By Dave Andrusko
Sometimes, and the occasions are rare because pro-abortionists in and out of the media so often are able to suppress “bad” news, the American people get a glimpse of the ugly face of pro-abortion absolutists. So it comes as no surprise that for the 24th time Thursday, pro-abortion House Democrats blocked a vote on the Born- Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.
The last thing Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) and her pro-abortion colleagues want is a vote on non-discriminatory treatment of babies who survive an abortion. They don’t want the public to know that like a car running a red light, the anti-life ethos that is now a part of the party’s DNA has raced right past abortion up until birth to infanticide.
Yesterday, a day after National Right to Life sent a letter to members of the House, NRLC issued an Action Alert asking all prolifers to “Urge Your House Member to sign the discharge petition to force a vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act!” (Go to cqrcengage.com/nrlc/action.)
Without getting into all the complications, a discharge petition is the one way around an obstinate pro-abortion Democratic House leadership team. If a majority (218) of members sign the discharge petition, there will be a vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.
As NRLC explained yesterday, Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) has indicated that a discharge petition for the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (H.R. 962) will be filed on April 2nd.
Not that you need to know (because you already do)but to remind your friends and family as well as your House member, H.R. 962 is a very, very modest proposal.
It does not prevent a single abortion. What it would do, however, is extend federal legal protection to babies who are born alive during an abortion.
Why is that even needed? Surely, if a baby miraculously survives an abortion, medical staff will do no more—but no less—for her than they would for any baby born at the same gestational age.
No, they don’t. A little (but important) background.
In 2002, without a dissenting vote, Congress approved, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. BAIPA was subsequently signed into law by President George W. Bush and codified as 1 U.S.C. §8.
This important law states that “every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development” is a “person” for all federal law purposes. What was meant by “born-alive” was spelled out in great detail to protect BAIPA against the charge that it was too vague.
But evidences have multiplied since 2002 that some abortion providers do not regard babies born alive during abortions as persons. They do not provide them with the types of care that would be provided to premature infants who are born spontaneously. As NRLC wrote
In some cases, such born-alive infants are even subjected to overt acts of deadly violence. In 2013, Dr. Kermit Gosnell of Philadelphia was convicted under state law of multiple homicides of such born-alive infants, but such a prosecution and conviction is uncommon. In some jurisdictions, local authorities seem reluctant to investigate reports of infants born alive during abortions, or to bring appropriate indictments even in cases in which the publicly reported evidence of gross neglect or overt lethal acts seems strong.
And beyond that there are the shocking undercover videos taken by the Center for Medical Progress. As you will recall from the many stories in NRL News Today, various persons at certain abortion clinics described events and practices that (besides being revolting) raise questions about whether it is generally recognized among abortion-clinic personnel that a born-alive baby is a legal “person,” whether before or after “viability.”
We say all that to end with this. It is imperative that you contact your House member to urge them to sign the discharge petition. The mistreatment—or, in this case, non-treatment—of abortion survivors must come to an end.