The battle lines are being drawn ever more starkly in this country, between those who believe in the sanctity of life, and those who believe it to be just another disposable commodity.
Pro-abortion activists believe Ruth Bader Ginsburg is their last hope of protecting the travesty known as Roe v. Wade. And perhaps they’re right. Interestingly, the “Notorious RBG” hasn’t been seen in public in over a month, having missed several oral arguments at the Supreme Court due to health issues (out of character for her). Has anyone done a wellness check on her lately? Some thought Tuesday’s State of the Union address might confirm whether she’s still an active Supreme Court Justice or we’re seeing a Democrat reenactment of the movie “Weekend at Bernie’s.” But now we’re told she’ll be skipping it due to a schedule conflict. How… convenient.
Sensing their time is short, abortionists are moving quickly to emplace laws at the State level that would allow the slaughter of the unborn to continue regardless the fate of the Roe precedent. In their haste, they are dropping any pretense this is somehow about making abortion “safe, legal and rare,” as the tagline used to go. No, this flurry of activity is about making abortion available on demand at any time, for any reason…
…including just after birth:
Virginia’s governor has drawn backlash after suggesting that a pregnancy could be terminated after the baby’s birth, as the state debates a bill relaxing restrictions on third trimester abortions. Governor Ralph Northam, a Democrat, made the shocking remarks in an interview with WTOP-FM on Wednesday, as he attempted to explain a Democrat delegate’s earlier remarks.
Northam, a pediatric neurologist(!), described a hypothetical situation where a severely deformed newborn infant could be left to die. He said that if a woman were to desire an abortion as she’s going into labor, the baby would be delivered and then ‘resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue’ between doctors and the mother.
So does this mean that for a period of time after a
clump of cells fetus baby leaves the womb and draws breath it is still fair game for abandonment and death? How long is that period? Hours? Days? Weeks? What if an impaired child affects a mother’s “mental health” when it reaches two years old? The current crush of new laws go to great lengths to remove criminal penalties for killing an unborn child while assaulting the mother. Activists correctly realized the contradiction in charging “fetal homicide” while still permitting abortion. Their solution is to completely dehumanize the unborn in the eyes of the law, so they only become a “person” when born to a woman who wants them. “Women’s rights” do not include being allowed to play God.
We’re constantly berated that nobody has the right to tell a woman what to do with her body. But an unborn child is not the woman’s body. It is a distinct individual, with its own DNA, fingerprints, and future. Any person’s choices are limited by society to the extent they impact others, and this, above all, should be no exception. Aside from rape, every woman exercises her ‘choice’ in this matter by choosing to abstain from, or engage in, sexual activity. Abortionists like to “what if” all manner of horrific but statistically insignificant scenarios, but the conclusion is inescapable the overwhelming majority of abortions are simply birth control after the fact, at the cost of a human life.
It’s only a small step, not a slope, from this point to arguing that any inconvenient life can be terminated. The concept of “assisted suicide” already allows people to end their own life if they find it “too painful.” But last year the Netherlands began an investigation into a doctor who allegedly had family hold a patient down while he inserted a fatal IV drip against her will.
I commented recently on the willingness of political opponents now to say things that would have been considered beyond the pale just a generation ago: “Put the MAGA hat kids in the woodchipper,” “Burn their school down,” and of course an alleged comedian holding a simulated severed head of the president. Add this to the general devaluation of life that abortion and euthanasia represent, and we have an explosive cocktail indeed. Earlier generations of Marxists had no qualms about “breaking a few eggs” in the quest for their socialist paradise. Given the opportunity, I suspect their ideological descendants today would feel the same way.
Still wonder why many of us are determined to protect the right to bear arms? In a culture of death, the means of self-defense are essential.
Do you know what direction your State is headed on this issue? Will it protect the first heartbeat, or enable the murder of a person on the verge of birth? How will you help ensure your State chooses life?