Axne vs Nunn on abortion

Cindy Axne believes in unregulated abortion rights in contrast to Zach Nunn who believes in heavy restrictions on abortion. Even more, Ms. Axne wants to take away Iowans right to regulate abortion at the state level, while Mr. Nunn believe Iowans know better than Nancy Pelosi on what’s best for Iowa. As you can see, the contrasts between Axne vs. Nunn on abortion are stark.

Cindy Axne sent out a press release in July that states:

“Today, Rep. Cindy Axne (IA-03) voted to restore the right to an abortion nationwide, ensuring all Americans can make their own decisions about their bodies, their lives, and their futures.

The Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022 establishes a statutory right to abortion, securing health care providers’ right to provide abortion care and patients’ right to receive that care, free from state bans and restrictions.”

Essentially, this bill’s sponsors believe it would codify abortion and override all anti-abortion regulations passed by state legislatures, such as the fetal pain restrictions Iowa’s legislature passed banning abortions after twenty weeks.

This bill was proposed by Democrats in 2013, 2015, and 2017, failing each time. What is interesting is that its latest version, voted on just a few months ago, removed carve-outs for parental-notification laws, such as we have on the books in Iowa.

In other words, Democrats recognized that laws which required parental notification before their child could obtain an abortion resonated with voters across the country. Until this year, the Women’s Health Protection Act allowed for those laws to stand. But since the party has been purged of its last pro-life member, the exemption was dropped.

In a televised debate, Axne said that the mortal fate of the daughter in the womb should be left to the whims of the mother and her doctor:

“This should be left to women. With the help of their doctor and their family and no one else. This shouldn’t be a decision that states get to make. This is a decision that women get to make.” 

To set the record straight, states have always passed laws on life and death issues regarding their residents. Why should this one be any different, as Zach Nunn pointed out:

“Congresswoman, this is not your decision. This is not my decision. This is Iowans’ decision. We should give them the opportunity to take a vote, have their voice heard and move forward. Unfortunately you tried to take that away from them with the vote that you took in Washington, D.C., right after the Dobbs case.” [the Women’s Health Protection Act].

Recap

Here is a recap on the differences between Cindy Axne and Zach Nunn on the issue of abortion:

Should we take away the right of Iowans to pass their own laws on abortion?

Axne: yes

Nunn: NO

Should abortion be restricted at the point when the person in the womb can feel the pain of abortion?

Axne: no

NUNN: YES

Should abortion be restricted at the point that a human heartbeat is detected?

Axne: no

Nunn: YES

Should abortion be restricted at all?

Axne: no

Nunn: YES, except in the case of rape, incest, and the mother’s life.

Should taxpayers be compelled to fund abortion even though it violates their religious convictions?

Axne: yes

Nunn: NO

Should people of faith be compelled to participate in performing abortions even though it violates their religious convictions?

Axne: yes

Nunn: NO

As you can see, when it comes to abortion, the choice between Axne vs. Nunn is stark.