Planned Parenthood, ACLU Sue Iowa Over ‘Cruel’ 6-Week Abortion Ban

In this Jan. 24, 2015, file photo, then-Iowa Lt. Gov. Kim Reynolds speaks to guests at the Iowa Freedom Summit in Des Moines.

By Published on May 15, 2018

Two pro-abortion groups filed a lawsuit Tuesday over Iowa’s new law banning abortion after six weeks, alleging the law is cruel and reckless.

Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed their lawsuit against Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds and the Iowa Board of Medicine in an attempt to strike down Iowa’s newly passed law banning all abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected. A heartbeat typically manifests at about six weeks into a pregnancy. The new legislation also bans the sale of all fetal tissue in the state.

“We’ve moved quickly to challenge this cruel and reckless law because it cannot be allowed to take effect,” ACLU Iowa legal director Rita Bettis said, according to The Associated Press.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

Iowa’s attorney general Tom Miller indicated that he would not defend the law because it “would undermine rights and protections for women,” The AP reported.

The lawsuit follows reports of increased pro-life protests and advocacy outside of abortion clinics across the country, The AP noted.

South Carolina nearly passed a law banning all abortions except those performed in the case of rape, incest and to save the mother’s life, but the bill died in the state’s Senate.

Iowa’s law will take effect July 1 pending Planned Parenthood and the ACLU’s lawsuit. No other state limits abortion access as strictly.

 

Follow Grace on Twitter.

Copyright 2018 Daily Caller News Foundation

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Andrew Mason

    It’s cruel and reckless to not kill kids? That’s … quite a claim!!!

    • Boris

      90 percent of kids are just fodder for Jesus to eventually burn and torture in hell for all eternity. So the abortionists are just doing these potential children a huge favor, saving them from a fate WORSE than death. So your argument falls flat my friend.

      • Andrew Mason

        That doesn’t remotely make sense. How does getting killed early mean they don’t burn in Hell for eternity? And since those who end up in Hell are those who choose to go theredon’t choose to follow, it’s kinda disingenuous to accuse Jesus of being some sort of psychopath.

        • Boris

          Are you saying that even fetuses go to hell? I thought you had to be born first to tick Jesus off. Like the Bible Answer Man says, “God looks down the corridor of time and sees what you would have done and then punishes people accordingly.” If hell actually existed then it would only be filled with people who didn’t accept Jesus and therefore didn’t believe the threat of hell was real. Like me. So this plan of salvation is a total failure. Now the only reason you oppose abortions is because you are afraid Jesus will punish the nation you live in for making abortions legal. And you’re afraid that when you meet Jesus he will tell you, “I never knew you. You didn’t do enough to save those babies.” That’s very selfish of you but par for the course because no one is more selfish or self-absorbed than you Christians.

          • Andrew Mason

            I’m not commenting on the eternal destination of babies and children – it’s a disputed subject. Your post isn’t clear on whether you believe unborn children and the like go to Heaven or not, and it is a binary issue.

            Actually I oppose abortion on the grounds it’s murder and thus wrong. If you want to argue that murder shouldn’t be wrong you’re free to. As for being afraid Jesus will punish the nations, why should I be afraid? Why shouldn’t I simply acknowledge how depraved the West is and how deserving of punishment it is? Perhaps the imposition of Sharia Law will be the punishment merited, perhaps something else.

            And again you talk of fear. Frankly it’s never crossed my mind that Jesus would say that, but it is curious that it’s occurred to you. Having made your accusation without a shred of proof you then find me guilty of being selfish because of your own completely unfounded accusation. Bigotry much?

          • Boris

            Both sides of the abortion debate believe murder is immoral. Where they disagree is on the nature of the fetus – whether or not it is the sort of entity that can be murdered. In other words, moral disagreements are often not about what is good or bad but some other aspect of reality. I am an atheist and so I don’t believe in heaven, God or that such a person as Jesus Christ ever existed. I have heard so many Christians admit that they are afraid of the things I accused you of fearing. Listen Christian radio, it won’t belong before you hear it. You could be different but I have no reason to think you are and you could be honest but I don’t think I could believe that about any religious person. I am not a bigot. I hate all religions pretty much the same, Islam the most of course. Don’t hate people. You know we atheists like to say, “Love the Christian, hate the Christianity.”

          • Andrew Mason

            Except they don’t. You ignore those who argue that killing children should be acceptable, and those who argue in favour of euthanasia, especially for those deemed unworthy of life – mental defectives etc. Oh they’ll say murder is wrong, the problem is their definition of murder is … looser.

            I figured you were an Atheist or something of that nature. If you’ve heard Christians expressing the fears you’ve accused me of then you clear mix with, or listen to, a different sort of Christian. I can’t recall any ever expressing the sentiments you list.

            Given bigots are those who are exceedingly intolerant of others’ views or beliefs, and your defence against the accusation is that you hate all religions, albeit Islam more than most, you actually admit to bigotry.

            And no actually I’m not aware of Atheists ever saying love the Christian hate the Christianity. My own observation would be hate Christians full stop.

          • Boris

            Yes I would ignore those who argue that killing children should be acceptable, and those who argue in favor of euthanasia, especially for those deemed unworthy of life – mental defectives etc. However I’ve never heard or read anybody making those kinds of statements in the last half century or so. Now let’s see the names and claims of the present day people or organizations you are aware of that argue that killing children should be acceptable, and those who argue in favor of euthanasia, especially for those deemed unworthy of life – mental defectives etc. I think you’re probably doing what religious people do, making stuff up. Really. Yes I am intolerant of religious beliefs the same way I am intolerant of willful ignorance which is what it takes to be religious. I am intolerant of religious beliefs because they are provably wrong, extremely anti-science, anti-intellectual, anti-human and they cause people to make bad life decisions that affect all of us. They cause people to be binary thinkers, unable to see two or more sides to an issue but only one. We have millions of people in this nation who believe the earth is flat and/or that it’s only a few thousand years old because of religion and for no other reason. Religion breeds a kind of ignorance that is just unacceptable at this time but really always has been. “There are so many things to be said against religion that I wonder they do not occur to everyone.” – Frederick the Great (1712-1786)

          • Andrew Mason

            Try Peter Singer for starters.

            Actually religious beliefs aren’t provably wrong. You can’t prove for instance that virgin births cannot occur without technology. What you can do is prove that all observed births are the product of sexual relations. The concept of miracles are events which occur outside the scientific paradigm – they wouldn’t be miracles if simply ordinary events. Where you can disprove religious beliefs is when a claim is made that pertains to history, and it can be shown to unequivocally conflict with the evidence. Note a lack of knowledge about something isn’t proof of it’s non-existence e.g. Troy.

            As far as I’m aware most reported Flat Earthers are Millennials with university education. Whether they’re trolling or genuinely ignorant I can’t say. As for the 6,000 year or so age of the Earth, that’s not quite purely a matter of religion, but also a matter of historical documentation – Biblical genealogies. Whether other methods for arriving at a similar date exist I can’t say.

            While you contend that religion breeds ignorance it was religious folk – specifically Christians and those influenced by such views, that established modern science. Modern Atheism is sadly breeding a kind of stupid intolerance that refuses to accept that those who don’t share the faith might have something intelligent to contribute. A girl I knew at school for instance should have gone into astrophysics – she was incredibly bright, but had to settle for another field since YECers weren’t tolerated in the course she looked at. I think she eventually managed a professorship or an R&D position or something of that nature. And of course this ignores the whole transanity and other such pseudoscientific pursuits which can only flourish in an Atheistic environment.

          • Boris

            Human evolution is the best documented science there is. Evolution by Natural Selection is the longest standing, best established, most useful, most productive explanation we have ever had. That alone debunks all religions absolutely. Intelligent Design Magic and Creations Magic are both pseudoscience and they have both been thoroughly debunked. Christian colleges and universities that teach life sciences teach evolution not creationist superstitions. You can look up any creationist claim on Index to Creationist Claims and you will get a complete refutation of that claim. You won’t do it though because you’re afraid to expose yourself to any real science. The more one knows the less they believe. Science will never accept any supernatural explanations for anything. The reason for this should be obvious. The only way we could ever accept a supernatural explanation for anything is by first eliminating all possible naturalistic explanations. However we could never be sure we’ve done that. So you can forget science ever supporting any of your retarded beliefs and they are retarded. You really should just grow up.

          • Andrew Mason

            Ah the smell of bigotry and foolishness in the morning. You preclude the supernatural by choice and refuse to accept it as a possibility until such time as you have Godlike knowledge of the universe. Since that’ll never happen you’re effectively refusing to accept the possibility that something that ignores the law of science can exist. That’s a faith statement.

            Never heard of Index to Creationist Claims but I expect it’s the standard bunk site. I honestly got kinda bored with the debate a while back so mostly only look up stuff when I have to.

            Evolution is a recent pseudoscientific explanation that’s only been in existence for roughly 2 centuries. Like Copernicus or Galileo, those who reject the scientific faith face persecution at the hands of the scientific establishment. Sadly that means those who actually want to do real science can be hampered in their efforts or even forced to look towards other fields entirely.

          • Boris

            > You preclude the supernatural by choice and refuse to accept it as a possibility until such time as you have Godlike knowledge of the universe. Since that’ll never happen you’re effectively refusing to accept the possibility that something that ignores the law of science can exist. That’s a faith statement.
            Nope. The natural position to take on any claim is unbelief until something has been proved. The existence of anything supernatural has not been proved so the natural position to take on this claim is unbelief or atheism. I don’t refuse to accept the supernatural as a possibility. The same as I don’t refuse to accept the existence of werewolves and leprechauns which are things for which the evidence is on the same level as any Christian claims about the supernatural.
            >Never heard of Index to Creationist Claims but I expect it’s the standard bunk site. I honestly got kinda bored with the debate a while back so mostly only look up stuff when I have to.

            Where’d you get your degree in science? You are in no way qualified to judge that website or any scientific data. I know creationists refuse to check it out because they must keep their thoughts in captivity to the false beliefs they have already been indoctrinated with. Christianity is about as anti-intellectual as you can get.
            > Evolution is a recent pseudoscientific explanation that’s only been in existence for roughly 2 centuries. Like Copernicus or Galileo, those who reject the scientific faith face persecution at the hands of the scientific establishment. Sadly that means those who actually want to do real science can be hampered in their efforts or even forced to look towards other fields entirely.

            You don’t know the first thing about science. Scientific explanations have to be useful and nothing has been more useful than our discovery of how Nature actually works. Since we have discovered how Nature structures itself through Natural Selection we have doubled the life expectancy and cured many diseases one or the other of which would likely have killed you years ago if it weren’t for science. You can’t get results fro pseudoscience which what Intelligent Design Magic and Creation Magic are. Believing in fairies and magic has never advanced civilization one inch but rather has held it back. The Christian war on science was over a long time ago. Your side lost a century ago when your own Christian colleges and universities all began teaching Darwinian Evolution in the science classes as they all do today. So take all of your creationist nonsense to your own Christian academic community and demand they teach your rib woman- talking snake story as science and stop teaching that dang evolution stuff. You won’t and we both know why. Hard to believe this kind of willful ignorance can exist. Christianity only appeals to the base human emotion of cowardice. Have fun with that.

Inspiration
The Sound of Freedom
Al Perrotta
More from The Stream
Connect with Us