Democrats have let their infanticide flag fly. Comments by embattled Virginia Governor Northam (who is, ironically, not in the hot seat because of his endorsement of murdering new-born babies, but because of racist yearbook photos recently made public) inflamed the personhood debate.
In response to Northam’s horrifying suggestions, Sen. Sasse (R-NE) introduced the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act and requested unanimous consent. It was defeated by Democrats who objected his request for unanimous consent, citing state-level laws protecting against infanticide.
Okay… So why not codify those protections at the federal level?
Sasse’s bill would’ve required the Senate’s opinions on infanticide to be on record, but there is nothing in the bill itself that should be the least bit controversial or contentious.
Exercising “the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age,” is one provision. And another provision requires “following the exercise of skill, care, and diligence required” to “ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.”
Sasse on the issue:
The Washington Times has more:
Sen. Ben Sasse, Nebraska Republican, asked for the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act to be approved by unanimous consent after an outcry over comments last week by Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam decried on the right as pro-infanticide.“There are only two sides of the debate on the floor debate tonight: You’re either for babies, or you’re defending infanticide,” said Mr. Sasse in his floor speech. “That is actually what the legislation is that’s before us.”Disagreeing was Sen. Patty Murray, Washington Democrat, who objected to the request for unanimous consent, effectively derailing the bill. Forty Republicans and no Democrats cosponsored Senate Bill 130.“We have laws against infanticide in this country,” said Ms. Murray. “This is a gross misinterpretation of the actual language of the bill that is being asked to be considered and therefore I object.”Mr. Sasse, who has also sought to use the Rule 14 process to expedite the legislation, said the issue had taken on new urgency as state Democrats push to remove obstacles to third-trimester abortions.
Democrats in state houses are actively working to roll back abortion restrictions. WT ctd:
In New York, Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed a bill two weeks ago clearing the path for late-term abortions, which included removing the death of the unborn from the criminal code. Other bills expanding abortion access are pending in New Mexico, Rhode Island and Vermont.State Democrats have argued that such legislation is needed to “codify” the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision in the face of a threat from jurists appointed by President Trump, but the legislators have also been accused of overreaching, seeking to go beyond Roe and remove third-trimester limits supported by most Americans.Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, blasted the Sasse bill as “just the latest attack in the decades-long Republican effort to eliminate a woman’s right to control her own body.”“For example, imagine being pregnant and learning that your baby has a terminal condition,” Ms. Feinstein said in a statement. “This bill would limit that mother’s decisions and require her doctor to administer unwanted medical care that could prolong her pain and suffering—even putting her health and safety at risk.”
True to form, Democrats take the rarest of cases, suggest they’re commonplace, ultimately making outliers mainstream.
In 2002, President George W. Bush signed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which defined newborn infants as humans.
Full text of the bill here:
Born-Alive Abortion Survivo… by on Scribd
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY