New Hampshire lawmakers have introduced an amendment that would practically eliminate the federal government’s ability to regulate abortion. The goal is to make sure abortion remains legal in the state, should Roe v. Wade eventually be overturned. Yet the amendment is already facing heavy opposition from residents who say the amendment goes too far.

State Rep. Tim Smith is one of the sponsors of the amendment, CACR 14, and spoke before the House Judiciary Committee. “There is nothing more emotional, nothing more sensitive, more private or personal, and a legislative body is not qualified to resolve this issue,” Smith said, claiming the amendment would “protect citizens from us, the people who hold these seats.” Another sponsor, State Rep. Chuck Grassie, said, “You don’t know what someone’s situation is. We don’t need politicians and special interest groups imposing their values on others.”

But it seems the people of New Hampshire disagree. Two hundred people also arrived to testify, almost all in opposition.

One of the people who spoke, Manchester attorney Ovide Lamontagne, said the bill creates “mischief,” and that both people who support and oppose abortion should equally be concerned. “New Hampshire has chosen not to regulate abortion,” he said, pointing out that the state’s abortion laws are already extremely liberal. If Roe v. Wade were to be overturned, that would have no effect on the existing abortion laws.

READ: Two polls: Overwhelming majority of Americans support significant abortion restrictions

Strangely, according to Seacoast Online, even abortion behemoths Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire do not appear to support the amendment at this point, although it’s not clear as to why.

Others who testified against the bill were numerous post-abortive women, and said mothers experiencing unplanned pregnancies should be directed to get help at agencies that give them the support and resources necessary to choose life. Katie Glenn, government affairs counsel for Americans United for Life, also didn’t buy the excuses for why the amendment is allegedly needed. “This is about abortion on demand,” Glenn told judiciary committee members. “This has nothing to do with well-trained practitioners. This amendment would eliminate government’s ability to regulate abortion and protect life.”

It’s telling that, even in a state as pro-abortion as New Hampshire, a bill that would permanently protect abortion has received such resistance. It should serve as a warning to pro-abortion politicians everywhere: not even those who consider themselves to be “pro-choice” support unlimited abortion on demand. Politicians need to decide if they stand with the abortion industry or with the American people.

“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!

New Hampshire lawmakers have introduced an amendment that would practically eliminate the federal government’s ability to regulate abortion. The goal is to make sure abortion remains legal in the state, should Roe v. Wade eventually be overturned. Yet the amendment is already facing heavy opposition from residents who say the amendment goes too far.

State Rep. Tim Smith is one of the sponsors of the amendment, CACR 14, and spoke before the House Judiciary Committee. “There is nothing more emotional, nothing more sensitive, more private or personal, and a legislative body is not qualified to resolve this issue,” Smith said, claiming the amendment would “protect citizens from us, the people who hold these seats.” Another sponsor, State Rep. Chuck Grassie, said, “You don’t know what someone’s situation is. We don’t need politicians and special interest groups imposing their values on others.”

But it seems the people of New Hampshire disagree. Two hundred people also arrived to testify, almost all in opposition.

One of the people who spoke, Manchester attorney Ovide Lamontagne, said the bill creates “mischief,” and that both people who support and oppose abortion should equally be concerned. “New Hampshire has chosen not to regulate abortion,” he said, pointing out that the state’s abortion laws are already extremely liberal. If Roe v. Wade were to be overturned, that would have no effect on the existing abortion laws.

READ: Two polls: Overwhelming majority of Americans support significant abortion restrictions

Strangely, according to Seacoast Online, even abortion behemoths Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire do not appear to support the amendment at this point, although it’s not clear as to why.

Others who testified against the bill were numerous post-abortive women, and said mothers experiencing unplanned pregnancies should be directed to get help at agencies that give them the support and resources necessary to choose life. Katie Glenn, government affairs counsel for Americans United for Life, also didn’t buy the excuses for why the amendment is allegedly needed. “This is about abortion on demand,” Glenn told judiciary committee members. “This has nothing to do with well-trained practitioners. This amendment would eliminate government’s ability to regulate abortion and protect life.”

It’s telling that, even in a state as pro-abortion as New Hampshire, a bill that would permanently protect abortion has received such resistance. It should serve as a warning to pro-abortion politicians everywhere: not even those who consider themselves to be “pro-choice” support unlimited abortion on demand. Politicians need to decide if they stand with the abortion industry or with the American people.

“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!