Posts

Infanticide Is the Historical Hallmark of a Pagan Culture

/0 Comments/in , /by

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, who just made deeply troubling comments on abortion, and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who just signed the country’s most radical abortion law, have been the subject of intense ire in recent days. The outrage is coming not just coming from “radical” pro-lifers, but people from across the political spectrum.

Why? Because virtually no one but the far left believes it is morally acceptable to allow infants to be murdered seconds before birth, or to be left to die after delivery at the behest of the mother.

Yet the nation has been shocked by radical left’s boldness in their mission to define preborn human beings as disposable non-persons. Where is this evil coming from, and how do we stop it?

The Slaughter of the Young and the Elderly

Abortion and infanticide have historically been common practices. In the first century AD, infanticide was a common and culturally accepted practice across the world. The murder of infants was a regular occurrence in Europe into the Middle Ages and beyond, despite being condemned by both church and state.

The practice was not confined to the desperate, illiterate, impoverished masses, as if “enlightened” thinkers knew better. The Twelve Tables of Roman Law, admired by Cicero, contains the command that, “A dreadfully deformed child shall be quickly killed.”

Likewise, the wealthy first century Roman philosopher Seneca once wrote, “We doom scabby sheep to the knife, lest they should infect our flocks. We destroy monstrous births, and we also drown our children if they are born weakly or unnaturally formed; to separate what is useless from what is sound is an act, not of anger, but of reason.” This from a Stoic, who supposedly believed virtue to be the highest good. Notably, Seneca was Nero’s tutor.

Infanticide was an acknowledged option for any child who was deformed, sickly, of uncertain paternity, the wrong sex, or simply unnecessary to the household. Aristotle, revered by many a university professor, wrote that, “As to exposing or rearing the children born, let there be a law that no deformed child shall be reared,” and “if any people have a child as a result of intercourse in contravention of these regulations, abortion must be practiced on it before it has developed sensation and life.”

The Aztecs, Mayans, and Incans all practiced child sacrifice to appease their gods. The Chimú civilization, located in what is now Peru, sacrificed more than 140 children at one time some 550 years ago. The children’s chests were slashed open, presumably to remove their hearts.

The citizens of the powerful ancient city Carthage in Phoenicia ritually sacrificed their infants. Archaeologists believe the preferred age of sacrificial infants was less than three months old. According to the writing of early AD Greek biographer Plutarch, “But with full knowledge and understanding [the Carthaginians] offered up their own children, and those who had no children would buy little ones from poor people and cut their throats as if they were so many lambs or young birds.”

The residents of the broader region of Canaan (late second millennium B.C.) were condemned numerous times by the ancient prophets of Israel for their child sacrifice. The prophet Jeremiah, in his judgment against apostate Israel, foretold that the valley of Hinnom, where the Israelites were sacrificing children to Baal, would be called “the valley of Slaughter” (Jeremiah 19:5-6).

Evidence for both ritualistic and utilitarian murder can be gathered from around the globe. In times of famine, the Inuit would abandon the elderly (both with and without consent) or dispense of them by quicker means. The Bactrians of ancient Persia were reported to have fed their sick and elderly to dogs trained especially for this purpose. Nearby cultures were supposed to have had similar senicidal customs. Among the Massagetae, Herodotus wrote that, “Human life does not come to its natural close with this people,” but that the people sacrificed their elderly, boiled their flesh, and ate it.

Not every single community on earth had such evil practices, but the embrace of death as the first solution to a family or tribe’s problems has been wickedly banal, historically speaking.

Judeo-Christian Morality Has Saved Us from Much Evil

Northam’s endorsement of infanticide by exposure is only shocking because we have lived in a rare cultural moment in which infanticide is considered abhorrent. This extraordinary development is no accident. A sense of morality about life and death is not the product of evolution over the last 2,000 years. Rather, humanity’s progress out of death culture is due to nothing less than Judeo-Christian influence.

As formerly mentioned, the Christian God condemned child sacrifice through his prophets; Israelites were specifically commanded not to kill their children. The concept of bloodguilt is found throughout the Old Testament, even in cases where death was seemingly accidental.

Murder was an abomination. The blood of Abel, the first recorded murder victim in the Bible, “cried out” to the Lord from the ground. The gravity of taking a human life was no less firm among the followers of Jesus, who consider the Hebrew scriptures the word of God. As the gospel spread, so did the idea that all human life is precious.

The belief in the sanctity of life overrode even the commonly accepted practice of abortion. Contrast the evil of Aristotle’s belief with what Tertullian, an early church father, wrote in “Apologia”: “In our case, murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the foetus in the womb…To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to the birth. That is a man which is going to be one; you have the fruit already in the seed.”

Elsewhere, he wrote: “Thus, you read the word of God, spoken to Jeremias: ‘Before I formed thee in the womb, I knew thee.’ If God forms us in the womb, He also breathes on us as He did in the beginning: ‘And God formed man and breathed into him the breath of life.’…Was it, then, a dead body at that stage? Surely it was not, for ‘God is the God of the living and not the dead.’”

As Tertullian recounted, believers in the early church would search through the heaps of refuse in Roman cities and rescue infants from among the refuse and broken pottery. There is archaeological evidence to support the fact that infants were thrown in the trash or into the sewer, sometimes deliberately killed instead of being out left to die by exposure. That children should never be trash was a revolutionary concept in the early centuries after Christ.

The fourth century Roman emperor Constantine, who is generally believed to have converted to Christianity and was at the very least influenced by it, considered infanticide a crime. Later, Emperor Valentinian, also a professed Christian, officially outlawed the practice by requiring that all children be reared.

Since that time, the belief that God made man in his own image and set him apart from the rest of creation for communion with his creator, that he is “fearfully and wonderfully made,” and that therefore God’s prohibition against murder is to be upheld, has been the basis for the protection of human life.

Christianity Deeply Shaped the Early Days Of America

Infanticide was outlawed in colonial America. The earliest recorded execution for infanticide was in 1648 in Massachusetts. Similar court cases from the 17th and early 18th century are found in Maryland, Maine, Virginia, and New York. Abortion was also a prosecutable offense. Between 1670 and 1807, there were 51 convictions of infanticide in Massachusetts.

The seriousness with which our forefathers considered the murder of children was not due to the influence of the “great” philosophizing of Aristotle, Seneca, or Cicero. It was due to the Christian faith. It is Christians who have historically run orphanages, adoption agencies, and pregnancy clinics. It is Christians who advocate most fiercely for heartbeat bills and abolition. It is Christians out on the sidewalk, day after day, begging women not to kill their babies and offering to connect them with church members who are willing to adopt. Christians take seriously the biblical command to “look after the orphan and widow in their distress.”

Where the kingdom of God* invades, death flees, both spiritually and physically. Where populations dwell in spiritual darkness, death finds favor. How can I know this for sure? How do I know our contemporary revulsion toward infanticide is not simply the result of human “progress” over the last two millennia? Because when Christianity is aggressively suppressed within a culture, as it has been under Communist and Socialist regimes, society chokes on the stench of death.

Recent Godless Regimes Did Not Value Human Life

Adolph Hitler’s genocidal socialist regime* practiced the euthanasia of “life unworthy of life” and murdered about six million Jews. Communist dictator Joseph Stalin had no qualms with mass starvation. A quarter of the Cambodian population died under Pol Pot. Altogether, godless collectivism led to the deaths of about 100 million people in the 20th century. Karl Marx’s philosophy implicitly assumed that some segments of the population must be “left behind” in the march toward utopia.

American culture has stood in stark contrast against this backdrop of death and misery, and it’s not because Anglo Americans are inherently better than any other people group. It is because this nation was founded on Christian principles, namely that we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. First among those rights is life. The principles of Christianity have been deeply formative to American culture. Restraining evil and promoting prosperity bound us together with a common creed.

But as we are now witnessing, that influence is fading. Majority support for legal abortion has been steady for decades, and millennials are just as supportive of it as the previous two generations. We are less religious than ever, and it is no coincidence that the godless are some of the biggest proponents of late-term abortion and infanticide. Those who profess Christianity and publicly bless abortion clinics do so against the core teachings of their own faith––it is not an intramural dispute, but an aberration.

What we are seeing now is a return to a world that does not know God and does not want to know God. This is the consequence of our detachment from Christianity and its moral system. The truth is that you do not attain a culture where human life (albeit born life) is almost universally cherished without the knowledge of the one true God.

As the Apostle Paul reiterated from Old Testament writers: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God…Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

The fact that we are surrounded by a wealth of resources and still 13 percent of all pregnancies in America and 28 percent in the state of New York end in murder should tell you something. This is not a matter of inequality of rights between the sexes or inequality of resources. It is a matter of the heart, and a heart without God is “desperately wicked.” The god of Progress has led its worshippers to embrace death as easily as the Canaanite gods that surrounded the people of Israel.

Where idolatry is not directly involved, a perceived lack of resources has, for millennia, been the excuse to choose death, not the reason. In such a wealthy and technologically advanced society, it is perhaps more obvious a truth now than it was 2,000 years ago, but the truth has always been there.

*I am not talking about the political Christendom of Europe and the Crusades. I am talking about the spiritual kingdom of God as referred to by Jesus and the New Testament writers.

**Before you tell me, “Hitler was a Christian!” watch this video of a “Christmas tree” with a Swastika suspended over the top. Hitler also is reported to have said, “I’ll have my reckoning with the church. I’ll have it reeling on the ropes.” The Nazis who surrounded Hitler deeply hated Christianity and wanted to see it destroyed.

(For more from the author of “Infanticide Is the Historical Hallmark of a Pagan Culture” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Democrats Block Infanticide Ban, but It’s Not Over. The Senate Must Vote

/0 Comments/in , /by

Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., kept his word Monday evening, coming to the Senate floor and giving all 100 U.S. senators the opportunity to condemn infanticide. The opportunity was declined by Senate Democrats.

Sasse asked for unanimous consent to proceed to a vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, a bill that would protect infants born alive after attempted abortion procedures by requiring doctors to provide medical care to those — I must stress this — born-alive infants. Without these protections, an infant who survives an abortion procedure may be left to die on the table in a state like New York, where late-term abortion up to the point of delivery is now legal if an abortionist says it is necessary to “protect the mother’s health” or that the fetus is not “viable.”

“Every senator will have the opportunity to stand for human dignity – to stand for the belief that, in this country, all of us are created equal,” Sasse said. “Because if that equality means anything, surely it means that infanticide is wrong. Frankly, this shouldn’t be hard.”

Sasse moved to pass this bill after Virginia Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, in defense of a bill introduced in his state similar to the New York law, suggested that a mother and her physician would have a “discussion” about what to do with an infant born alive after an attempted abortion.

“The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother,” Northam said.

Sasse said Governor Northam endorsed infanticide.

No euphemisms. No weasel-words there. Infants could kept comfortable and resuscitated. And also, baby girls could be left cold and alone to die.

Just a few years ago, the abortion lobby was really clear in its talk about hoping that abortion would be “safe and legal, but rare.” This was the slogan. Abortion would be “safe, legal, and rare.” Now we’re talking about keeping a baby comfortable while the doctors have a debate about infanticide.

That is what we’re talking about here on the floor tonight. We’re not talking about second-trimester abortion; we’re not having some big, complicated discussion about a mother’s reproductive freedom, as important as all those debates are. We’re actually talking about babies that have been born. The only debate on the floor tonight is about infanticide.

Sasse’s bill, cosponsored by 42 Senate Republicans, would require those physicians to save the life of the baby born alive. He pleaded with his Democratic colleagues, asking them not to object to his unanimous consent request.

There are only two sides of the debate on the floor tonight: You’re either for babies, or you’re defending infanticide. That is actually what the legislation is that’s before us.

Please don’t block this legislation.

Please don’t let Governor Northam define you. Don’t let an extremist pro-abortion lobby and pledge hold you hostage. Please don’t protect infanticide.

Democratic Senator Patty Murray of Washington stood in objection to the bill, claiming that infanticide is already illegal and accusing the Republicans of mischaracterizing Sasse’s bill.

“We have laws against infanticide in this country. This is a gross misinterpretation of the actual language of the bill that is being asked to be considered, and therefore, I object,” Murray said.

Murray is wrong, of course. As Sasse noted, the New York abortion law removed the protections for infants born alive during an attempted abortion. National Review’s Alexandra DeSanctis points out that only 26 states have affirmative protections for infants who survive abortions. And it’s hard to understand how Sasse and others have “mischaracterized” his bill, which is only seven pages long and not difficult to understand. The bill states that Congress finds: 1) “If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws”; and 2) “Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care.”

Specifically, the bill Murray claims is grossly mischaracterized requires that a health care practitioner present when a child is born alive shall “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.” Then it requires that health care practitioner to take the baby to a hospital for further care. The penalty for failing to follow the law would be at least five years’ imprisonment. Additionally, the intentional killing of a child born alive would be prosecuted as murder.

The bill has a mandatory reporting requirement, so people working at an abortion facility would be required to report if and when an abortionist does not work to save the life of an infant born alive. The bill also gives a mother the legal right to sue if her baby is born alive and the abortionist did not follow this law, letting the child die.

And that’s it. What exactly is Sasse mischaracterizing? His legislation protects infants born alive after attempted abortions from being left to die and clarifies that killing such an infant is murder. It’s an infanticide ban, exactly as Sasse describes.

It’s Murray and the other Democrats defending or excusing Northam’s comments and the New York abortion law who are making a gross mischaracterization. This is not hard. They are defending and excusing the murder of children born alive. By blocking the bill, Murray and the Democrats who support her protected infanticide.

Now it is time to push for a roll call vote. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., promised this would not be the last time this bill is considered.

Speaking in support of Sasse’s bill, he said it is “harrowing” that this bill is necessary.

What could be more unanimous than this: That what medical professionals owe every single newborn American citizen, regardless of the circumstances of their birth, is attention and care — not neglect, and certainly not violence. Frankly, it’s harrowing that this legislation is even necessary. It was even more disturbing when, last week, a Democrat governor was unable to clearly and simply state that of course, these newborn babies have human rights that must be respected.

I’ve been co-sponsor of Senator Sasse’s legislation. And I hope that none of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle invent any reasons to block this request later today. That would make quite a disturbing statement. If they do inexplicably block Senator Sasse’s effort, I can assure them that this will not be the last time we try to ensure that all newborns are afforded this fundamental legal protection.

Likewise, Sasse promised to continue to seek a roll call vote on in the Senate on this bill. Every member of the United States Senate should go on record to oppose infanticide. This shouldn’t be a controversial position. It’s not a philosophical or scientific debate about when life begins. This is about little babies who are clearly, visibly alive and shouldn’t be killed or left to die. This is about what we, as Americans, are willing to do to protect those little babies.

Voters ought to know where their senators stand on opposing infanticide. The Senate must vote. (For more from the author of “Democrats Block Infanticide Ban, but It’s Not Over. The Senate Must Vote” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Oh, so This Was the Person Who Revealed the Racist Photo on Ralph Northam’s Yearbook Page

/0 Comments/in , , /by

By Townhall. Well, it seems support for late-term abortion is what created the fiasco that has embroiled Virginia’s Democratic governor. Pretty much everyone has besieged Gov. Ralph Northam, especially within his own party. They’re urging him to resign after a yearbook photo from his days at Eastern Virginia Medical School was unearthed last week. The picture shows two men donning racist costumes on his 1984 page. One is wearing blackface while the other figure donned Ku Klux Klan garb. Northam apologized for the photo, admitting he was in it last Friday night. He did not specify which person he was in the photo. Was he the KKK man or the blackface dude?

On Saturday, the dumpster fire grew when Northam retracted his apology, saying that wasn’t him in the photo. Then, he admitted to doing blackface, saying he dressed as Michael Jackson in the past. So, Northam’s defense is ‘the photo on my yearbook page that shows someone in blackface isn’t me, but I’ve done blackface before whose pictures haven’t been seen.’ . . .

The Washington Post interviewed Patrick Howley of Big League Politics, who got the scoop on the yearbook photo. He told the publication a former classmate of Northam’s tipped him off. The reason: Northam’s comments about abortion (via WaPo) [emphasis mine]:

The reporter who exposed the racist photo on Gov. Ralph Northam’s yearbook page said a “concerned citizen” led him to the story that has prompted widespread outrage and calls for the Democrat’s resignation. . .

“It’s very easy to explain,” Howley, 29, said in an interview Saturday. “A concerned citizen, not a political opponent, came to us and pointed this out. I was very offended [by the photo] because I don’t like racism.”

(Read more from “Oh, so This Was the Person Who Revealed the Racist Photo on Ralph Northam’s Yearbook Page” HERE)

______________________________________________

Fairfax suggests Gov. Northam could be behind leaked sexual assault allegation

By Fox News. Virginia Democratic Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax on Monday, when asked by a reporter, did not rule out the possibility that embattled Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam could be secretly pushing a newly revealed sexual assault allegation against Fairfax to derail his possible ascension to the governorship.

And in a separate, fiery statement late Sunday, Fairfax accused The Washington Post of “smearing an elected official,” reiterated that the sexual assault allegation against him is “false,” and seemingly threatened to sue the paper for rebuking his earlier characterization of the evidence surrounding the episode.

“This is what we meant when we said that people who continue to spread these false allegations will be sued,” Fairfax said.

Fairfax’s extraordinary comments came as Northam faces a torrent of pressure from both Democrats and Republicans to resign, after a now-infamous yearbook photo surfaced showing someone in blackface and someone in a KKK costume on Northam’s 1984 medical school yearbook page.

In a post published on the right-wing website Big League Politics on Sunday night, a woman accused a politician fitting Fairfax’s description of sexually assaulting her in a hotel room during the Democratic National Convention in Boston in 2004. In a statement Monday, Fairfax denied assaulting anyone, but acknowledged having a consensual encounter with the woman. (Read more from “Fairfax suggests Gov. Northam could be behind leaked sexual assault allegation” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Lone Dem Senator Blocks Bill Banning Infanticide for Babies Who Survive Abortions

/0 Comments/in , , /by

On Monday, Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), blocking a Senate bill that would require doctors to give aid to babies who survived abortions, objected to the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and her one vote was enough to prevent the Senate from passing the bill in a unanimous consent vote, LifeSiteNews reports.

Last Thursday, Senator Ben Sasse (R-NB) requested the unanimous consent vote after Virginia Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, a pediatric neurologist, had made comments indicating he did not object to letting an infant die after its birth, indicating that a born-alive “infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired.” Sasse had already called for a unanimous consent vote to pass a resolution defending the Knights of Columbus in mid-January. That resolution was passed unanimously.

According to the rules of the Senate:

A senator may request unanimous consent on the floor to set aside a specified rule of procedure so as to expedite proceedings. If no Senator objects, the Senate permits the action, but if any one senator objects, the request is rejected. Unanimous consent requests with only immediate effects are routinely granted, but ones affecting the floor schedule, the conditions of considering a bill or other business, or the rights of other senators, are normally not offered, or a floor leader will object to it, until all senators concerned have had an opportunity to inform the leaders that they find it acceptable.

Sasse appealed to the conscience of the entire Senate, saying, “Just a few years ago, the abortion lobby was really clear in its talk about hoping abortion would be … safe, legal, and rare. Now we’re talking about keeping the baby comfortable while the doctors have a debate about infanticide. You’re either for babies, or you’re defending infanticide … please, don’t let Governor Northam define you.” (Read more from “Lone Dem Senator Blocks Bill Banning Infanticide for Babies Who Survive Abortions” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Ralph Northam’s Truth-Reveal Party Unmasked Abortion’s Evil

/0 Comments/in , /by

It is ironic that the most volatile controversy in American politics—abortion—hasn’t really been a debate: it’s been more like a mystery story. The truth has been cloaked in misdirection and sugar-coated with words like choice and rights. . .

Pro-choice extremists advocate policies unheard of anywhere else in the free world—publicly financed abortion on demand, up to the moment of birth, justifiable even when the baby is a girl instead of a boy—yet they are called moderate politicians.

Let’s not beat around the bush. This cannot be explained by sympathy for “women’s reproduction rights” or the “health of the mother.” These excuses have nothing to do with the left’s barbaric support for the killing of children in America. No. It’s deliberate and calculated. They’re just lying. . .

Abortion is violence, perpetrated by the powerful against the weak and innocent, usually for a handsome profit. Every baby announcement, every sonogram image, every gender-reveal party, every baby shower, every first kick or hiccup from the womb, every tragic miscarriage, and every miraculous preemie testifies anew to what we already know: they’re babies in there, and abortion kills them dead. Abortion is legal, but it shouldn’t be, and that is the truth the pro-abortion movement must conceal and suppress at all costs.

So, after the nausea wears off, the pro-life movement should be grateful to Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam. This week Northam defended proposed legislation in the Virginia legislature that would, following New York’s lead, gut remaining restrictions on late-term abortions up through and, apparently, after the child’s birth. (Read more from “Ralph Northam’s Truth-Reveal Party Unmasked Abortion’s Evil” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Democrats’ Inexorable Abortion Logic Has Finally Caught Up With Them

/0 Comments/in , /by

This week, Democrats finally succumbed to the inescapable logic of abortion. They have admitted, perhaps against their better judgement, that there really is no difference between abortion and infanticide.

Between New York’s expansive new abortion legislation, a bill now before the Virginia General Assembly, and Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s infamous comments about making a just-born infant “comfortable” while the mother and a physician discuss whether to snuff its life out, there can be no doubt that Democrats have acceded to the demands of their own ruthless logic on abortion.

What that logic demands is nothing less than unrestricted abortion up to the moment of birth and after. There is almost nothing in these bills to limit late-term abortion. Indeed, they constitute a strenuous effort to free late-term abortion of any kind of medical justification.

The Virginia bill, for example, would change state law to allow third-trimester abortions if the continuation of the pregnancy is likely to “impair the mental or physical health of the woman”—removing the qualifiers “substantially and irremediably.”

In other words, almost any impairment—anxiety, depression, physical discomfort—is enough to justify abortion up to the point of delivery. As my colleague David Harsanyi pointed out on Twitter, is there a difference between aborting a fetus in the third trimester because it’s causing the mother emotional distress, and killing a premature infant in the NICU for the same reason? If there is a difference, what is it? Will any Democrat say?

(Read more from “Democrats’ Inexorable Abortion Logic Has Finally Caught Up With Them” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: Women See the Horrific Reality of Abortion in These Stunning Videos

/0 Comments/in , /by

Live Action, the pro-life organization founded by Lila Rose, has an ongoing video series in which they approach men and women who identify as pro-choice, and try to change their minds.

The series follows a simple format. A person behind the camera first asks the pro-choice individuals their beliefs about abortion, then has them watch a video narrated by former abortionist, Dr. Anthony Levatino. These videos, which can be viewed in their entirety here, feature animated depictions of various abortion procedures as described by Levatino. . .

While watching the video, the women begins to cry. During the post-video interview, she says:

I didn’t know that you’d have to detach and crush, and the process it goes through, and all the risks that happen with this. So now that I do know, I just — you can, there are so many other options apart from abortion, and I know it sucks, and like, the consequences, and how it happened, and why you might want an abortion, but there’s always another option. And [you’ve] just got to suck it up because it’s a life.

The person behind the camera notes that prior to watching the video, the woman had said that there were “certain instances [or] circumstances where you would support it, in cases of rape, for example.” She was then asked if the video changed her mind. The woman replies that the video has indeed changed her mind.

(Read more from “WATCH: Women See the Horrific Reality of Abortion in These Stunning Videos” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

It’s Time for Pro-Lifers to Realize They’re Losing

/0 Comments/in , /by

When is it time to question the power of the pro-life movement? This week the state of New York passed a law that will mean babies can be killed up to the moment of birth. Babies that feel pain, cry, and could easily survive outside the womb will be brutally killed, chopped up, and sucked out like pieces of meat. Vermont is considering a similar bill. So is Virginia.

Meanwhile, the annual March for Life had a huge turnout this year, estimated to be as high as 300,000 people. How do these two things go together? Perhaps big marches are not a sign of success.

A New York book store owner, who became somewhat famous after he shut down his store in protest of the new abortion law, put it this way: “When intense pro-life involvement is defined by going to an annual pep rally or giving five bucks to a pro-life lobbyist at a Sanctity of Life Sunday, it’s not surprising that someone hanging a sign in his window, turning off the lights and going home is viewed as heroic.”

The pro-life movement has too much bark and no bite, too much signal and too little virtue. It takes participation in a march as more significant than legal victories ending abortion. The simple truth is that the pro-life movement is stagnant, dominated by an uncritical and defeatist attitude. It needs some new life.

A friend who worked for a pro-life organization very much in the “the movement” confirms this. He became frustrated that people there ignore the evidence in front of them, and instead show excitement about the size of the marches, acting “as if our country is turning a corner and is getting closer and closer to life.” Meanwhile, they react more strongly to those who challenge their approved legal tactics or rhetoric than they do actual political defeats, as if questioning the success of the movement is some sort of heresy. (Read more from “It’s Time for Pro-Lifers to Realize They’re Losing” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Don’t Be Surprised by Dem Gov. Northam’s Abhorrent Abortion Position

/0 Comments/in , /by

“The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

Those words from Virginia Democrat Gov. Ralph Northam in defense of an extreme state abortion bill kicked off a national firestorm among pro-lifers, as well as those generally disgusted by the idea of killing a viable human infant in the name of “reproductive choice.”

Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill responded by calling what Northam described by its proper name: Infanticide.

“In just a few years pro-abortion zealots went from ‘safe, legal, and rare’ to ‘keep the newborns comfortable while the doctor debates infanticide,” said Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., in response. “I don’t care what party you’re from – if you can’t say that it’s wrong to leave babies to die after birth, get the hell out of public office.”

“I never thought I would see the day America had government officials who openly support legal infanticide,” tweeted Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.

But of course, the major networks’ evening broadcasts made no mention of it whatsoever. In other news, water is wet.

Later that day, one of the bill’s Democratic cosponsors withdrew her support, saying that she only attached her name to the measure because she wasn’t aware of just how extreme it really was. And, make no mistake, it’s quite extreme.

But anyone who found the remarks genuinely surprising should take a hard look at how Northam’s fellow Democrats have treated abortion survivors in recent years. People do survive abortion attempts, and pro-life lawmakers have introduced bills to protect abortion survivors in the last few sessions of Congress. But most Democrats vote against them.

Last session, H.R. 4712, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, came up for a vote in the House of Representatives. It was a relatively short and simple measure to “prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.”

I.E., it would prohibit that “discussion” that Northam referred to on the radio from leading to the child being killed or left to die.

The bill passed by a vote of 241 to 183. All 183 “nay” votes came from House Democrats, and only six Democrats voted in favor of it.

A Heritage Foundation policy brief in favor of the bill explained that it would have augmented a law passed and signed in 2002: “However, as the disturbing case of Kermit Gosnell has shown, babies continue to be born alive and then killed after attempted abortions or are purposely delivered alive and left to die. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act augments the 2002 law by providing for criminal consequences for health care providers who violate the law and requires that proper medical care be given by the health care practitioner present if an infant is born alive.”

In September 2015, the Obama administration issued a formal policy statement opposing an earlier iteration of the bill, saying that heightened legal protections for abortion survivors “would likely have a chilling effect, reducing access to care”; basically, hypothetical concerns about abortion access were more important to the Obama White House than protection for infants outside the womb.

Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., now the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, defended his opposition to the measure on the House floor, making the nonsense “argument” that the requirement to admit abortion survivors to a hospital somehow “puts children’s lives and health at risk.” He also said that the implication that abortionists “cannot be trusted to take adequate measures to save a living baby’s life, is insulting and untrue.”

Just to put things in further perspective here, Nadler said that just before the vote, on January 19, 2018; Northam’s infanticide comments are 376 days later.

Given where Northam’s party members have fallen on the born-alive issue, given that the 2016 Democratic presidential candidate admitted that she “did not think” that there should be any restrictions on late-term abortion after Roe v. Wade, and given that the wider abortion activist cadre is quickly replacing the old mantra of “safe, legal, and rare” with “on demand and without apology,” should anybody be that surprised by what Northam said? (For more from the author of “Don’t Be Surprised by Dem Gov. Northam’s Abhorrent Abortion Position” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Trump Must Be Stronger on Abortion to Win in 2020

/0 Comments/in , /by

The American people were reminded this week that there are depraved politicians in this country who think there should be a legal right to kill children in the late stages of pregnancy and maybe even beyond. As Democratic lawmakers in New York, Virginia, and Rhode Island move to advance late-term abortion bills that would allow babies to be murdered at any point up to delivery, Democrats have nowhere to hide their radical, evil position on killing children.

President Donald Trump should go on offense on the abortion issue this week, today even, next week in the State of the Union address, and every day for the next two years if he wants to win re-election in 2020.

When it became clear in 2016 that Donald Trump was going to be the Republican nominee for president, many conservatives had reservations about voting for him. Though he claimed to be a conservative on many issues, he was still an unknown factor. He had no record of governing. He was a lifelong New Yorker, and his past positions were quite liberal. He had supported Democrats for election. Pro-lifers were among those concerned that if elected, Donald Trump would be a pro-abortion liberal president. He had, after all, declared in 1999 that he was “very pro-choice.”

There were two issues Trump campaigned on that united enough conservatives around his candidacy to ultimately prevail on Election Day and defeat Hillary Clinton. The first was abortion. Trump campaigned as a pro-life candidate, explaining that his position changed after watching a friend decide against abortion and coming to know the “great, great child” that is living today. He pledged to defund Planned Parenthood as president. The second issue that won over conservatives was Trump’s promises to nominate originalist judges to the Supreme Court. Trump also always promised these judges would be pro-life and would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Reality struck many wavering conservatives during the final presidential debate between Trump and Clinton when the abortion issue came up. In a powerful moment, Trump showed the clear distinction between his pro-life promise and the promise of an America under the Democratic Party where restrictions on abortion were removed.

“If you go with what Hillary is saying, in the ninth month you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby. Now you can say that that’s okay, and Hillary can say that that’s okay, but it’s not okay with me,” Trump said.

Trump beat Hillary. Pro-life voters hoping he would keep his promises were a huge reason why.

The 2020 election is now under way. Democratic candidates are lining up to challenge President Trump. Confident in their 2018 midterm victory, Democratic lawmakers across America are pushing the envelope to see how far left they can take the country. In New York, with full Democratic control of state government for the first time in years, lawmakers stood and applauded as abortion till birth was legalized exactly as Trump described it in that debate.

Now Democrats want to repeat that victory in Virginia and Rhode Island. If given the opportunity, they will try to do it nationally. They will make it legal to kill a baby at any time during pregnancy, even just before birth, because the mother wants to. With more Americans disapproving of President Trump now than at any time in his presidency yet, with most Americans believing the country is on the “wrong track,” the Democrats may have that opportunity soon. And if Virginia’s Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam is an indicator, the Left’s real position is even more evil than permitting abortion through the third trimester.

“The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

Americans will not stand for that. But so far President Trump’s response has been tepid. In an interview with the Daily Caller, Trump called Northam’s comments “terrible” and referenced his debate with Clinton.

“I thought it was terrible,” Trump said. “Do you remember when I said Hillary Clinton was willing to rip the baby out of the womb? That’s what it is, that’s what they’re doing, it’s terrible.”

The president also tweeted that the Democratic Party has become the party of late-term abortion.

Trump needs to go further. He can begin the course correction on his presidency right here, right now, making it clear to everyone that while he is president of the United States, he will fight this evil will all the powers of his office.

In his State of the Union address next week, Trump should renew calls to defund Planned Parenthood — which almost certainly is one of the special interest groups pushing the Democrats’ evil legislation. He should call on Congress to take up votes condemning the practice of abortion in the third trimester, to expose the Democrats in Congress who won’t vote for that. He should call on Congress to pass a federal heartbeat bill, protecting life from the moment of a baby’s first heartbeat. Congress should also take up legislation banning selective abortions based on sex or genetic deformity.

And if Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., refuses to bring these bills to the floor of the House, then Trump should turn around during his address, point at her, and tell the American people the Democrats’ position on killing children is so evil and extreme that their leadership won’t even allow votes on these bills.

Rewrite parts of the speech if necessary. The president cannot show weakness or inactivity to pro-life conservatives when the Democrats’ abortion extremism is so naked.

After Trump delivers this address, he should make every single one of his Democratic challengers tell the American people what their position is on late-term abortion. It should be abundantly clear to every voter in America that if they oppose killing children just before birth, they must vote to re-elect President Donald Trump.

Go after the media, too. Show how the partisan progressive mainstream media in America is the enemy of unborn children. It’s easy enough to do. When Northam’s comments were finally reported in The Washington Post, the article was originally framed as “Va. Gov. Northam faces fierce conservative backlash over late term abortion bill.”

Virginia Democratic Delegate Kathy Tran openly admitted that her legislation allows killing a baby just before birth, and the Post made it seem like Republicans were the bad guys.

This is the Left in America. These leftists do not need to be exposed. They have exposed themselves. They are defending and excusing infanticide. Do not let them get away with it, Mr. President! Shame them! Oppose them!

Do that, Mr. President, and conservatives will have your back again. Do that and you will be re-elected. (For more from the author of “Trump Must Be Stronger on Abortion to Win in 2020” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE