Democrats ok with Infantcide

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
To quote the bill, it requires “any health care practitioner who is present when a child is born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion to: (1) exercise the same degree of care as reasonably provided to any other child born alive at the same gestational age, and (2) ensure that such child is immediately admitted to a hospital.”

Hadley Arkes, the engineer of a lighter version of this bill signed into law by George W. Bush in 2002, set forth to introduce a “modest first step.” He reasoned, “Even if Roe v. Wade articulated an unqualified right on the part of a woman to end her pregnancy, the pregnancy would now be over. No right to end the pregnancy would require at this moment the death of the child.” Yet 183 of the 189 Democrats who voted in the House just declined to support this measure.

This position is completely indefensible. It is so bad it is almost immune to exaggeration. For all the cries of “extremism” at any attempt to restrict abortion, the Democratic Party is now defending practices that amount to infanticide. Again, not hyperbole. This is a radical stance that does not represent the viewpoint of most Americans, regardless of their political leanings.


It Is Not About Bodily Autonomy
It Is Not About Terminology
It Is Not About the Mother’s Health
A Dead Baby Is Now the ‘Right’ Sought

Because the baby has been born alive, no violations of the mother’s rights are even in question. So, what is left to argue? All that is left, to quote Arkes again, is to argue that “the right to an abortion is the right to an effective abortion or a dead child.” The death of the child is the only end left, and it is deemed to be the good sought. The appropriate response to this notion is to say intentionally killing babies is a bad thing. I hope we can all agree.


This Is Not Hyperbole: Democrats Now Refuse To Oppose Infanticide
 
Top