“For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.” Psalm 139:13-16
Last week, at a hearing before Florida State legislature arguments were heard for HB1129, a pro-life bill that would require that medical care is given to newborns likely to be premature who survive botched abortions. The care would be given at a hospital and not at the abortion clinic.
Of course Planned Parenthood in Florida is opposing the bill. During the hearing, Alisa LaPolt Snow, the lobbyist representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified that her organization believes the decision to kill an infant who survives a failed abortion should be left up to the woman seeking an abortion and her abortion doctor. Needless to say, this caused quite a stir, not only on the Senate floor, but also around the nation as the story went viral.
An incredulous Rep. Jim Boyd said to her, “So, um, it is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief. If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”
Snow’s answer was vague, “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”
When Rep. Daniel Davis then asked Snow, “What happens in a situation where a baby is alive, breathing on a table, moving? What do your physicians do at that point?” She replied, “I do not have that information, I am not a physician, I am not an abortion provider. So I do not have that information.”
While I am heartened to see such shock and outrage on the part of most comments I’ve seen about this story, I have to wonder why people are surprised that people such as Ms. Snow would say such a thing. After all, do people not remember that Barack Obama, when he was a Senator from Illinois, voted either “no” or voted “present” when Illinois tried to pass Born Alive Infant bills? Then-Senator Obama was the only one to oppose it. He was more concerned about abortion doctor rights than he was babies left to die alone. He also voted “no” on the Federal Born Alive act.
This is the same man who, when Pastor Rick Warren asked him when does he believe life begins, Obama replied, “It’s above my pay grade” and then went on and said he didn’t want his daughters to be “punished with a baby” should either one of them find themselves pregnant.
Why should we be shocked, when we have people Princeton University’s Peter Singer, a Professor of Bioethics. For those who have never heard of Singer, he once stated, “Human babies are not born self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons…[therefore] the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee.”
This man, who is also a Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne, also specializes in applied ethics. He has written and spoken extensively on the subject, claiming that children up to the age of 2 should be allowed to die. Oh, and did I mention, Singer is also a contemporary of Obama’s former Science Czar, John Holdren who is big on population control.
Then there were two medical ethicists at Oxford who co-wrote an article appearing in the Journal of Medical Ethics, entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?” In this article, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva argued, “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.” And later, “Both a fetus and a newborn certainly are human beings and potential persons, but neither is a ‘person’ in the sense of ‘subject of a moral right to life’.”
These are just a few examples of what we have in our ‘enlightened’ society. There are many proponents of population control who espouse similar views. Once the Supreme Court opened the door in the Roe v Wade decision, pro-life groups have been trying to warn of a slippery slope, but they’ve been mostly ignored. Now we have a man in the White House who does not believe in a baby’s right to life, who has also forced a socialized system of healthcare on the American people, which forces private corporations to provide birth control and abortion procedures for all employees. What makes us wonder if soon they will be forced also to allow infanticide coverage? Hmm. Doesn’t seem to make Sarah Palin’s death panel comments so far-fetched now does it?
Thomas Jefferson said, “The care of human life and happiness, not their destruction, is the first and legitimate object of a good government.” One cannot have liberty and the pursuit of happiness if one is not allowed to have life. But maybe that’s the idea–at least to those who don’t have a problem with killing children.
But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. 2 Tim 3:13