[Here is a transcript of Scott Valencia’s remarks before an Iowa Senate subcommittee in support of the proposed Heartbeat Bill legislation. Mr. Valencia is Executive Director of the NATURAL JOURNEY ALLIANCE and Chairperson of THE COALITION OF PRO LIFE LEADERS:]
Good morning Senator Sinclair, Schultz, and Petersen. I am Scott Valencia, Chair Person for the Coalition of Pro-Life Leaders. I appreciate your taking the time today to hold this sub-committee.
If a heartbeat exists, it is a life
It’s not a secret that our coalition believes that life at fertilization is the gold standard that Iowa should strive for, because all lives from the moment of fertilization have value.
We also understand that specific points within life at fertilization currently has challenges for both legislators and Senate leadership, in both legality and enforceability.
This is not the case with this bill.
This bill creates protections at a fundamental level, that any person no matter political affiliation or education level can understand. If a heartbeat exists, it is a life. And so the coalition is supporting SSB 3143 [the Heartbeat Bill].
I would like to address quickly a few key points:
Healthcare shouldn’t be about finding ‘safer’ ways to take a life
• Senator [Janet] Petersen stated:
“If this law was passed we would lose our only obgyn residency program and create an environment that OBGYN’s would not want to risk working in.”
I am confused.
Most postgraduate training programs are preparing the practicing obstetrician/gynecologist to be adept at the care of female reproductive organs’ health, and at the management of pregnancy.
Wouldn’t we be better suited in creating a program for providing better care for the women and babies of Iowa … and not welcome a program that’s training apparently hinges on finding safer ways to take a life?
And if we are losing doctors because we are NOT taking lives, don’t we have a much bigger issue?
Taking another’s life is not a ‘health choice’
• We heard today that a woman’s health should take the main spotlight, and I agree that a person’s health should be the primary concern. But I always struggle with how the taking of another’s life is a health choice. When it is a health choice involving the risk of life to the mother, this bill addresses it giving the ability to the doctor to terminate if taking the life will save the mother.
No one argues that “a heartbeat does not prove life”
• Last, it seems that many people speaking here today have tried very hard to avoid the statement that “a heartbeat does not prove life.” I think that is very telling
Thank you for your time.
[The Heartbeat Bill needs YOUR help this Monday. Can you attend a crucial hearing Senate subcommittee hearing Monday, February 12th, 5PM, in room 116? Planned Parenthood will be out in force. Pro life proponents need to show their support. Be sure to read/watch Maggie Dewitte’s testimony.]