Americans aren’t being told the truth on how extreme and out of step with commonsense values President Joe Biden and Democrat leaders are on the issue of abortion.
During the first GOP primary debate on Aug. 23, for example, when Govs. Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, and Asa Hutchinson, as well as U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, charged Democrats with supporting legal abortion all the way to birth, Biden’s former White House Spokesperson Jen Psaki denied it on social media, insisting, “No one supports abortion up until birth.”
No one … except nearly every elected Democrat in Washington, D.C., that is.
Reporters from the Des Moines Register, Associated Press, Newsweek, and CNN have similarly all told The FAMiLY Leader that America’s top Democrats definitely do not support abortion to birth.
CNN’s Dana Bash even told TFL’s Bob Vander Plaats in a live interview on Aug. 8, “I have not talked to a Democrat who wants abortion on demand until time of birth.”
But the reality is that several Democrat-led states already allow abortion through all 9 months of pregnancy without limit (such as New Jersey, New Mexico, and Oregon) or require merely that a late-term abortion “preserve the mental health” of the mother (like Massachusetts).
Why are America’s left-leaning journalists working so hard to deny what’s demonstrably true in the public record? Perhaps they are simply having a hard time believing how extreme their preferred Party’s leaders are on this issue.
A significant majority of Americans support a more compromised position on abortion – willing to permit the practice in the early days of pregnancy, but also wanting to legally limit late-term abortions. Even after an upswing in pro-abortion sentiment following the overturning of Roe v. Wade, only 1 in 5 Americans – and less than half of everyday Democrats – can stomach killing a fully developed preborn child only a few weeks or days from being born.
Which may be why, when elected Democrats profess vague pledges to “codify reproductive choice” or “restore Roe,” most reporters assume that means a compromise position that would still allow some limits, such as Roe v. Wade originally posited in 1973.
But actions speak louder than words. And it’s time Americans learned the truth: Democrats in D.C. are not in step with commonsense values or with compromise.
For Democrats in the U.S. House have voted – and passed – the radically pro-abortion Women’s Health Protection Act as recently as September 2021 and July 2022, and gained a majority of Democrat votes in the U.S. Senate both times. The 2023 version of the bill, called H.R. 12, is currently stuck in subcommittee, but 212 House Democrats have signed on as cosponsors. And Biden’s White House has released multiple official statements declaring, “The Administration strongly supports House passage of … the Women’s Health Protection Act.”
Which means over 250 of America’s top Democrats are therefore on record, voting for and publicly supporting this bill. It’s verifiable and official, and media “fact-checkers” have no excuse for obfuscating the fact any longer.
So what does this Women’s Health Protection Act actually do?
1. It overrides every state law limiting abortion, even restrictions on barbaric, late-term abortions.
Section 7, Subsection 1 asserts, “This Act shall supersede any inconsistent Federal or State law … whether adopted prior to or after the date of enactment of this Act.”
2. It creates an absolute right to abortion prior to a preborn child’s ability to survive outside the womb (“viability”).
Section 5, Subsection 1 declares, “A health care provider has a right under this Act to provide abortion services, and a patient has a corresponding right under this Act to terminate a pregnancy prior to viability without being subject to any … limitations or requirements.”
3. After viability, it dictates a woman needs only a nurse or pharmacist’s note to get an abortion … even up to the day of birth.
Section 4, Subsection 3 defines “health care practitioner” to include a midwife, nurse, pharmacist, or physician assistant, then Section 5, Subsection 2(A) declares, “A patient has a corresponding right under this Act to terminate a pregnancy after viability when, in the good-faith medical judgement of the treating health care provider, it is necessary to protect the life or health [italics added] of the patient.”
An important point of clarification is necessary: The Act’s chief sponsor in the Senate, Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, has already acknowledged that emotional health is a good enough reason to approve an abortion post-viability. And the text of the bill in Section 8(a) specifically instructs the courts to “liberally construe” the provisions of the act, meaning courts would likely look to the definition of “health” found in Doe v. Bolton, which states, “Physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age … all these factors may relate to health.”
In other words, all a woman needs is an abortion-mill official to agree that she’s stressed out, and she can get an abortion the day before her baby’s birthday.
That’s utterly indistinguishable from abortion-on-demand up to the day of a baby’s birth.
In fact, so committed are the nation’s leading Democrats to permitting third-trimester abortion, they won’t even allow an unconventional voice from their ranks like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to stray from toeing the line.
When asked at the Iowa State Fair about abortion earlier this month, Kennedy make the mistake of affirming the compromise position most Americans support: “Once a child is viable, outside the womb, I think then the state has an interest in protecting the child.”
But within hours, Kennedy’s campaign corrected its candidate, stating he believes instead, “It is always the woman’s right to choose. He does not support legislation banning abortion.”
In other words, his campaign insisted, Kennedy supports what nearly all D.C. Democrats have affirmed and voted for on record: Abortion, for even the flimsiest of reasons, all the way up to a baby’s birth. It’s the Democrats’ de facto position, after all, and not even Kennedy will be allowed to stray from it.
Now how about the media starts telling the truth about it?
Comments