Path 27
Commentary

Watch as 'Moderate' Dem. Gov. Calmly Explains How Bill Would Allow Killing of Babies After Delivery

Path 27

In what can only be described as a disturbing shock to much of the nation’s conscience, pro-abortion Democrats in some states — either emboldened by 2018’s midterm victories or in fear of future Supreme Court rulings — have pressed to legalize the “right” of abortion up until the moment prior to birth of a fully formed infant.

New York has already passed a law that legalized abortions until the last moment, stripped personhood from unborn babies and removed the term “abortion” from all criminal statutes. The Democratic governor of Rhode Island, Gina Raimondo, has signaled that she would support a similar law in her state, according to LifeNews. And Democrats in Virginia just attempted to get such a law through their own state legislature.

That proposed Virginia law — now tabled, likely for the year, according to WTVR — has received quite a bit of disgusted and outraged pushback, after a sponsor of the bill admitted in a hearing that it would allow for an abortion even as a mother was dilating and on the verge of delivery.

That prompted the so-called “moderate” Democrat governor of that state to actually defend incredibly late-term abortions, even including “post-birth,” which would actually constitute infanticide, or the murder of an infant.

Gov. Ralph Northam appeared on a local radio program Wednesday to try to defend the legislation proposed by Democratic House Delegate Kathy Tran that would allow third trimester abortions, and had been been the subject of a heated committee meeting in the Virginia House of Delegates the day before.

Trending:
Mud-Spattered Journalist Reports from Flood-Ravaged Area, But Now She's Suspended After Bystander's Video Revealed Her Cunning Trick

But in doing so, he used an example that included the delivery of a live baby, then a discussion over whether the newborn would be allowed to to live or die.



During his appearance on WTOP’s “Ask the Governor” segment, Northam was asked if he supported Tran’s position, and replied affirmatively, though he prefaced his reply by noting that he “wasn’t there” at the contentious committee hearing and couldn’t presume to speak on Tran’s behalf.

Northam said, “This is why decisions such as this should be made by providers, physicians, and the mothers and fathers that are involved. When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of the mother, with the consent of physicians — more than one physician, by the way — and it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus which is non-viable.

Are you disgusted by the left's recent push for late-term abortions?

“So in this particular example, if the mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen: The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated, if this is what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physician and the mother,” he continued.

Northam added that he thought the controversy over Tran’s bill had been “blown out of proportion” and suggested that government shouldn’t be involved in such decisions, even as lawmakers from his own party are writing potential laws directly addressing and allowing for such decisions.

There are a couple of things in Northam’s commentary that scream out for attention, the first of which is the fact that what he was describing wouldn’t even be an “abortion,” per se, but instead is the murder of a newborn baby after it had been born. Again, that is known as “infanticide,” and that is simply downright evil.

Second, despite the fact that the baby in Northam’s example had already been born, he spoke of doctors performing resuscitation only “if” the mother desired the baby be kept alive. He also spoke of a “discussion” between the mother and doctor about the baby, presumably about whether that baby born alive should be allowed to live or die.

As an aside, Northam’s caveat in the example of the baby being born with deformities or being “non-viable” is rather beside the point, as he was discussing ending a living, breathing human being, apparently because allowing that potentially deformed, unhealthy or “non-viable”-yet-alive baby to continue living and be raised would be a financial burden or inconvenience on the mother and family.

Related:
Obama's White House Doctor Sounds the Alarm Over Biden's Mental State, Becoming So Bad It's Now 'a National Security Issue'

Writing for The Daily Wire, conservative pundit Ben Shapiro noted that what Northam had said was “pure infanticide” that evoked the era of eugenics with the discussion of killing born-alive babies because of deformities or other serious health issues.

“This is not an argument about the morning-after pill. It’s not an argument over whether a fetus feels pain. This is a statement that a fully-formed infant, born alive, ought to be murdered if the mother says the infant ought to be murdered,” Shapiro wrote, and noted that despite such a thing being “pure evil,” it had nevertheless become the default position of far too many Democrats these days.

“The Democrats have decided that the era of safe, legal, and rare is over — the era of ‘Shout Your Abortion’ is here. And if that means dehumanizing already-born children, so be it,” he added.

This is indeed evil — discussing the merits of life or death of a just-born child in so callous and casual a manner — and we can only weep at the horrific ramifications of such laws allowing the legalized murder of fully formed babies, whether pre- or post-birth, and where such dehumanizing behavior will lead our increasingly coarsened society moving forward.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →



loading

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Tags:
, , , , , , , , ,
Path 27
Ben Marquis is a writer who identifies as a constitutional conservative/libertarian. He has written about current events and politics for The Western Journal since 2014. His focus is on protecting the First and Second Amendments.
Ben Marquis has written on current events and politics for The Western Journal since 2014. He reads voraciously and writes about the news of the day from a conservative-libertarian perspective. He is an advocate for a more constitutional government and a staunch defender of the Second Amendment, which protects the rest of our natural rights. He lives in Little Rock, Arkansas, with the love of his life as well as four dogs and four cats.
Birthplace
Louisiana
Nationality
American
Education
The School of Life
Location
Little Rock, Arkansas
Languages Spoken
English
Topics of Expertise
Politics




loading

Conversation