Here are some reasons I won’t support the 20-week abortion ban.
The 114th Congress has made the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act one of its legislative center pieces. Rep. Trent Franks’ House Resolution HR36 is a ruse to lull the proLife community into believing that national pro-life organizations are effective and bolster Republicans for the next election.
Even if both houses of Congress were to pass the HR36, President Obama is already on record stating that he will veto this type of bill.
HR36 is so morally and logically flawed.
There is good cause to oppose HR36:
first: The bill makes pro-lifers complicit with the heinous act of abortion.
One section of the bill is titled “requirements for abortion.” In that section, the bill clearly delineates the parameters and the circumstances in which the legal murder of preborn children is permissible. Not only does it codify the intentional, legal murder of babies before 20 weeks gestation, but also legitimizes the murder of older, innocent children, if their father is a criminal.
To postulate the moral compunction involved here, consider that, if we substituted the word abortion with the similar crime of spousal murder. No matter how bad the circumstances were, can you imagine advocating a bill that contained a section entitled “requirements for spousal murder”?
secondly. This bill is based on elitist value standards.
HR36 puts a heavy emphasis on the fact that there is “substantial medical evidence that an unborn child is capable of experiencing pain at least by 20 weeks after fertilization.” Brutally tearing a baby limb from limb causes pain, but that is not the reason we oppose abortion. We oppose abortion because it kills a preborn child. A child, who is created in the image of God, a person deserving of dignity.
thirdly. This bill unjustly discriminates.
The bill also specifically allows abortion to murder children older than 20 weeks, if they are conceived through rape or incest. In a just society, how can we possibly suggest that an innocent child, in this case the second victim, should be killed because their father is a criminal?
And This bill codifies that abortion can actually be a legitimate medical treatment.
H.R. 36 also includes an exception for the life of the mother that those with a financial stake may use. Abortionists make money by killing babies. Do we believe they will be forthright? In fact, hundreds of experienced OBGYN’s have affirmed that abortion is never medically necessary.
Real doctors faced with situations wherein the life of mother and child are in jeopardy have a clear situation of two patients. If the baby dies in the treatment of the mom, if it’s not intentional, there has been no killing. Recently, in South Dakota’s law,HB2015, “… medical treatment provided to the mother by a licensed physician which results in the accidental or unintentional injury or death to the unborn child is not a violation of this statute.” Obviously, this is a possibility.
Some understandably compassionate, well-intentioned pro-life groups suggest that we should support flawed legislation such as H.R. 36 and use such to raise funds, because it is all that we can get through at the moment.
It seems like some ProLife groups are desperate for a win and anything that appears to be one, will do. They won’t even look at the details.
Isn’t it time that we pro-lifers started actually working toward a pro life ethos without delineating the permissible criteria for abortion?
H.R. 36 is a poor choice.
What would you like to see changed?