Posted on 04/22/2024 1:41:42 PM PDT by Morgana
When the Dobbs ruling overturned Roe v. Wade, we knew the abortion industry would not go away quietly without a fight. As you know, after our amicus brief was cited by the U.S. Supreme Court in overturning Roe, Liberty Counsel has been fighting the abortion industry’s attempts to make killing an unborn child a “right” in state constitutions across the country.
Beyond barbaric …
Now, the abortion industry is going for a bigger prize — federal legislation to force every state to wipe away all abortion restrictions. The bill even goes so far as to overturn the federal ban on gruesome partial birth abortion, which murders a viable, full-term baby before its head leaves the mother’s womb.
Late-term abortion murders viable babies who could, if given the chance, live outside their mother’s womb. In a typical procedure, everything except for the baby’s head is outside the mother’s body. Then, just before the child’s head comes out, the abortionist drives a spike through the child’s skull, literally scrambling the baby’s brain to kill the child.
Instead of a spike to the brain, some abortionists, like the demonic Kermit Gosnell, use heavy duty scissors to sever the child’s spinal cord once the legs, torso, and neck, but not head, are outside the birth canal.
Late-term abortion is beyond barbaric, and it’s hard to believe that nearly half of Congress wants to overturn the 1992 federal ban on this horrific practice. But as we saw in the undercover videos our client Sandra Merritt filmed, Planned Parenthood makes big money from abortions.
That’s so Planned Parenthood can get higher prices in its human organ trafficking scheme, selling baby hearts, livers, and spleens to the highest bidders.
Unpacking the absurd lies in this bill …
In addition to the obscenities mentioned above, HR 12 and its Senate companion bill, S 701, are outrageous.
Section 2.8 asserts that abortion creates “better maternal bonding.” How, I wonder, does a woman “better bond” with a dead child?
Section 2.11 claims that state abortion bans prevent women from receiving “potentially lifesaving treatment for ectopic pregnancies and miscarriage management.” But that is a bald-faced lie! Treatment for ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages is NOT the same procedure as an abortion, and nowhere in the U.S. have those lifesaving treatments been banned.
Sections 2.17 claims that abortion bans cause a loss of “liberty, dignity, bodily autonomy, equality, due process, privacy, health, and freedom from cruel and inhumane treatment.”
But again, at least one person in the abortion scheme loses every time. And having one’s brains scrambled, spine severed, and/or arms and legs unceremoniously yanked off before the head leaves the womb seems to me to be the ultimate in “inhumane treatment.”
Section 2.20 states, “Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures in the United States.” But abortion is NEVER safe for the child. With each abortion performed, at least one person winds up dying.
But perhaps most eye popping of the federal abortion bill’s demonstrably false claims is found in Sections 2.12 and 2.13. In those sections, the abortion advocates claim that abortion bans are racist in nature and primarily hurt minorities.
In overturning Roe, the Supreme Court referenced Liberty Counsel’s amicus brief that detailed the racist eugenic origins of the abortion movement, as well as the ongoing genocide of black and brown children through abortion.
Section 2.12 claims that access to abortion “has always been deficient in the United States for Black, Indigenous, Latina/x, Asian American and Pacific Islander, and People of Color (BIPOC) and their families.” But that is a lie!
Margaret Sanger’s writings show quite clearly that she wanted to stop the proliferation of black and poor people, whom she deemed the “human weeds” of society. Further, the overwhelming majority of abortion clinics are in black and brown neighborhoods, revealing the specific demographic Planned Parenthood and its allies are targeting.
Further, the section claims that abortion is “reproductive justice,” and that creating the right to kill a child will somehow make up for the “forcible removal of Indigenous children” that happened in the 19th century.
Section 2 reveals this bill’s insanity. Section 3 lowers the boom.
In Section 3, the bill states that any and all restrictions, or any and all rules, laws, and policies that might delay an abortion must be erased. That means that ultrasound laws, which have saved many children, will be eliminated. Parental rights also will be eliminated. Section 3 also insists that state and local regulations that force abortion clinics to meet the same health and safety standards as any other surgical center should be abolished. Any law that could make abortion “more difficult to access” would be gone.
The bill states that any restriction based on the age of the unborn child must be overturned. Laws like Florida’s “Heartbeat Law” and even the federal partial birth abortion ban will be overturned, and unlimited abortion on demand up until birth will be the law of this American land.
So who is really being “protected” in this bill?
Section 2.10 admits what this bill is REALLY about. It claims that abortion bans reduce patient access to health care services, including “contraceptive services,” “sexually transmitted disease testing,” and “LGBTQ” services. In other words, it refers to the services Planned Parenthood offers in addition to its primary profit center — baby killing.
HR 12 has 213 co-sponsors, which means the pro-abortion crowd only needs to convince ONE Republican to vote their way to make unlimited abortion the law of the land. Congress needs to hear from you NOW demanding they hold the line against Planned Parenthood and its baby-killing schemes. Tell Congress to VOTE NO on HR 12 and S 701!
If this passes, it's time to turn out the lights on this country. I would be very surprised if God's judgment is withheld any more.
The hidden purpose of this push is to get women voters energized to vote Dem in every state, not just ones with current ballot proposals.
The Michigan one brought out tremendous amounts of women who also voted in the Dems to control the governor’s office, the House and the Senate while they were guaranteeing no hindrance to any abortion by a “health care provider”——not even a doctor necessary now.
Funny thing.
Democrats all talk about Constitutional rights when it suits them.
I hear 1st Amendment rights.
I hear 14th Amendment rights.
Need I go on......
However, they don’t respect any other portions of the Constitution.
4th and 8th Amendment has been lost when it comes to Trump.
2cd Amendment has been lost to Liberals for years.
They never respected the 10th Amendment.
The ruling by the SCOTUS was to return power to the voters, not the Federal Government. It’s a 10th Amendment right, meaning, it’s for States to decide.
Hey, if people want change I am all for it, make Abortion rights a new Amendment to the Constitution and lets get to it. Otherwise, 10th Amendment.
Every state can negate Federal law.
They’ll have to fight the states. SCOTUS said this is a state issue, and the red states will likely fight it.
The ruling by the SCOTUS was to return power to the voters, not the Federal Government.
EVIL is defined by dimmocrap. In so many ways.
Unconstitutional on its face: Congress has no police powers regarding abortion since it’s no longer a civil right.
Pro-life people need to publicize partial birth abortion pictures!!!! It is that easy!
Murder never was a civil right.
Some consider late term abortions years later.
Websters (the way it should appear)
Narcissist > see abortion
I am not surprised that the real Leftist Radicals introduced this bill and in return those on the extreme right will introduce a bill that is the exact opposite.
I doubt the SCOUTS will agree with either. In the end we probably will end up with a Abortion Bill along the lines of European Countries, that is if it ever came to that.
The battle is at the State Level now where it belongs. The Democrats had 50 years to codify Abortion at the Federal Level but didn’t;t want to as it is such an inflammatory issue that helps them raise money from their 70 IQ supporters.
Those on the Right do the same thing.
Let’s take this democrat logic to its logical conclusion:
Since this all revolves around the fact that the unborn child is someone that no one supposedly cares about, why decriminalize any murder at all?
If someone wants to kill someone, why should the government be involved?
If the victim was someone worth something to some one, let that someone murder the murderer.
(with all the subsequent murders of the murderers)
Soon the democrats will have their Moa, their Stalin, or their Hitler.
(Which is what they want anyway)
I’d like to abort some Democrats after birth.
Or a "State's Right".
Did the baby get any due process before it was slaughtered ?
Does the Father have any say in the matter.
No on both counts, therefore it violates the Federal due process clause.
The unborn baby would sue, but I am sure SCOTUS would reject the claim per "no standing".
Strictly speaking, it should not be a crime to murder anyone if it can be shown that person was inconvenient to the murderer.
Wouldn’t it be a hoot if a guy used as his defense that “she was inconvenient to me.”
I should have put “civil right” in quotes.
Every Democrat party headquarters needs to have a bucket of blood or red paint flung on their doors and all those who are pushing this when they go out in public should have blood or red paint thrown on them.
They like blood so much, let them bathe in it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.