What Is An Aborted Fetus Who Survives?
Hat Tip to James Taranto for pointing out this ridiculous statements in an Associated Press article over the weekend. The article was detailing Hillary Clintons recent attacks against Obama and his lack of a pro-choice voting record. The article states:
During his eight years in the legislature, Obama cast a number of votes on abortion and received a 100 percent rating from the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council for his support of abortion rights, family planning services and health insurance coverage for female contraceptives. He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive, a vote that especially riled abortion opponents.
As Taranto correctly points out, there is a word in English for “aborted fetuses who survive.” They are called infants. Apparently Mr. Health Care for all, only believes in government mandated health care if you are wanted by your mother. If the “aborted fetus who survived” managed to grow up, drop out of high school and become a leech on society, mandating it receive health care is the compassionate thing to do. If on the other hand the new born baby who has yet to have a chance at life is unwanted by the woman (I refuse to use the word ‘mother’ here), then the compassionate thing to do would be to let the baby die.
For all of you pro-choicers out there please keep these two questions in mind when casting your ballot in November:
- What is an “aborted fetus who survives”?
- Should an “aborted fetus who survives” receive the same health care any other infant would receive?
After answering those two questions, then decide how far to the left your pro-choice stance is. If you are someone who would “No” to question number two, you probably already stopped reading, so there is no reason for me to tell you how hypocritical you are.
In the meantime, the National Right to Life PAC and South Carolina Citizens for Life PAC have been sending out mailers in South Carolina endorsing Fred Thompson. After reading articles like this, it only reaffirms my belief that I made the right decision endorsing Thompson myself.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Thank You! I have finally read something about this issue that address the barbaric notion that we wouldn’t give medical care to an infant….it is horrific. I am angry that Obama has the following he does when he denies the most helpless members of our society any measure of compassion. My hope is that the reason for his popularity is due to a lack of education on what he stands for.
The proper label for an aborted fetus who survives is “citizen”. Period, paragraph.
But hey, if they want to say “fetus who survived an abortion,” I’d suggest that Gianna Jessen walk up, introduce herself, and say, “Hi. I’m a fetus who survived an abortion. Would you support my biomom’s right to choose to complete the abortion she started 23 years ago?”
What are the other points of the bill? Do you understand what the bill was actually about, and the OTHER things in the bill that may have persuaded him to vote for the bill? It is very common in congress to write bills that have other motives and things like this are a great example. This could have just been a one liner in a bill that was trying to accomplish other things, and the media distorted it.
You are a man- you cannot possibly understand the pain that a woman goes through when she is rapped and has a child as a product of that rape. What if that baby survived and the mother ran into it later in life- how do you think she would react, especially if the child looked like her rapist?
Besides that- the abortion procedure is dramatic and painful. It literally rips the child apart or stabs them to get them out and to die. If a fetus survived that (and I do not mean to be insensitive) think of the health problems they would have- the injuries that they would grow up with and the deformities that would make them cripple them for life. Most babies that do survive do not survive long, and even if they did they are a liability for companies. Deformed and crippled maybe unable to take care of themselves, it would be the burden of the government to take care of them. It is logical to dismiss this as a fluke in the bill and shouldn’t really be considered further.