Missouri Lawmaker Introduces ‘Right to Life Act’ to Outlaw Abortion in State

Photo Credit: Oriol Martinez

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — A lawmaker in Missouri has presented a bill that would end abortion in the state with no exceptions.

Rep. Mike Moon, R-Ash Grove, introduced the “Right to Life Act” in the legislature on Monday, which recognizes the unborn as being persons from the point of conception and therefore entitled to the right to life.

“The life of each human being begins at conception and is hereby deemed a person,” it declares. “As with all persons, unborn children have protectable interests in life, health, and well-being. The natural parents of unborn children have protectable interests in the life, health, and well-being of their unborn child.”

The bill consequently mandates that “[l]aw enforcement officers, officers of the court, and any licensed or state regulated entities in the state shall affirmatively enforce article I, section 10 of the Constitution of Missouri, which specifies that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”

Moon’s legislation has not yet been scheduled for a hearing, but if passed, would go into effect on Aug. 28.

In October, Moon outlined on his blog that he disagrees with simply regulating abortion and believes that the murder of one’s unborn child should be outlawed altogether.

“Pro-lifers only seek to regulate abortions. Though it may not be their intent, pro-lifers are the ones keeping abortion legal,” he wrote. “Pro-lifers lobby for legislation containing language like this: ‘It’s legal to kill your child if you wait 36 hours to decide’ or ‘It’s legal to kill your child if you give him or her pain killers first.'”

  • Connect with Christian News


“Representative Moon does not seek to regulate abortion. He intends to abolish human abortion and with the help of others, both representatives and fellow Missourians, we will be successful!” the post said.

As previously reported, earlier this month, a lawmaker in Idaho also advised that he plans to present legislation that will criminalize abortion as first-degree murder.

Sen. Dan Foreman, R-Moscow, told reporters that he believes abortion needs to be prosecuted for what it is: murder.

“I think Roe v. Wade is a disgrace,” he told East Idaho News. “It lies in the face of the U.S. Constitution, our Constitution here in Idaho, and it just lies in the face of common sense.”

Under his soon-coming legislation, both the woman who seeks out the death of her unborn child and the abortionist who murders the baby would be charged with first-degree murder.

“People find themselves, in many cases, with unwanted pregnancies and the easy answer is to just terminate the baby,” Foreman said. “We’re looking at killing innocent kids, and it’s not up to us to just kill it to solve someone else’s personal problem.”

Texas Rep. Tony Tinderholt, R-Arlington likewise presented a bill this month declaring that unborn children are entitled to human rights from the moment of conception, and removes current exemptions under state criminal homicide law relating to abortion.

“When you read and see how abortions are performed, and how they end the life of an innocent child, it amazes me that we allow that,” Tinderholdt told the Star-Telegram. “When we look back over history and we see … the cultures that took the lives of children, people are appalled by that. People are going to do that with America, too, and look back one day and say they can’t believe we allowed this.”

Abortion is Murder from I’ll Be Honest on Vimeo.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly
  • tatoo

    It is unconstitutional. If it passes, it will be held up in court.

    • Oboehner

      Babies are protected by the Constitution as well, tossing out the word “unconstitutional” doesn’t make it so.

      • Bill

        What clause are they “protected” by? Abortion rights, established by Roe and other case law explicitly allow abortion.

        • Amos Moses

          i looked at the BoR ….. cant find it ……. no “right” to kill a child …….

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Roe v Wade. Maybe you’ve heard of it? (That would be where the right to abortion is found, not the right to kill a child.)

          • Amos Moses

            yeah …… RvW is not in the BoR ………. and it is killing a child no matter what euphemism you want to use ………. it is part of the right to Life, Liberty and other things ……… in the DoI …..

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Okay, but it’s still law, granting a Constitutional right to abortion, regardless of how you feel about it.

        • Oboehner

          Oh you mean the non-law court OPINION? They are just as protected as you are in the entirety of the Constitution.

          • Chris

            What does that have to do with the question you were asked?

          • Oboehner

            If I have to explain, you obviously wouldn’t understand.

          • Chris

            I think you got that backwards. You can’t explain it because no one would understand. Conclusion: There is no connection.

          • Oboehner

            Why the denigration? If you would bother to read up on the conversation you weren’t invited to, the question would answer itself.
            Is this what it means to be a tolerant liberal in the US? To adopt this superior attitude and assume that anyone challenging your views must be inferior? Is that how good, loving, tolerant, lefties behave?

          • Chris

            “If you would bother to read up on the
            conversation you weren’t invited to, the question would answer itself.”
            This is a public board. If you want a private conversation go elsewhere. Since it is a public board I don’t require an invitation to join in a discussion.

            “Is this what it means to be a tolerant liberal in the US?”

            I wouldn’t know as I’m not a liberal nor am I in the US. Is rudeness and a sense of privileged what it means to be an evangelical Christian in the US?

            “To adopt this superior attitude and assume that anyone challenging your views must be
            inferior? Is that how good, loving, tolerant, lefties behave?”

            How do you get all that from me asking a respectfully posed question? Boy you assume a lot. With this many assumptions I suggest you go to the library. You can assume everything in the book just by reading the titles.

          • Oboehner

            If you are not in the US, then this is a waste of time.

          • Chris

            You stated “Babies are protected by the Constitution as well, tossing out the word “unconstitutional” doesn’t make it so.”

            You were asked by Bill “What clause are they “protected” by?”

            You never answered the question. You merely threw doubt on Roe v. Wade.

            Oh and by the way it’s the Legislative branch’s job to legislate laws and the Judicial branch’s job to interpret those laws. Roe v. Wade is an interpretation and NOT legislation as you claim.

            Will you provide evidence to support your contention that:
            1) The constitution provides protection for babies.
            2) The actual job of the Supreme Court in your country.
            Thank you.

            Notice I said ‘evidence’ and not just your opinion which you seem to assume is infallible.

          • Oboehner

            Declaration od independence, Bill of Rights, Constitution, etc. The same protections that keep someone from killing you.

          • Chris

            I have a question to ask you. Just a yes or no answer please. Is it possible for you to be wrong and another human being be correct?

            If you answer yes then perhaps you should consider the evidence which other people provide. If you answer no then it would seem you are implying you are infallible and, by extension, since only God is defined as infallible then you are claiming to be God.

            So which is it?

          • Ambulance Chaser

            No, we mean the ruling, that is law.

          • Oboehner

            How does that work when ALL legislative power resides in Congress?

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Simple. No one is legislating.

          • Oboehner

            If their opinion is law, THAT is legislating. Since they cannot, it is not.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            I guess someone had better tell Louisiana State University Law School that they’ve been doing it wrong all this time:

            “United States Supreme Court–The decisions of the United States Supreme Court are mandatory authority in all courts, federal and state, when the decisions cover points of federal law.” MANDATORY V. PERSUASIVE CASES Barbara Bintliff, LSU Law Professor, copyright 2001

            And Georgetown University Law Center, I guess they don’t know what they’re doing:

            “Federal Issue in US Supreme Court. Binding Authority: US Supreme Court” WHICH COURT IS BINDING?* Mandatory vs. Persuasive Cases. Georgetown Law Center

            And if cases don’t matter, why did I buy a $700 book full of case law for every class I took in law school? Did all of my professors, and the authors who compiled the textbooks, just not understand law as well as you do?

          • Oboehner

            Go tell them then and I can’t do anything about the money you flushed, that’s your problem. The Constitution is clear.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Well I didn’t go to LSU or Georgetown, but my legal education seems to be holding up just fine, since I cite cases every day, and so do my colleagues and adversaries. And never once has a judge told me that we don’t cite cases in this country, or that “case law is an oxymoron.” Judges nearly always issue orders full of case law themselves!

            Why do you suppose that is?

          • Oboehner

            Inmates running the prison, what judge is going to come out and say “constitutionally speaking, I don’t have the power to do that.” Then we have the ones who are just plain ignorant.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Or maybe if this is how it’s done, and every lawyer, law professor, judge, judicial clerk, and legal scholar in the country thinks this is how it’s done, and the only one who disagrees is one conspiracy theorist on the internet, then THIS IS HOW IT’S DONE.

            You sound like someone on the side of a football field, trying to scream over the crowd, “Stop carrying the ball! You have to kick it! It’s called football!”

          • Oboehner

            So now the Constitution is a conspiracy theory? I posted earlier on how the federal courts usurped for themselves the power to strike down a law, using as my source a .gov judicial site – that must be a conspiracy theory site too right? Whatever.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            No, I’m familiar with the plain language of the Constitution, and I don’t take issue with it. I’m telling you that your interpretation of those words is not the one the legal community uses.

          • Oboehner

            Then the legal community is in the wrong as the Constitution trumps all.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Then luckily for you, the Constitution grants courts the power to overturn laws.

          • Oboehner

            Do post the wording and where it is to be found in the Constitution.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            I already did. Article III, Section 2, giving Apellate Jurisdiction as to law and fact. The courts can literally establish what the law is, and the facts are.

          • Oboehner

            I see you embellish as much as they do, did you not read the definition of appellate that I posted? Doesn’t say anything about court decisions being binding to anyone other than the two parties involved, nor does it state anything about legislating.

          • Bill

            Legislating power resides in Congress? Explain executive orders. No, it’s not as simple as 9th grade civics would have you believe. Case law is a legally binding interpretation of laws written over 200 years ago. Our constitution was specifically written to allow for broad liberties, liberties that even our founders in their great wisdom could not yet imagine, like slavery being illegal.

          • Oboehner

            Executive orders? Easy, non-law. Case law is also non-law, just judicial laziness.

          • Bill

            It’s legally binding case law, not opinion.

          • Oboehner

            Opinion in ONE case, not law of the land.

    • Amos Moses

      Guess it depends on the Scalia replacement ……..

  • Marshall P

    In 38 states (yeah, including NY and California), it is a felony for anyone to cause the death of a fetus – except, ironically, the mother or a hired abortionist. If a man kicked his pregnant wife or girlfriend in the hope she would miscarry, he could go to prison. But the mother of the fetus can get an abortion and people applaud her for her “choice.”

    Our laws reflect a very sick society.

  • james blue

    So will miscarriages have to e reported to the cops and investigated?

    Every state where personhood has been on the ballot it has failed. People tend to only be for laws like that when it only effects others, but it would criminalize the most popular form of birth control.

    Around 50% think abortion should be legal with restrictions and 30% think it should be legal under all circumstances.

    Only around 20% of the nation believes abortion should be illegal with no exceptions. This means 80% of the country think abortion should be legal to some extent.

    This site doesn’t allow links, you can find the surveys by searching “pro life survey”

  • Amos Moses

    Getting Preggers …… if you are a “celebrity” …. its a “baby bump” …….. anyone else ….. guess its just a “clump bump” ……. this and many countries choose to worship idols and the elite ….. rather than God …….. /SMH …… God help you if you are born a “poor black “clump”” ………. most dangerous place to be is in the womb if you are black …… and those who promote “choice” …. also promote genocide by infanticide ………..

  • Amos Moses

    Doctors Discover Strange, Baby-Shaped Organ In Woman’s Womb
    January 27, 2017

  • Robert

    No Mike Moon is not serving two masters here .He might even understand that GOD rules over both kingdoms earthly Governmemt and his heavenly (Church ) Government , Here Mike is pleasing God by trying to stop the murder of little babies using a earthly government role.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Thank God for the righteous men in the USA!! Truly a shining example of hope for mankind!