{"id":312106,"date":"2024-05-11T09:19:16","date_gmt":"2024-05-11T14:19:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=312106"},"modified":"2024-05-09T13:19:44","modified_gmt":"2024-05-09T18:19:44","slug":"heartbeat-reasonable-term-abortion-laws","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/heartbeat-reasonable-term-abortion-laws\/","title":{"rendered":"Why the term ‘heartbeat’ is reasonable to use when it comes to abortion laws"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

(National Review<\/a>) In recent years, supporters of abortion have decided that it is politically inconvenient to continue using the term \u201cheartbeat\u201d in reference to unborn children at an early stage of development and have thus tried, with some success, to foist a change in the language on the rest of us. Here is\u00a0New York Times\u00a0<\/em>reporter Elizabeth Dias\u00a0talking about<\/a>\u00a0what are colloquially called \u201cheartbeat bills\u201d that ban abortion after six weeks\u2019 gestation:<\/p>\n

It\u2019s important to note, though, that this was a\u00a0powerful messaging<\/a>\u00a0tactic and that\u00a0embryos don\u2019t have fully developed hearts that early in a pregnancy<\/a>. Most experts actually describe what is detected at this point as an electric pulse from a primitive tube of cardiac cells.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In\u00a0previous installments<\/a>\u00a0of this campaign,\u00a0Times<\/em>\u00a0reporters have lamented that even doctors use the h-word (\u201cthe word has even crept into the medical literature\u201d). The\u00a0Times<\/em>\u00a0itself used to have no compunction about using the word, which appeared as recently as 2021 in reference to the early stages of pregnancy in (deliciously) a\u00a0Linda Greenhouse column<\/a>. I\u2019m sure she\u2019ll have mastered the new messaging tactic the next time this comes up \u2014 just as Planned Parenthood has adjusted\u00a0its own word choice<\/a>.<\/p>\n