The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act

Did you know that the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives 241-183 on Friday? Steve Byas reports in The New American,

Of course, Friday was only a few days before the anniversary of the January 22, 1973 Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision, in which the 7-2 vote essentially created a supposed right to abortion. Since 1973, a March for Life has been held on that day to call attention to the holocaust of abortions generated by the Supreme Court’s infamous ruling.

At the time of the judgment, Associate Justice Byron White, one of the two dissenters, called the ruling an exercise of “raw, judicial power,” arguing that the justices had created a “right to abortion” when no such right existed in the Constitution of the United States. Although pro-abortion activists were jubilant at the decision, thinking they had won forever the right to kill unborn babies, a large opposition to abortion has grown up over the years, calling itself “the pro-life movement.”

Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life, told Breitbart News that the Born Alive measure “is the bare minimum that a humane society should offer to newborns. It should be obvious that a baby, born and alive outside of the womb, should receive medical care if he or she needs it. Adding criminal penalties for the so-called medical professionals who stand there and allow a baby to die is absolutely appropriate, especially when you consider that they have the skills to aid the struggling young infant.”

But pro-abortion extremists such as those in Planned Parenthood disagree. They consistently argue in opposition to any restrictions not only to abortion, but to helping a baby who has actually been born alive. For example, in 2013, a Florida Planned Parenthood lobbyist, Alisa Laport Snow, spoke against a similar bill being considered in that state. During her testimony, Snow reportedly suggested that letting a baby die is acceptable, as long as the physician and the patient (by which she meant the mother who just allowed her baby to be aborted) agreed.

Taking the Planned Parenthood statement apart and examining it more closely reveals a similar mindset. “Doctors … oppose this law because it prevents them from giving the best care to their patients,” they argued in their statement. Actually, the only “doctors” referred to in this statement are abortionists, who kill unborn children for a living. Planned Parenthood is not surveying doctors in general, but only those whose business it is to abort babies. In this particular instance, the baby has survived the abortionist’s best efforts to kill it. The abortion effort is over. If a physician can let a baby die moments after it is born, then just exactly how long does this circumstance prevail? What about in an hour, if the baby is still living? What about the next day? The next week?

In the Orwellian language of the abortion industry, “giving the best care” to a patient is apparently no care at all.

...Planned Parenthood is presently under investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice for its alleged involvement in selling body parts of aborted babies for profit. As reprehensible as such a practice is, many pro-lifers argue that the greater crime is killing unborn children in the first place.

Read more here.