Babies' Lives or Womens' Rights?

With all of the pro-life bills being passes by many state legislatures, abortion is at the forefront of chatter on social media.  Here's what we all should remember: there's no worse Fake News than that an unborn child isn't a human person with Constitutional rights.  There's so many lies circulating about these new laws and about "reproductive rights" in general.

Because of these laws, we're being subjected to endless tantrums on the part of Leftists everywhere, but especially in Washington and in Hollywood.  How low must we have stooped as a country when we're still allowing the murder of our unborn?  Worse yet, when so many are protesting the limitations on the ability to kill unborn children.

Since there are so many lies and misconceptions being circulated about both the new pro-life legislation and about the abortion debate in general, we're here to set the record straight here at Newsnado.  

The biggest lie, currently being circulated by Freshman congresswoman Alexandria Occasio-Cortez, among others, is that the new Pro-Life Alabama legislation will prosecute women who obtain abortions.  This is false.  The law clearly states in Section 5 that none of these women will be held criminally or civilly liable.  The Alabama law also leaves in a loophole for the health of the mother.  If the mother's health is in peril, the abortion will be allowed in order to save the mother.  So, no, Congresswoman Occasio-Cortez, these women will not be prosecuted, so please stop spreading misinformation.  She was even called out on her lies and still refused to admit the truth.  You can check out coverage of the exchange here.

Neither Alabama's law - or any of the others that have been passed in recent days - are looking to punish women.  That isn't what the Pro-Life position is at all, even though we're frequently mischaracterized by the Left.  We want to stop babies from being killed.  That's our goal.

However, what the Alabama law does allow for is the prosecutions of some doctors who perform abortions.  This is perhaps where the misunderstanding lies for so many, even though the Alabama law totals only 1,511 words.  It is available here for you to read for yourself.  Read it for yourself and don't be duped by all of the misinformation being spread about it.

And doctors who perform abortions in medical emergencies in order to save the mother's life, will not be prosecuted.  The law does set out specific definition for "medical emergencies" as "a condition which, in reasonable medical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of the pregnant woman that her pregnancy must be terminated to avoid a serious health risk as defined in this act".  This protects the life of the mother, unlike what many pro-abortion advocates are saying right now.

Why would we listen to the lies of extreme Leftists like AOC when we could easily read the bill?  I read it myself so I could write this article and give you the full truth on it.  It's short and the language is simple and clear.  This law will not prosecute women who obtain abortions or attempt to.  It is an attempt to curb the amount of children killed by abortion every day.  Personally, I applaud the state of Alabama (and all the other states passing similar legislation) for their courage.

Since that first lie is now debunked, we can move on.

Lie number two is just as significant.  Leftists frequently use the phrase "Reproductive Rights" when referring to the right to obtain an abortion.  However, this term is inaccurate and highly misleading.

As medical science can prove, from the moment of conception, a new, unique DNA is formed inside the womb that is the blueprint for a brand new human person.  Conception is the culmination of the act of reproduction.  The reproduction has already happened by the time a woman decides she wants to end the life of her unborn child, regardless of how it was conceived.

Matt Walsh, who writes for The Daily Wire, put it like this. 

Matt Walsh quote, May 10th, 2019

And he's exactly right.

Alabama set the current limit at before the heartbeat of the child, which is at about 6 weeks of development.  

Here's the question that I've never seen a pro-abortion argument answer satisfactorily.  If it isn't a human person, then what is it?  Here's the problem, any line other than conception that could be drawn to indicate personhood has the potential to leave out those among us that are already born.  

The most common line I hear is they attempt to draw a line at viability, saying that since the child can't live outside of the mother yet, it isn't really a person and it should be acceptable to kill it.  If viability is the claim, what about people who can't care for themselves, like those who are severely developmentally or physically disabled?  To further poke holes in that argument, viability is not a consistent line.  Is a premature baby's life more valuable because it is born in a hospital with state of the art technology that is able to save its life earlier and earlier as technology progresses?  Is it more valuable than a baby of the same age, but born in a hospital that doesn't have the same kind of technology?  This argument isn't consistent and is illogical and full of holes.  

The other most common argument is that they bring up victims of rape and incest. First, let's get two things straight straight. First, most abortions are not performed because of either of those scenarios; these are outliers, rather than the norm.  Secondly, outside of a very small margin of people - namely actual rapists - we ALL think rape is bad.  No one is encouraging it and we feel sympathy for victims of these awful situations.  No Pro-Lifer I've ever met has ever expressed toleration for rape.  But here's the problem, because we don't want to allow the murder of a baby conceived this way, we're characterized as unsympathetic and enabling rapists.  This simply isn't the case.  The truth is that we don't believe that any child, born or unborn, should have to suffer for the crimes of their parents.  We especially disagree with the idea that it's alright to kill a child because their father was a rapist.  That child's life has worth. 

Moving on from these arguments, there are still some frightening aspects of this issue.  Most of the 2020 Democratic candidates for president all oppose putting restrictions on abortion, even late term abortion.  Others even voted against legislation that would require doctors to care for babies born alive in spite of an attempted abortion.  Late term abortions, as the law currently stands in New York, include babies up to the moment of birth.  Nine month old babies, fully formed, obviously human children, are being killed because of the laws passed in New York.

 This isn't - and has never been - about controlling women.  This is about protecting innocent life.  Including the lives of yet unborn women.  If we're so focused on the rights of women, where are their rights?  Of course women have rights and unborn women should as well.  The problem here is that no person, of any race or sex or creed, has the Constitutional right to murder another innocent person.  And there is no more innocent form of human life than the unborn child.

We're living in a time where there is concerted effort being exorcized to dehumanize unborn human children.  It's no different than what the slave owners did to slaves or the Nazis did to the Jews.  An entire group of people are being dehumanized so we'll be desensitized to their murder.  Keep this mind the next time you hear that it's "a woman's choice".


Leave a comment