I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.

I am emailing you today to ask that you pass a Heartbeat Act in the NC General Assembly this session. I share the opinions and sentiments of Tami Fitzgerald, who recently wrote in the Carolina Journal: "For the first time in 50 years, North Carolina legislators have the opportunity to save tens of thousands of pre-born babies annually from abortion violence, to protect women, and to provide life-saving alternatives to the brave mothers who choose life. With the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, North Carolina could become a destination for life instead of abortion. Two options have been floated by the General Assembly. The first is a Heartbeat Act that would protect unborn babies from abortion at the point a heart beat is detected (6-weeks). The other is a bill to protect unborn babies starting at 13-weeks, when babies’ pain receptors are starting to develop. . . . Any legislator who calls themselves 'pro-life' should want to save as many unborn babies from abortion as possible. Based on 2020 data from the Department of Health and Human Services, a 13-week bill will save only 13% of the unborn babies currently being aborted, while a heartbeat bill will save 86% of those babies. That’s a difference of 21,902 lives. And that doesn’t even consider that abortion has increased by 37% in North Carolina since Dobbs, making us the No. 1 destination for abortion in the nation. Passing a 13-week limitation on abortion will ensure we remain an abortion destination, because almost every state around us has protected pre-born babies at conception or detection of a heartbeat. A Heartbeat Act is already a major concession, but to choose 13-weeks over a Heartbeat bill is only symbolic. A heartbeat bill will save tens of thousands (25,803) of unborn babies from abortion every year; while a 13-week bill will only save 3,901 babies. For decades, Republicans have campaigned on being pro-life. Being pro-life is easy when you can’t really do anything because of Roe v. Wade. But now saving all unborn lives from abortion is a real possibility. Choosing symbolic over substantial decreases in abortion is disingenuous." For more reasons on why I support a Heartbeat Act, please visit ncvalues.org/heartbeat-act-brief. Thank you.