Posted on 03/31/2020 1:41:20 PM PDT by Morgana
Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon defended his decision Friday to veto a bill that would have ensured babies who survive abortions receive basic medical care.
In a statement, the Republican governor claimed to be pro-life despite his rejection of the pro-life bill, according to the Christian Post.
“Laws already in place protect children from being denied life-saving care simply because they were born as a result of an abortion,” Gordon said in his veto message.
He claimed the bill could unintentionally hurt families.
“This bill will not do anything to improve on those laws which already exist,” he continued. “Instead, this bill will harm people it never intended to harm – parents who want a child, but have received the devastating news that their pregnancy is not viable. The State should not seek to make that moment for parents any more tragic than it already is. For this reason, I am vetoing this bill.”
Senate File 97, sponsored by Sen. Cheri Steinmetz, R-Lingle, requires abortionists to “take medically appropriate and reasonable steps to preserve the life and health of an infant born alive” from an abortion. Abortionists who fail to do so could be punished with up to 14 years in prison.
The pro-life legislation passed the state House and Senate with strong support.
Previously, Steinmetz refuted similar claims from Democrat lawmakers. She said her bill clarifies existing law to ensure babies are protected.
“I would like to see Wyoming be known as a place where we live up to our name, the Equality State, where everyone is equally protected under the law,” she told KGAB earlier this year.
HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!
Infanticide by actively killing a baby is illegal already, and pro-abortion Democrats often point to those laws to claim legislation like Steinmetz’s is not necessary. But her legislation is necessary to protect abortion survivors from dying from a lack of basic medical care. The penalties for abortionists who fail to provide that care also are important measures that hold the abortion industry accountable.
According to the Star-Tribune, some state lawmakers raised concerns that “the legislation strips the rights of parents and their doctors to spare suffering for children born with profound birth defects.” Others claimed it would be unfair to punish doctors who do not provide basic medical care to a baby who “has serious medical issues that would make the child incompatible for life,” the report states.
But these are dangerous arguments that smack of eugenics, and they are precisely why such legislation is needed. It should not matter if a newborn is healthy or sick; that baby deserves the same basic medical care as any other child. Sometimes, a baby has a fatal disorder and comfort care is all that is needed – care that allows their parents to hold them until they die. In other cases, a baby who survives an abortion will live and grow into a thriving adult if they receive basic medical care.
Though babies’ survivals have been called “imaginary” and protections for them unnecessary, state health statistics indicates that at least 40 babies were born alive after botched abortions in just three states between 2016 and 2018. According to the state health data, 11 babies were born alive after botched abortions in Minnesota, 10 in Arizona and 19 in Florida.
Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control, as well as the personal testimonies of nurses and abortion survivors themselves, also provide evidence that babies survive abortions. According to the CDC, at least 143 babies were born alive after botched abortions between 2003 and 2014 in the U.S., though there likely are more.
Research by the American Center for Law and Justice estimated the number is much higher, at least 362 between 2001 and 2010.
Some states do not have laws to protect abortion survivors from infanticide, though the number is shrinking. This spring, lawmakers in Alabama also moved forward with legislation to protect newborns from infanticide. West Virginia also passed a law to protect babies from infanticide this winter. However, New York and Illinois recently repealed their laws requiring medical care for infants who survive abortions.
Pro-life advocates lamented that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressional Democrats have not been cooperative with similar federal legislation. In 2019, Pelosi blocked the federal Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act more than 80 times.
ACTION ALERT: Contact Gov. Mark Gordon to complain about his veto. Also, contact state legislators and ask them to override the governor’s veto.
RINO alert!
I think it’s a bad precedent to set that we need a bill to say that if you are born alive that you can’t be left to die.
It should be so inherently obvious in the laws that exist that this almost justifies abortion.
It’s saying abortions are okay but if the baby survives then you have to take care of him or her
That’s just my opinion. It’s a feel-good bill to score political points.
A POS
L I A R
What are you doing on this site?
This is Free Republic.
Get out of here now!
seriously? Who has the right to take an innocent human life.
Do you feed yourself?
No amount of legal linguistic ju-jitsu can justify it. Murder is murder!
Anyone want to address the logic the governor used to reject the bill?
Doesn’t look that way so far.
I support your position.
In fact, the fact that a human being is alive, should protect them from murder, or at least guarantee that their murderer is punished.
This bill was needed because past experience proves it was needed.
Thank you Morgana, for all of your posts.
no one.. Read my post again. You read it too fast
you’re another idiot that can’t read or has ADD
go..well...do whatever it is morons do
jerk
Well I got the usual dolts who read 4 words in a post and attack.
Thank you for reading what I wrote.
IF YOU MAKE A LAW BASICALLY AFFIRMING ABORTION BUT NOT FOR THE ONES THAT LIVE, YOU’RE UNWITTINGLY LEGITIMIZING ABORTION.
Murder is ALREADY against the law. So is negligent homicide
Parts are in all caps for those that only read what they want or aren’t that bright.
Abortion is currently the law of the land. Babies who survive the procedure are left to die without legal consequence.
The Governor is attempting to say this bill may hurt women and families who have been advised that the pregnancy was not “viable”. If the baby survives the process he or she is more than just viable. The baby is a fighter that is struggling to survive.
This bill DOES NOT LEGITIMIZE abortion. It seeks to provide survivors with needed protections in the legal code. You and former Illinois Senator Obama find ways to oppose these measures but they are needed. That struggling baby needs more legal protection that does not currently exist. You should review your sophistry with current realities. I would prefer something be done with the legal code to spell out protections for the survivors of abortion until abortion itself ceases to be the law of the land. This bill was supported by pro-life organizations and opposed by abortion advocates. Shouldn’t the abortion advocates have welcomed it if it legitimatizes abortion?
my eyes raced my brain
That's supposed to be equality? Sick.
Dear Lord save us from our callous disregard for the lives of Your little ones.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.