By Tom Quiner

A baby lies on a slab in front of you.

She’s alive, kicking and cooing. Adorable, isn’t she?

Is it okay to kill her?

One-hundred seventy-seven Democrats said Yes, it is okay. They voted against the H.R. 3504 “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.” Two-hundred forty-three House Republicans (along with 5 Democrats) voted in favor of legislation to make it illegal to kill the girl after she was born.

How far have we sunk as a nation?

Here’s how far: the president would veto the legislation if it ever reaches his desk. He would veto decency in favor of depravity.

Thus goes the Democratic Party.

Thanks to House Republicans, and 5 Democrats, for standing up for the little gal.

11 Comments

  1. pray2christ on September 22, 2015 at 6:12 pm

    God bless those stood up for the little girl’s. May he tackle the anti-child mob with his unfailing justice. Amen.

  2. parrillaturi on September 22, 2015 at 6:37 pm

    Spot on. The Democrats have sunk to their lowest. Remember when they had to vote three times in order to allow God in their convention?

  3. nehringlv on September 22, 2015 at 9:40 pm

    I’ll never understand how anyone could ever think this is okay. I’ve heard many pro-choice points of view, but maintain that an innocent child loses his or her life and we can in no way justify this heartless behavior.

    • quinersdiner on September 23, 2015 at 6:22 am

      Of course I agree. Sadly, it doesn’t seem to faze millions of Americans.

  4. encourage the faithful on September 22, 2015 at 10:25 pm

    It’s not by happenstance that liberals do what they do, Tom. Liberalism is a mental disorder,and usually mental disorders are the result of sins of grave matter committed either by the person himself or a forebear and without having reconciled the sin. Everything of grave matter is spiritual. Do you think God would not be involved when someone commits an objectively mortal sin? These people have twisted minds and those of us who do not (have twisted minds) have a hell of a difficult time figuring all of this out and countering the evil. I’m no Rhodes Scholar and yet I figured this all out through intense prayer. If we don’t have a prayer life, then we have no room to complain. Some things can only be accomplished through prayer and fasting. Some evils can only be eradicated through prayer and fasting.

  5. joescotoma on September 23, 2015 at 2:25 pm

    At first blush, your post evokes an obvious emotional response, but I have a few questions.

    At what stage of development is she?

    Is there any realistic chance to keep her alive?

    Would we only be increasing her suffering at that point? If so, would it be right to prolong that suffering?

    Now for the more logistical questions. Who would pay for the care and treatment of the infant, and if she survives, who takes custody of her?

    • quinersdiner on September 23, 2015 at 3:33 pm

      Great questions, Joe. To answer each of your questions, “irrelevant.” She has the exact same dignity and moral value at her stage of development as any other person. Regarding the next two questions, irrelevant. After surviving the human abortionist’s best effort to kill her, she is now entitled to the medical community’s best efforts to save her life. Who should pay if she survives? Well, who are the parents? They are the ones who made the choice to engage in activity that conceived her. Just because they don’t want her doesn’t mean they aren’t still her parents. If they still do not want her since she foiled the abortionist who tried to kill her, they can put her up for adoption. Millions of parents wait in line for a child. Wouldn’t it have made a lot more sense for the parents to have done that in the first place instead of subjecting their daughter to torture?

      • joescotoma on September 25, 2015 at 9:06 am

        First, thanks for the response.

        Just saying something is irrelevant doesn’t make it so. As for the answers you give to the questions after deeming them irrelevant;

        Asking about her stage of development wasn’t an abstract way to decrease her dignity or moral value. I was asking a question that has real world ramifications. In healthcare, we triage and assess patients. If efforts to save a person would unquestionably be futile, then taking those efforts are a waste of efforts and resources. When I ask what stage of development, I am asking if there is a realistic chance the fetus would survive. It isn’t until about 20 wks gestation that we see an above zero percent chance of survival. At that point the current estimates are between 0 and 10% depending on circumstances. With longer gestation, the chances increase.

        Now, I will make a brief aside. I do not support abortion in all cases. For example, after the age of viability (a number that may decrease as our skill and technology increases) I think abortion should be off the table (except in cases of rape, incest o the life of the mother will be jeopardized). Even with abortion off the table, I do not think the woman should be forced to carry to term. At that point, I think she should have the right to induce labor, or undergo a c-section.

        Considering the costs, the decision to abort may have been due to the fact that the parents could not afford to raise a child. Now they will be punished because the abortion failed, and the law (if it had passed) forced physicians to attempt resuscitation, even if the efforts would obviously be futile… Sounds like a case were the government should cover the costs, or the physician’s medical liability insurance, since the resuscitation efforts were the result of a failed medical procedure.

        You are also make an assumption that both parents ‘made the choice’ to conceive her. This isn’t necessarily the case. They could have been using birth control and prophylactics, both of which failed, or this could be a case of rape.

        If there are ‘millions’ of parents waiting in line for a child, then why do we not have a near 0 number of children currently living without parents? I understand there are bureaucratic hurdles to overcome, but that does not lend weight to your assertion that millions are waiting in line for a child. Forcing women to carry pregnancies to term, or mandating physicians try to save even those beyond saving, will increase the number of parent-less children.

        http://ccainstitute.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=25&layout=blog&Itemid=43

  6. […] Joe responded to yesterday’s blogpost titled, “Ethics 101“: […]

  7. oarubio on January 13, 2016 at 3:19 pm

    We respect the dignity of human life from conception to natural death. Humans are more than mere pieces of economic machinery, as Marx, Lenin, Sabsovich et al declared.

Leave a Comment