I respect Eva Bak and David Riese for expressing their opinions last week against my article in the Feb. 27th edition of the Windham Independent and also posted here on the Granite Grok. In that article, I exposed the heinous decision of Senators Shaheen and Hassan, who voted to NOT protect the lives of newborn infants who survive an abortion. Mrs. Bak and Mr. Riese claimed I abused my Right to Free Speech, and accused me of using hate speech because I called NH’s U.S. Senators “Heinous Monsters.”
I did not choose those words lightly. “Heinous monsters” fittingly describes those who condone the act of willfully causing a newborn infant to die, and who refused to use their significant legislative powers to codify into law a requirement to provide medical care to helpless innocent children that are born alive during an abortion. While it was not easy to use such strong language to describe our Senators, I believe those words are accurate and appropriate as it relates to this subject.
Any health care practitioner present in the case of an abortion or attempted abortion that results in a child born alive shall—
(A) exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age; and
(B) following the exercise of skill, care, and diligence required under subparagraph (A), ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.
In other words, a child that’s born-alive after an attempted abortion must receive medical care comparable to any other child born at that same gestational age, then transported and admitted into a hospital. Medical practitioners would no longer be able to passively ignore a baby’s medical needs and cause it to die. The Bill included mandatory reporting, and establishes penalties:
A health care practitioner or any employee of a hospital, a physician’s office, or an abortion clinic who has knowledge of a failure to comply with the requirements of paragraph (1) shall immediately report the failure to an appropriate State or Federal law enforcement agency, or to both.
Whoever violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.
Whoever intentionally performs or attempts to perform an overt act that kills a child born alive described under subsection (a), shall be punished as under section 1111 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.
Mrs. Bak and Mr. Riese falsely stated the Bill “was designed to pave the way for abolishing ‘Roe vs. Wade’ and threatens doctors who perform abortions with the possibility of imprisonment.” They are wrong. The bill has absolutely nothing to do with a woman’s choice. It does, however, require that a child who survives an abortion and is outside the mother’s womb must be provided with medical care. Only if that care is NOT provided would practitioners be held accountable.
Once a baby is outside the mother’s womb and has a heartbeat or takes a breath, it is a living, breathing human being. Why would Senators Shaheen and Hassan oppose requiring medical care for a new born infant? If a newborn child is willfully denied medical care, it will die – a form of manslaughter.
Botched abortions happen. This video contains a troubling 30 second story (@ 5:54) about a born-alive baby that was left to die. It is told by Dr. Kathi Aultman, a former abortionist. I can’t comprehend how any human being can support the willful killing of a viable newborn infant. This heinous act should be prohibited by law, with mechanisms in place to ensure violators are held accountable. That is what S.311 would have accomplished.
While my message offends Mrs. Bak and Mr. Riese, it is not hate speech. My article represents actual facts. It is important for American people to know the truth so they can see and understand the moral decay that has been injected into American society and thereby cast an informed vote in upcoming elections.
Senators Shaheen and Hassan state that S.311 goes against a mothers right to choose, but the convergence of law and morality betray the big lie that S.311 is about a woman’s body. It’s not. Once an infant is born alive, it’s about a separate, sacred, living human being,
Senators Shaheen and Hassan also claim S.311 is not necessary because a born-alive baby is already protected under current law, but that is not the reality of what sometimes happens.
When a baby is born alive after the doctor failed to destroy it, it is no longer a fetus. At that point, it is a living, breathing child, separated from its mother, and should be protected by law. But the now living child is prima facie evidence of the doctor’s failure to meet the terms of his services to his client, the mother, leaving the doctor two choices:
(1) be sued by the mother if the child remains alive; or
(2) walk away from the baby, causing it to die, and falsely state that the fetus was destroyed during the abortion.
The reality is that babies have been allowed to die when they are born alive during an abortion. Watch the video.
It is appalling that some people are unable or even worse… unwilling to grasp the significance of the inhumanity and the hideous moral defect of abandoning a legally protected living infant to die.
When it becomes impossible to defend an argument on its merits, demonizing the messenger becomes the means of last resort. Attack me if you will, but I believe life is sacred, and those offended by the hellish reality of post-abortion killings might want to reconsider their support for it. Difficult as it may be for me to say and for you to hear, everyone should be aware of the fate of innocent children who are born alive and then left to die, and that Representatives Kuster and Pappas and Senators Shaheen and Hassan condone this abhorrent behavior.
For those who disagree with me, ask yourself these two questions:
1. How long does a living, breathing child need to be outside of the mother’s womb before its life should be protected?
2. What would you call an individual who condones leaving helpless new born infants alone to die?