Stacy Abrams Says Georgia Bill Banning Abortions When Baby’s Heartbeat Begins is “Evil”

State   Micaiah Bilger   Apr 1, 2019   |   6:07PM    Atlanta, GA

Pro-abortion politician Stacey Abrams slammed a Georgia bill as “evil” on Sunday because it protects unborn babies from abortion once their heartbeats are detectable.

Abrams, who lost to pro-life Republican Gov. Brian Kemp in 2018, criticized pro-life lawmakers and the heartbeat bill during a rally in Dalton, Georgia, according to the Times Free Press.

“HB 481 is evil. And it exists because it was a campaign promise. It exists because it was a political stunt,” Abrams said.

And while Abrams attributed insidious motives to pro-life lawmakers, the local news suggested that her motivation for attacking the bill is political power.

According to the report: “… Abrams has maintained that her goal since she was a child was to occupy the governor’s mansion that Kemp now calls home. She said legislation like the abortion bill could lead her to challenge Kemp in 2022.”

Georgia House Bill 481, the Living Infants Fairness and Equality (L.I.F.E.) Act, would ban abortions on an unborn baby after their heartbeat is detectable, around six weeks. It would allow exceptions for rape, incest and threats to the mother’s life. In addition, the bill would allow parents to claim unborn babies as dependents on their taxes and include the unborn baby in census data. It also would allow mothers to collect child support for pregnancy and delivery costs from the father prior to the baby’s birth.

It passed a final vote Friday in the House, and now is headed to the governor’s desk for his signature.

Kemp said he would sign it into law, but he is facing a massive protest from Hollywood elites who are threatening to boycott the state and take their millions in movie and television productions with them.

Abrams joined the pro-abortion movement in slamming the legislation Sunday.

“It is dangerous,” she told reporters after the rally. “I think it is scientifically insupportable. I know it will cause harm to women, especially to those women who face the highest rate of maternal mortality already. We know that we will lose doctors. We will lose jobs. And I believe it is purely a craven exercise designed to fulfill a political promise.”

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

What Abrams meant by “scientifically insupportable” is not clear, but it is generally medically accepted that an unborn baby’s heart is beating by six weeks of pregnancy, though research by the University of Oxford suggests the heartbeat may begin as early as 16 days after conception.

Abrams’ claims that the bill is dangerous also ignore the fact that it protects human lives by banning abortions. If enforced, the legislation would end almost all abortions in Georgia and save countless unborn babies’ lives. Legalized abortion also does nothing to help prevent maternal mortality.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia recently announced its intention to sue the state over the legislation.

Some pro-lifers have renewed hope that the new conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court will uphold an abortion ban and overturn Roe v. Wade. Others, however, are hesitant because of concerns about losing court battles and being forced to reimburse pro-abortion groups for their legal fees.

In March, a federal judge blocked Kentucky’s new heartbeat bill. In January, a judge also declared Iowa’s heartbeat law unconstitutional. North Dakota and Arkansas passed heartbeat bills several years ago, but federal courts struck down their laws as well.

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals said the following about its ruling on the six-week abortion ban: “Because there is no genuine dispute that (North Dakota’s law) generally prohibits abortions before viability — as the Supreme Court has defined that concept — and because we are bound by Supreme Court precedent holding that states may not prohibit pre-viability abortions, we must affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiffs.”

There is more hope that the U.S. Supreme Court may consider an abortion ban, but it is difficult to say if it would for certain – especially after Chief Justice John Roberts recently sided with the liberal justices on an abortion case.