PROVIDENCE — What topic can draw a backlash so intense seven state lawmakers remove their names from a bill in matter of days?

Abortion, of course.

Legislation introduced in early February to keep abortion legal in Rhode Island in the event of a Supreme Court reversal of Roe v. Wade has been under attack from pro-life and Catholic groups in recent weeks.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Edith Ajello, D-Providence, was initially co-signed by 36 of the 75 members of the House but had lost seven of those co-sponsors by the end of last week.

Lawmakers taking their names off the bill include Deputy Speaker Charlene Lima, D-Cranston; Finance Committee chairman Marvin Abney, D-Newport, and Corporations Committee chairman Robert Jacquard, D-Warwick.

Why did they distance themselves from the bill?

While supporters say the bill would maintain the status quo on abortion, opponents including the Rhode Island Right to Life Committee and Rhode Island Catholic Conference have called it an “extreme” attempt to bar any regulation of abortion in the state.

“My understanding is that the bill was only to codify federal law, because they were concerned on a national level it would be changed,” Lima told The Providence Journal on Wednesday. “I have no problem keeping things the same, but after talking with [Rev. Bernard A.] Healey, the lobbyist with the Catholic church, he pointed out that the language went further and would apply to partial-birth abortions.”

Supporters of the Ajello bill vehemently deny that it would protect partial-birth abortion or prevent the Health Department from regulating providers.

Three Warwick Democrats — representatives Joseph McNamara, David Bennett and Evan Shanley — called out in a Right to Life Committee ad about the Ajello bill, this week fired back with a news release calling attacks on the bill a campaign of “misinformation.”

“Absolutely not,” Shanley said Wednesday about whether the bill would infringe on current regulations and adding that he would be open to tightening language of the bill, if necessary, to remove any doubt.

The bill would prevent the state from restricting a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy up to the point of “fetal viability.”

Abney said he supports a woman’s right to choose, but took his name off the bill because the debate surrounding it had become too polarized.

Like Lima, he said he would consider voting for the bill if it makes it out of committee.

— panderson@ providence-journal.com

(401) 277-7384

On Twitter:

@PatrickAnderso_