Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
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:
In Virginia, Democratic delegate Kathy Tran is sponsoring a bill that would legalize abortion up until birth. When directly asked whether a woman at 40 weeks could receive an abortion during in labor, Tran says yes. Watch the exchange: https://t.co/0TwZ1ECkWl
— Alexandra DeSanctis (@xan_desanctis) January 29, 2019
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:
VA gov on abortion this morning:
“If a mother is in labor…the infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians & mother" pic.twitter.com/cc15pVLjIQ
— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) January 30, 2019
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
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.
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.
So, the treatment for mom mental health issues is infanticide.
And the devil laughs…
… 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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
Move the legal age for an abortion to 18. Then maybe teenagers would at least pretend to respect their parents.
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.
That is a good point.
Is Alexandra correct?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.”
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
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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:
I don’t know what else to say.
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?