By Dave Andrusko
During debate Tuesday on the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act there were many important statements from Members of the House of Representatives explaining why they oppose a regime of abortion on demand for any reason, or no reason, up until birth in our nation’s capital. Yes, that’s what I said, up until birth.
Let me offer two of many fine examples. The first comes from House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.)
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the DC Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. It is simply unfathomable that, other than by the methods banned by federal law, the District of Columbia allows abortion for any reason, by any method up until the moment right before birth. While people may differ on the issue of abortion, Americans overwhelmingly support the notion that abortions should be restricted at the point at which an unborn child can feel pain. And with good reason, the ability to experience pain is one of the traits that makes us human. And the commitment to protect the defenseless from physical acts of violence is one of the hallmarks of humanity.
“Science demonstrates that by at least 20 weeks after fertilization, an unborn child can feel pain. In response to this scientific evidence, to date nine states have enacted laws to restrict late-term abortions. Just this week, a judge upheld an Arizona law that does the same thing we’re attempting here today, citing the brutal methods used to abort a baby late in a pregnancy and the scientific fact that unborn children have developed pain sensors all over their bodies by at least 20 weeks. It is time to add the District of Columbia to the list of jurisdictions that put an end to the practice of late-term abortions.”
The second comes from Rep. Chris Smith (R-Va.) Pro-abortionists hate it when Rep. Smith rises to speak on abortion because he never, ever minces words, drowns the import of what he is saying in a sea of euphemisms, or backs off when a female pro-abortion member insists only women can talk about abortion. Yesterday he said
We all dread it. Avoid it. Even fear it. And go to extraordinary lengths to mitigate its severity and duration.
By now, many Americans know that abortion methods are violent and include dismemberment of a child’s fragile body, chemical poisoning and hypodermic needles to the baby’s heart.
But the relatively new scientific understanding that unborn babies are forced to endure excruciating pain in the performance of later term abortions—and perhaps even earlier—should shock us. Children not only die from abortion—they suffer. This is a wakeup call to all Americans: unborn children feel pain.
Mr. Speaker, this is the most common method of abortion used in the late second trimester and is known as “D&E,” a dismemberment abortion. It involves using a long steel tool to grasp and tear off, by brute force, the arms and legs of the developing baby—after which the skull is crushed and removed.
Dr. Colleen Malloy testified,
“There is no reason to believe that a born infant would feel pain any differently than that same infant were he or she still in utero. Thus, the difference between fetal and neonatal pain is simply the locale in which the pain occurs. The receiver’s experience of the pain is the same. I could never imagine subjecting my tiny patients to horrific procedures such as those that involve limb detachment or cardiac injection.”
I would ask you to think about that for a second. Even more so I would ask those Members of the House who spoke against and/or voted against H.R. 3803 to ponder Dr. Malloy’s remark.
If it is true that “the difference between fetal and neonatal pain is simply the locale in which the pain occurs,” how would they respond if the District of Columbia’s City Council made it legal to poison newborns or rip off their arms and legs?
Would they offer up some cockamamie excuse about “self-rule”?
I’d like to think—although I am not sure—that even Nancy Pelosi would draw the line there.
There is a real irony to this particular phase of the abortion battles. Pro-abortionists argue by slogan: “war on women” is only the most recent (and particularly stupid) example. Another is that pro-lifers and/or conservatives are waging another war—a “war on science.”
But over and over and over, it is the anti-life side that refuses to acknowledge what modern medicine and contemporary science tells us: the unborn is not only one of us—unique from the moment of conception—she is also capable of experiencing pain by 20 weeks after fertilization. “Science” is fine so long as it doesn’t tamper with “abortion rights,” which means that scientific discoveries of the last 20 years must be ignored/trivialized/distorted.
Please take the time to read all five parts of NRL News Today’s discussion of yesterday’s vote on the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. Yesterday’s “defeat” was only Round One.
Please keep up to date with developments at www.nationalrighttolifenews.org.
Your feedback is very important to improving National Right to Life News Today. Please send your comments to firstname.lastname@example.org. If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha