This is a great bill and smart politics and it shows how elections matter. Even when Obama vetoes it we can use it to show how extreme he and the rest of the Left are. They not only rabidly support late-term abortions but even infanticide (aka “partial-birth abortion”) and letting children die who survive abortions. Even most pro-choicers oppose late-term abortions, and few know how extremely liberal our policies are compared to other Leftist countries.
“We have a moral obligation to end dangerous late-term abortions in order to protect women and these precious babies from criminals like Kermit Gosnell and others who prey on the most vulnerable in our society,” Blackburn said. “The United States is one of the few remaining countries in the world that allows abortion after 20 weeks. That is why today we renew our efforts to protect the lives of babies and their mothers with the introduction of the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ)96% and I have been a good team moving this legislation through the House as we continue to lead the fight to ensure the unborn are provided the same protections that all human life deserves.”
The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act passed the House of Representatives in 2013, yet progressed no further as President Obama vetoed it and the Senate refused to take it up for a vote. However, with Reid now sidelined as a result of the November midterm elections, the law has a more promising road. Should the bill pass the House, the new Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)67% has already pledged to take the bill up for a vote.
Unfortunately, there’s still that presidential veto threat hanging in the air. President Obama has made it clear that he’s no fan of the pro-life movement. In 2007, he received a 100 percent score from the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council for his pro-abortion agenda while in the Illinois state senate. Among his pro-abortion record, was the time he voted against legislation that would offer medical care to babies who survived abortion.
Getting these things in the news cycle also provides opportunities to share the scientific and moral truths about the pro-life position. Pro-life reasoning is simple and accurate: It is a scientific fact and basic common sense (what else would two human beings produce?) that a new human being is reproduced at fertilization. Seriously, go check out any mainstream embryology textbook. I’m too pro-science to be pro-choice. Based on the settled science, it is then simple moral reasoning that it is wrong to take the life of an innocent human being without proper justification, and that is what happens during 99% of abortions.
The situations surrounding abortions are psychologically complex (pressures on the mother to abort, economic concerns, etc.) but morally simple (you don’t kill unwanted humans outside the womb for those reasons, so you shouldn’t kill them inside the womb for those reasons). Their size, level of development, location and degree of dependency are not reasons to ignore their right to life. Arguments about “bodily autonomy” ignore the body destroyed in the abortion.
In other words, it is wrong to take the life of an innocent human being without proper justification. Abortion does that. Therefore, abortion is wrong.
And of course, despite what the “Christian” Left tells you, God opposes abortions (those ghouls insist that life really begins at the first breath, so they think it is acceptable to kill the children even when they are 90% out of the mother).