Immoral, unconstitutional, lawless legislation.
Absolutely! It’s just like the so-called “Partial Birth Abortion Ban” that so many pro-lifers celebrated when it was “upheld” by the U.S. Supreme Court. They celebrated the decision, but only because they didn’t READ the decision. It was basically a “how to” manual for the “acceptable” ways to kill babies late term.
So it is with this decision. It basically says that those conceived by rape or incest are less worthy of protection, and it’s ok for them to suffer horribly as they are dismembered after 20 weeks. It’s a pro-abortion bill with exceptions; not a pro-life bill. How can one be taken serious to say Baby A, conceived in a consensual sexual act, feels pain at 20 weeks, and so deserves to be protected in law from the brutality of abortion. But, Baby B, conceived in rape or incest; completely innocent of his or her father’s violent act, should be denied the same protection, and therefore suffer an agonizing death? It’s an incoherent argument. It’s insane!
But, furthermore, the whole argument is a false premise anyway. It focuses on a fuzzy line in the sand as to when an unborn child feels pain. Is it 20 weeks? Can a baby feel pain at 19 weeks? Earlier? The focus is on the wrong aspect entirely. The focus should be is it wrong to kill the unborn. Period. If it’s wrong, as hopefully most of us believe, then to support a piece of legislation that ends with, “and then you can kill the baby,” makes no rational sense.