
It would be interesting to see the reasons why women in Guam chose to abort their child. I do not think medical or health issue is the number one reason. So, how is abortion about women's health care if the reason for aborting the child has nothing or little to do with health care? I would hope Governor Lou Leon Guerrero, who is a nurse, would take this into account. I know that she supports abortion, so it would not be surprising if she vetoed the bill. Nevertheless, I can only hope and pray that Governor Lou Leon Guerrero would somehow be enlightened and pass the bill into law so that abortion can stop being used as a birth control method.
Furthermore, hoping that the Governor would sign the Heartbeat bill into law does not mean that I support abortion until a fetal heartbeat is detected. Even the bill itself does not say that abortion is okay until a heartbeat is detected. According to the Guam Heartbeat Bill:
§91B106. CONSTRUCTION OF CHAPTER.
(a) This chapter does not create or recognize a right to abortion before a fetal heartbeat is detected
The main purpose of government is to protect individual rights. This government has spoken out for the rights of women, homosexuals, and the LGBTQ+ community. But what about the rights of the unborn?
In this season of Christmas, let us remember that Christ was born of the Virgin Mary. He was in the virgin's womb for nine months. Christ our savior was a person in Mary's womb. Likewise, every pregnant woman carries a living person in her womb. Every Christmas, our Catholic Churches in Guam are full of people, coming to celebrate the birthday of our Lord Jesus Christ. As they celebrate our Lord's birthday, let us remember that every child in the womb is also a gift from God (Psalm 127:3).
"§91B106. CONSTRUCTION OF CHAPTER.
ReplyDelete(a) This chapter does not create or recognize a right to abortion before a fetal heartbeat is detected:
If this wasn't written in the bill, would you have supported it? Just asking.
Dear Anonymous at 10:41 am,
DeleteThe language and timing of the bill is important. At the time this bill was introduced, Roe v. Wade was not yet overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. Therefore, it would not matter whether the language in the bill was there or not at that time because all it did was limit the killing of unborn children.
Now, that Roe v. Wade has been overturned, one would need to look at the language of the bill. If the above phrase was missing, I would most likely not support it because there was no stipulation as to what happens prior to the detection of a fetal heartbeat. However, Telena Nelson was one of the Senators who introduced the bill. Senator Nelson is a member of the Neocatechumenal Way, and the language of the bill that was introduced stated that it does not create nor recognize the right to abortion before a fetal heartbeat is detected. This language is still aligned with church teaching, which proclaimed that human life begins at conception.
On the other hand, if the language of the bill specifically stated (which it does not) that abortion is allowed before a fetal heartbeat is detected, I cannot support such a bill.