We’ve Moved on From Third Trimester Abortion to Straight Up Infanticide

 

In the wake of the ghoulish New York abortion law, there’s fresh horrors out of Virginia in the last twenty-four hours. The first, an actual bill:

What is more ghoulish than this, a baby killed just before it enters the world via birth canal? Virginia Governor Ralph Northam somehow manages to pull off an even more disturbing statement:

At least they’re no longer pretending this is about women’s health anymore. This is a culture of death. Notice how many in the mainstream take note that a Governor of a major state advocating for legalized infanticide.

 

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 133 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Brian Watt Inactive
    Brian Watt
    @BrianWatt

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Brian Watt (View Comment):

    What’s important to note is that the VA governor cites cases of extreme fetal deformity….

    While I understand that this is beside the point, if the child was deformed… is the child no longer human?

    I do not understand the pro-choice rationalizations on this at all.

    The child is of course human irrespective of any deformities, disorders or disabilities. This was a dodge by the governor to obscure the actual language of the bill which allows any child to be killed at the moment of birth…and apparently after birth.

    These are the some folks who would kill a Down Syndrome child in the womb or perhaps even kill a delivered DS child. 

    Missing in all of these discussions are the rights of the father – should the father’s identity be known – since half of the DNA of the child is from the father. The fetus, last time I checked, is not spontaneously generated. If the father gets wind of an impending abortion and steps forward to object, what rights does he have, if any, and can he legally stop the procedure – particularly if the mother claims that raising the child would cause her emotional stress and the father says that that can be alleviated since he will either care for the child or put it up for adoption? I appeal to those who are more knowledgeable in this area – particularly from a legal perspective.

    I haven’t looked at the statistics lately to see how many aborted pregnancies are from unwed mothers but my guess is that it may be the majority of cases. 

     

    • #61
  2. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Also, after watching the governor’s thoughts, I am so sick and tired of the idea that men should not weigh into this question of what a woman does with “her” body.  I mean… I am bone tired sick of it.  It’s so stupid and disingenuous and irrational and wrong. Shut up, men.  Your baby is thirty seconds from delivery.  Shut up.  

    • #62
  3. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Also, after watching the governor’s thoughts, I am so sick and tired of the idea that men should not weigh into this question of what a woman does with “her” body. I mean… I am bone tired sick of it. It’s so stupid and disingenuous and irrational and wrong. Shut up, men. Your baby is thirty seconds from delivery. Shut up.

    Oh, I don’t care if it’s the man’s child or not. This is a moral issue, not a women’s issue. Men are moral agents and have the right to comment. Of course, the Left is fine with men (like Obama) commenting on it, as long as they’re in agreement with the Left. Bastards. 

    • #63
  4. Joe Boyle Member
    Joe Boyle
    @JoeBoyle

    So, the treatment for mom mental health issues is infanticide.

    • #64
  5. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Joe Boyle (View Comment):

    So, the treatment for mom mental health issues is infanticide.

    And the devil laughs…

    • #65
  6. Max R. P. Grossmann Inactive
    Max R. P. Grossmann
    @mrpg

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Also, after watching the governor’s thoughts, I am so sick and tired of the idea that men should not weigh into this question of what a woman does with “her” body. I mean… I am bone tired sick of it. It’s so stupid and disingenuous and irrational and wrong. Shut up, men. Your baby is thirty seconds from delivery. Shut up.

    … never mind that the nine men who decided Roe v. Wade were all exactly that: men!

    Leftists only want men to speak if they support their cause. This is also why they unleash fire and fury against conservative women and members of minority groups. They feel they are owed unquestioning obeisance by disenfranchised groups. A truly despicable, racist, sexist, bigoted demand.

    • #66
  7. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    The ideological divide between northeastern Virginia, in and around Washington D.C., and the remainder of the state is getting as stark as the ones between NYC and Upstate New York, Chicago and Downstate Illinois, and Coastal and Inland California (Tran’s district being located on the southwest side of the Beltway). The amazing thing here is that Virginia still is not a Deep Blue state like the other three, but Tran and Northam apparently took the 2017 state election and the 2018 mid-terms as some sort of mandate, and that they can now ride roughshod over any concerns of pro-life people in the state, and go with the same type of absolutist abortion law that Andrew Cuomo got passed up in Albany.

    The fact that Northam has backtracked on his statement at about Warp Factor 10 while at the same time acting affronted that anyone would ever dispute his concern for children is a sign that the governor’s office realizes he’s stepped in it, that it isn’t playing well with any but the hardest of abortion hard-liners, and that a strategic retreat is best for his future political career (Tran’s district, being part of the federal bureaucracy hive-mind in the D.C. area, means she doesn’t have to back off her position. Like others fearing for the ongoing health of Ruth Bader Ginsberg, she’s in no mood to be compromising here, and can take an absolutist-on-steroids position of even post-birth abortions, because she knows the majority of voters in her liberal district aren’t going to show much opposition to it).

    • #67
  8. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    The Cloaked Gaijin (View Comment):

    Bethany Mandel:

    Virginia Governor Ralph Northam somehow manages to pull off an even more disturbing statement:

    Notice how many in the mainstream take note that a Governor of a major state advocating for legalized infanticide.

    Remember that, “Since 1992, Northam has been a pediatric neurologist at Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters in Norfolk, Virginia.”

    So I guess he loves children … under certain circumstances.

    Well, everyone hated Northam’s “far right” opponent Ed Gillespie.

    “EdWGillespie was one of the good guys, but now he peddles fear and white nationalism. It’s better for VA and America that he not prevail.” — Evan McMullin, November 7, 2017

    “(In support of Evan McMullin’s statement) That’s right, @brithume. Because we Never-Trumpers have fidelity to principles, not party. https://t.co/tyvqDHUpEh” — Bret Stephens, November 8, 2017

    “…the Virginia GOP and Ed Gillespie are falsely accusing Ralph Northam of supporting the MS-13 gang…” — Susan Kristol, wife of Bill Kristol, October 7, 2017

    I guess 21st Century Virginia is much more disturbed by Confederate Flags than abortion.

    Don’t forget Rand Paul’s right-hand man, who accused Gillespie of employing racist ‘dog whistles’: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/once-a-voice-for-a-big-tent-gop-gillespies-ads-prompt-criticism-from-unexpected-source-republicans/2017/11/01/acd453dc-bdbb-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0b9b2668f937

    Most of the ex-Republicans don’t merely just hate Trump, they find ‘great swathes’ of the Republican base to be deplorable, and more and more of them are outright admitting it rather than implying it.  The time of choosing is upon them, and I suspect that most will conclude that the infanticide enthusiasts are not so bad.

    • #68
  9. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    Brian Watt (View Comment):

    These are the some folks who would kill a Down Syndrome child in the womb

    I think I remember hearing that 70% of Down Syndrome babies are aborted in the US……and we’re on the low end of the scale.  In Europe, their politicians brag about 99.99-100% rates as a public health goal, which has been achieved in Iceland.

    • #69
  10. George Townsend Inactive
    George Townsend
    @GeorgeTownsend

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    I do not understand the pro-choice rationalizations on this at all. 

    I think it is just selfishness, pure and simple. Aside from ending a growing life, this is why I always felt that abortion is so tragic: It puts the desires to have an easy and fulfilling life before anything. What matters most is taking that vacation that’s been dreamed; or having that career; or not put the body out of shape. Or, caring for a life that is less than perfect will bring embarrassment to one’s own life, and keep the person from achieving success. For almost half-a-century, abortion has taught us to value what we want. Even if interferes with shutting down developing life.

    • #70
  11. Pony Convertible Inactive
    Pony Convertible
    @PonyConvertible

    Move the legal age for an abortion to 18.  Then maybe teenagers would at least pretend to respect their parents.

    • #71
  12. Amy Schley Coolidge
    Amy Schley
    @AmySchley

    Brian Watt (View Comment):
    If the father gets wind of an impending abortion and steps forward to object, what rights does he have, if any, and can he legally stop the procedure – particularly if the mother claims that raising the child would cause her emotional stress and the father says that that can be alleviated since he will either care for the child or put it up for adoption? I appeal to those who are more knowledgeable in this area – particularly from a legal perspective.

    As I understand it, none. Her body, her choice; his kid, too bad.

    Men have one technique for preventing abortion of their child: don’t have sex. But that concept is about as popular as using a porcupine as an acupuncturist.

    • #72
  13. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    Of course, the Left is fine with men (like Obama) commenting on it, as long as they’re in agreement with the Left.

    That is a good point.

    • #73
  14. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Is Alexandra correct?

    • #74
  15. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Amy Schley (View Comment):

    Brian Watt (View Comment):
    If the father gets wind of an impending abortion and steps forward to object, what rights does he have, if any, and can he legally stop the procedure – particularly if the mother claims that raising the child would cause her emotional stress and the father says that that can be alleviated since he will either care for the child or put it up for adoption? I appeal to those who are more knowledgeable in this area – particularly from a legal perspective.

    As I understand it, none. Her body, her choice; his kid, too bad.

    Men have one technique for preventing abortion of their child: don’t have sex. But that concept is about as popular as using a porcupine as an acupuncturist.

    The fact that men don’t want to have their child aborted would get rid of the canard that there is no one around who wants to care for the child.  Reading from a Men’s Rights site, a man named Greg Fultz had a billboard in New Mexico holding a child and proclaiming something along the lines of this would be him if his partner hadn’t killed his baby in the womb. It is interesting to note that New Mexico was New York before New York.  There are effectively no limits on abortion in that state at all.  I’m not even sure the mother has to claim a mental hardship there or in Alaska.  We look to Virginia. The killing has been a “thing” for a long, long time in multiple states.  

    • #75
  16. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):

    Is Alexandra correct?

    God, I hope so.  I hope these gambits make people get “woke” to what abortion actually is and how it is actually happening in multiple states around the country.  

    • #76
  17. Amy Schley Coolidge
    Amy Schley
    @AmySchley

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    The fact that men don’t want to have their child aborted would get rid of the canard that there is no one around who wants to care for the child.

    I agree it’s a lie; I know several men whose girlfriend, fiancee, or even wife aborted their child. Hell, there are 36 couples waiting for every adoptable infant! There is literally no such thing as an unwanted child, just a child unwanted by its mother. 

    But as the law stands, there is nothing a man can do to prevent the murder of his unborn child except not have sex with  an evil woman who’d rather murder her child than let someone else raise it. 

    • #77
  18. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):
    I think I remember hearing that 70% of Down Syndrome babies are aborted in the US……and we’re on the low end of the scale. In Europe, their politicians brag about 99.99-100% rates as a public health goal, which has been achieved in Iceland.

    Yes, the headlines made it sound so nice! Down Syndrome has been eliminated in Iceland!

    But they don’t really tell you the reason, except vaguely . . . (“thanks to prenatal screenings!”)

    Which means . . . we kill these children before they can be born. See? Down Syndrome eliminated! With a happy face!

    Lord, have mercy.

    • #78
  19. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    These people are essentially making legal what Kermit Gosnell got convincted for.

    They are hoping to make things safe for all the other Kermit Gosnells out there mass murdering in the name of “women’s healthcare.”

    • #79
  20. James Gawron Inactive
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    Joe Boyle (View Comment):

    So, the treatment for mom mental health issues is infanticide.

    Joe,

    Of course, Joe, the best thing for her. Just kill her own child what could go wrong with that psychologically. The left has a quick solution for all problems. You shouldn’t be concerned with the fact that not only is their solution grotesquely immoral but it makes the problem much worse. Don’t be so critical.

    Keep hopelessness alive.

    Regards,

    Jim

     

    • #80
  21. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):

    Is Alexandra correct?

    Pretty much, and it comes from living in the progressive Bubbleverse, where you think your enemies in the abortion fight are only the highly vocal pro-lifers. You want to pass a bill that will crush them, and then are gobsmaked when you find out the people who are less opposed to things like first trimester abortions are horrified at the thought of passing a law that would allow killing a baby after a live birth.

    Cuomo can get away with it since NYC voters can dominate Upstate and he just got re-elected in November. But Northam’s term-limited in Virginia, and while the D.C. area has huge sway in state voting, it doesn’t totally dominate it yet. So if he has and future political hopes past 2021, like running for Senate, he can’t afford to be indelibly tagged as the Kermit Gosnell of U.S. governors.

    • #81
  22. Postmodern Hoplite Coolidge
    Postmodern Hoplite
    @PostmodernHoplite

    cdor (View Comment):

    Eventually we are going to have to figure out a way to divide this country. I mean actually divide it into two countries. The schism is becoming too great.

    I “liked” this post, not because I really like it, but because I really agree with it.

    I have argued for some time now that the strategic mistake the Confederacy made was in not first pursuing an amendment to the US Constitution to provide a mechanism for peaceful withdrawal from the Union. It could have been legitimately argued at the time that although there was an explicit process for states to enter the union, there was no means for them to leave it. In 1860, there was sufficient support among the Abolitionist factions of the North to allow the Southern states to leave, taking the moral pollution of slavery with them. However, once the Southern states attempted secession by force of arms, the Union had no option but to either surrender or respond in kind.

    I fear that we are headed in this direction again. In the abortion (infanticide) issue as with many others, the moral chasm widening between significant segments of our society will become unbridgeable. Frankly, when the fight comes, I’d rather have a “cold” Civil War rather than a “hot” one.

    • #82
  23. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    Postmodern Hoplite (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    Eventually we are going to have to figure out a way to divide this country. I mean actually divide it into two countries. The schism is becoming too great.

    I “liked” this post, not because I really like it, but because I really agree with it.

    I have argued for some time now that the strategic mistake the Confederacy made was in not first pursuing an amendment to the US Constitution to provide a mechanism for peaceful withdrawal from the Union. It could have been legitimately argued at the time that although there was an explicit process for states to enter the union, there was no means for them to leave it. In 1860, there was sufficient support among the Abolitionist factions of the North to allow the Southern states to leave, taking the moral pollution of slavery with them. However, once the Southern states attempted secession by force of arms, the Union had no option but to either surrender or respond in kind.

    I fear that we are headed in this direction again. In the abortion (infanticide) issue as with many others, the moral chasm widening between significant segments of our society will become unbridgeable. Frankly, when the fight comes, I’d rather have a “cold” Civil War rather than a “hot” one.

    The Civil War divide was easier to define based on state lines — either you were a slave state or you were not, and even there some of the border slave states didn’t leave the Union. Virginia split in two and that’s similar to the situation in a lot of states today.

    Upstate New York is Red. Inland California is Red. Austin and Houston are Blue — it’s going to be really tough to delineate who goes where based on current state boundaries, unless America’s up for some Baltic State-style ethnic cleansing, only with ideological beliefs replacing ethnicity to determine who gets chased or worse out of what areas and why.

    • #83
  24. Goldwater's Revenge Inactive
    Goldwater's Revenge
    @GoldwatersRevenge

    Does anyone know if New York or Virginia has a law, as several states do, that can charge a drunk driver with murder if he/she causes the death of an unborn child? I agree with the drunk driver law but it makes little  sense to convict a person for accidentally committing an act that a doctor and mother can legally commit on purpose.

    • #84
  25. Brian Watt Inactive
    Brian Watt
    @BrianWatt

    Goldwater's Revenge (View Comment):

    Does anyone know if New York or Virginia has a law, as several states do, that can charge a drunk driver with murder if he/she causes the death of an unborn child? I agree with the drunk driver law but it makes little sense to convict a person for accidentally committing an act that a doctor and mother can legally commit on purpose.

    I believe the new law in New York wipes out that provision and the life of the child in the womb is no longer considered a human life that was murdered. Thus, no more double homicides when a pregnant woman in New York is murdered. Neat. Tidy. Done. Not sure about Virginia.

    • #85
  26. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    How does this Virgina bill square with the Born Alive Infants Protection Act, which was passed in 2002, granting full legal rights to an infant born alive after a botched abortion?

    (Which Obama voted against, giving him the exact same position as Gov. Northam, only he had the political saavy to not say it out loud.)

    • #86
  27. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    Turns out that this crazy guy was not so crazy after all. We have an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics from 2012 entitled “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” A couple of key quotes:

    A serious philosophical problem arises when the same conditions that would have justified abortion become known after birth. In such cases, we need to assess facts in order to decide whether the same arguments that apply to killing a human fetus can also be consistently applied to killing a newborn human.

    Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled. [emphasis added]

    I don’t know what else to say.

    • #87
  28. ctlaw Coolidge
    ctlaw
    @ctlaw

    drlorentz (View Comment):
    (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people

    How about saying that because abortion is not always in the interest of actual people, it should be banned?

    • #88
  29. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    ctlaw (View Comment):

    drlorentz (View Comment):
    (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people

    How about saying that because abortion is not always in the interest of actual people, it should be banned?

    They’ve got that covered in point 1: “both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons.” Since they’re not “actual people” there’s no problem.

    • #89
  30. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    drlorentz (View Comment):

    ctlaw (View Comment):

    drlorentz (View Comment):
    (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people

    How about saying that because abortion is not always in the interest of actual people, it should be banned?

    They’ve got that covered in point 1: “both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons.” Since they’re not “actual people” there’s no problem.

    Since this view is philosophical and not scientific, how do you go about attacking it from a philosophical point?

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.