Posted on 02/21/2026 10:57:08 AM PST by John Semmens
An effort to bring some mercy to infants who survive their attempted abortion was shot down by Oregon Democrats. Rep. Court Boice's (R-District 1) motion to bring HB 4087, the "Born Alive Infants Protection Act," to the full House out of the Committee on Health Care was voted down with 34 Democrats voting no and 22 Republicans voting yes. The decision came after testimony from abortion survivor Amy Miles.
Rep. Cyrus Javadi (D-District 32), a former Republican who previously sponsored the same legislation, explained "since the intent of the abortion is to terminate the life of the unwanted child, it makes no sense to thwart the objective by enabling the aborted infant to survive. Carving out a 'right-to-life' for a person not meant to live through the surgery impedes the mother's right to choose whether her baby is born or killed. Letting the baby die of neglect is a more merciful end than letting an unwanted child live. As a 'born again' Democrat, I can no longer support such a vile and incoherent bill."
Oregon Right to Life Executive Director Lois Anderson called the Democrats' position "legally endorsed cruelty. A baby who survives an attempt on her life shows a resilience that warrants life-sustaining measures by the medical personal who have an oath to do no harm. Defining required standards of care for abortion survivors should be a common ground position for all reasonable people, even if they do not identify themselves as pro-life."
Meanwhile in Minnesota, State Rep. Leigh Finke (D-District 66A) says that "kids who are uncertain of their gender identity need to have access to pornography to help them decide whether to transition to the opposite sex. I know my own transition from male to female would've been less stressful if I had had the opportunity to see real sex acts rather than have had to rely on my immature imagination. That's not to say that I'm displeased in anyway with my choice. All I'm asking is for the age requirements for visiting porn sites to be eliminated."
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Why isn’t killing children born alive murder? At what age are Democrats willing to stop this genocide of infants? Probably not until they register as Demon-rats 👿. 🐀.
How the hell does he think he knows that?
“Why isn’t killing children born alive murder?”
Interesting that you should use the term born alive. You might wonder where the stage of being born alive actually exists. I reference to the term partial birth abortion. All the bill is doing is opening up an area for ignorance.
The bill requires a health care practitioner to exercise the proper degree of care to preserve the health and life of a child born alive, regardless of whether the birth was the result of an induced abortion. Allows specified persons to bring an action against a health care practitioner for violations.
If a child is aborted in partial birth, which is the last step toward abortion and not a legal birth, then the bill is worthless unless the child is completely born which would constitute murder. And that was already a given.
wy69
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.