MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) — Minnesota lawmakers are taking up a highly controversial abortion bill.

Republicans in the House and Senate have introduced a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks. The proposal is modeled after the law Nebraska adopted last year that bans abortions after five months.

Supporters say that’s when developing fetuses feel pain, but opponents say there is no conclusive proof of that.

According to the Star Tribune, fewer than 2 percent of the over 12,000 abortions performed in Minnesota in 2009 involved fetuses older than 20 weeks, and most of those cases involved fetuses with fatal medical conditions.

Gov. Mark Dayton says he is against the legislation and will veto it if it ends up on his desk.

Comments (21)
  1. Sarah says:

    I find it ironic that there are all these organizations whose goal is to save wildlife, domesticated animals, the rain forest, the earth, etc, and yet day after day, year after year, children are being scraped out of their mother’s wombs, all in the name of CHOICE. I will never understand it. Please don’t misunderstand me, I believe in taking care of this earth and the creatures that inhabit it, I try to do my part to do just that, but human life is sacred, and needs to be protected.

    1. Todd says:

      Ok Sarah, are you going to financially pay for this baby for 18 years until he is old enough to fend for himself? Probably not. You Tea Party idiots are all against the womans choice for abortion but yet you support passing bills to take funding away from the poor, schools, military vets, and the money I have paid into Social Security for 35+ years. Don’t want an abortion, don’t have one but don’t push your religious beliefs onto everybody else. By the way, the Republicans are trying to pass a bill to ban abortions even if it means the mother will die if she doesn’t have one. What about her? Does she have a right to live?

      1. Hazmae says:

        You are the idiot. If it’s all about money why don’t we just kill all the kids in foster homes? That is costing millions

  2. Mel says:

    Ever seen an ultrasound of a baby at 20 weeks? We have become a brutal society if we claim that isn’t a life.

    1. BL says:

      You speak the truth.

      1. BL says:

        I had my 27 year old daughter at 16. I took responsibility for her. I finished high school, worked and then finished college. And the father and I paid for it all, no welfare. We worked our tails off, very little sleep and wouldn’t have traded that experience for anything. Sounds like a lot of work and it was. I learned really quickly what makes babies come about and took measures to make sure that the next one was planned. I know there are situations when the pregnancy is forced on a woman. I don’t tell my story for them. I was abused in a horrible manner until I was 12. I don’t know what would have happened had I been impregnated through that awfulness. I tell it to the majority of abortion clinic attendees who consider the child an inconvenience. I married someone who made the decision along with his girlfriend at the time in high school to opt for the abortion and it haunts him today. He is 49. My girlfriend and her daughter both had abortions. All of these were due to self-admitted “inconvenience”. They are all in therapy or have had to have good counseling to overcome. I look at that and am so glad that I didnt’ make that choice. I realize many of you don’t think this should be the focus of the elected officials. I am commenting because that is the subject of the post.

      2. K. says:

        It is amazing to me that one woman at 20 weeks can get an abortion and another woman who has been in an accident and loses the baby at 20 weeks can sue for this loss of life. Or, even more so, the woman who delivers too early, at 20 weeks, will everyone doing all they can to save this child in a neonatal intesive care unit. Why is it OK for one and not the other? Choice? You pro-abortionists (to say pro-choice just maskes what it really is) make me sick!

  3. gtV says:

    It seems the Legislature, especially the GOP, again is avoiding the main issue confronting this state–balancing the budget!! This abortion bill could have waited until the ship of state was on an even fiscal keel. No wonder things in St.Paul never get done.

    Stop wasting time over issues that can wait or have no relevance to the economic issues that need to addressed now and for the future!!!

    1. Jake says:

      Wow. That is about the lamest logic I have ever been compelled to endure. Change “the Legislature” to “our School Bus Driver” and change “the main issue confronting the state-balancing the budget” to “driving us to school.” Then change “This abortion bill” to “Stopping those boys from molesting that girl in the back” and “until the ship of state was on an even fiscal keel” to “until we arrive at the school.” No wonder we are always late to homeroom.

  4. Brie says:

    I thought the GOP said if we elected them, they would be completely focused on job growth this term, not social issues.

  5. Fed Up says:

    Leave social issues where they belong, in citizens private lives. (How convenient that the lead senator of the bill is the spouse of MCCL president). Abortions are legal in the US, have been for close to 40 years.

    Budget please! It’s time to work on something that actually has relevance to our current state of affairs!

  6. Raina says:

    What…the GOP lied? No…..

    1. Here says:

      What gets me are the comments by people that have no clue of what they are talking about, Some of the posts sound like a second grader wrote them, read the article do the research!

  7. Smithy says:

    Those silly religious anti abortionists…. Can’t they mind their own damn business…

  8. Papa K says:

    Jobs are important

    Jobs are important

    Jobs are important

    Jobs are important

    Dema didn’t get it and it’s obvious the Reps don’t either.

    Jobs are important

    Jobs are important

    Jobs are important

  9. Dang Straight says:

    Another example of how Republicans don’t want government intruding into the lives of the citizens, huh?

  10. max says:

    Last time I checked, there were still plenty of skilled people seeking employment. So it’s a little frustrating to watch the GOP spending so much time attempting to reduce access to safe and legal medical procedures.

  11. Rick Betts says:

    Whether you believe that life begins at conception, at birth or somewhere in between, an abortion does mean the end of a (potential) human life. But the choice to have an abortion, for whatever reason, should remain a decision between a woman and her doctor. More restrictive laws, minimum waiting periods between an initial consultation and the procedure, forced viewings of ultrasounds, etc. are simply vindictive and psychological ploys by religious and social conservatives who want to promulgate their views on the rest of society. For people who have had an abortion, regretted it and now pound the pavement for MCCL or any other pro-life group – don’t whine about a decision you made. The fact you cannot accept responsibility for your actions should not translate into restricting other women’s right to healthcare and the choices they make. In addition, as a man, what right do I or should I have to tell someone else what medical procedures they may or may not have access to? Government needs to remove itself from doctors’ offices and let people make their own decisions.

    1. max says:

      Well said. Arguing that “I regret my abortion, therefore nobody should have an abortion” is ridiculous. I feel terrible for anyone in that position but it doesn’t give them the right to dictate other people’s choices. Increasing access to reproductive healthcare is the best route for reducing the number of abortions.

  12. Matt says:

    Personally this is the issue with a two party system, you have to force everyone into one or the other camp. What if you are fiscally conservative, but have no issues with gay marriage (outside our ridiculous tax code.)

    Sorry I had to take gay marriage because after you have seen an ultrasound at 20 weeks it’s hard to imagine an abortion unless medically necessary.

    Bottom line, we need definition on when a life is a life. It’s illegal to kill so abortion rights are unimportant.

    Whether that’s at day 1, 20 weeks or at birth, that’s the debate.

    1. K. says:

      What is medically necessary? I always hear that from “pro-abortionists” yet, this is such a rare occurance. I mean, very rare. Pregnancy is a normal process and it is extremely rare for it to be life-threatening for the mother. And, even if it is, I have heard of many a case where a woman opted to continue the pregnancy anyway only to have everything turn out just fine (which would have been a needless abortion had she gone through with it).

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

More From WCCO | CBS Minnesota

Good Question
Best Of Minnesota

Watch & Listen LIVE