Since the abortion rights movement in the 1960s, pro-choice advocates have argued that abortions, the termination of a developing human life, should be, in the words of Hillary Clinton (D-NY) during a 2008 speech to the Democratic Leadership Council, “safe, legal, and rare.”
As science created a clearer picture of what an unborn child in the womb resembles, not a “clump of cells” but instead a distinct human with DNA that is unique to itself, the abortion lobby has had to make concessions to the pro-life side, supporting bans on some third trimester, partial birth or otherwise late-term abortions. For the purposes of this article, late-term abortion is used to describe any abortion that is carried out in the third trimester or after the unborn child is generally considered viable outside of the womb (23-25 weeks).
The pro-choice lobby had given the appearance that abortions were limited to the time before the unborn child can live on its own outside of the womb. They have most certainly claimed to be against the practice of infanticide, which is defined as the deliberate killing of an infant.
In January, the New York Legislature passed the Reproductive Health Act (RHA) by an astounding 38 to 24 vote in the Senate and 92 to 47 in the Assembly. The RHA gives mothers the right to have an abortion performed up to the point of birth, as long as a doctor agrees that the reason for the abortion is health-related, according to CNN. The Supreme Court Case Dalton v. Bolton (a companion ruling to Roe v. Wade and the basis for the definition of “health” in the RHA) describes health as “physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age.” This law effectively allows for late term abortions on demand, up to the moment of birth, including abortions performed on perfectly viable unborn children.
Now it appears that affectation has been wiped away. Infanticide has been embraced among the left-leaning, pro-choice crowd.
Assuming that one does not believe that life begins at conception, to not draw a distinction between a two week old fetus and a child entering the birth canal is either pure ignorance or pure malevolence. These unborn babies experience pain, have beating hearts, functioning brains and nerves, and have all the features of a newborn. There is no important anatomical distinction between a viable child in the womb versus a child one second outside of the womb besides location. Killing viable fetuses is infanticide by definition.
The only case in which late-term abortion should be permitted is when the unborn child poses a direct threat to the physical wellbeing of the mother, not for relatively minor and treatable mental health issues such as depression or anxiety. Fear for one’s emotional wellbeing is not an excuse for the murder of the unborn.
If somebody murders an adult based on the belief that they may cause problems to their mental or emotional well-being in the future, they would go to prison. Why is this standard not applied to fully formed humans seconds away from birth?
Late-term abortions are especially brutal procedures. As described by the C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital at the University of Michigan, some of the most commonly used methods of late term abortions, dilation and evacuation, entails the crushing of skulls, the use of vacuums to suck out brains (to assist with the crushing), and knives to chop off arms and legs in order to remove the unborn child. This act of pure evil is permitted under the RHA for a plethora of unjustifiable reasons.
Compounding the utter contempt the far left has shown towards the unborn in recent weeks, Virginia Delegate Kathy Tran proposed a law mirroring the RHA, allowing mothers to abort the unborn up to the moment of birth, also for reasons of mental health, according to Vox.com. In a committee hearing on the bill, Tran was grilled by Republican Delegate Todd Gilbert. This eerie dialogue ensued in which Tran stated that her proposed legislation would allow abortion up to the moment of birth.
Gilbert asked, “Where it’s obvious a woman is about to give birth… would that still be at a point at which she can request an abortion if she was so certified — she’s dilating?”
Tran responded, “Yes.”
It is evident that a large number of members on the left has begun to embrace infanticide. When presented an opportunity by Senator Ben Sasse last week to unanimously state they were against infanticide and ban doctors from killing children who survived botched abortions, not a single Senate Democrat chose to do so.
Democrats refused to applaud President Donald Trump’s condemnation of the infanticidal bills New York and Virginia have embraced during his State of the Union Address. If Democrats in the House and Senate are unwilling to condemn infanticide, they don’t belong in office. It is time for the reasonable liberals to speak out against it or they will have to convince the American people that killing fully formed babies in the womb is moral. I’m inclined to believe that the American people won’t agree.
