Posted on 04/03/2015 7:26:15 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is once again calling for his state to pass a bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks and protect unborn babies from late-term abortions. Walker recently stepped up to support a similar bill pending in Congress that would ban abortions after 20 weeks nationwide.
“I think it’s highly likely,” Walker told conservative talk radio host Charlie Sykes in an interview about the chances of such a bill meeting success in the Wisconsin state legislature.
“I think that’s a very rational position not only for those of us who are pro-life, but I think most people who have a rational view on this issue think those who oppose it are fairly extreme on this one,” Walker added.
Last month, Walker, a likely pro-life candidate for the Republican nomination for president, burnished his pro-life credentials by issuing a letter saying he would sign a bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks.
“As the Wisconsin legislature moves forward in the coming session, further protections for mother and child are likely to come to my desk in the form of a bill to prohibit abortions after 20 weeks. I will sign that bill when it gets to my desk and support similar legislation on the federal level. I was raised to believe in the sanctity of life and I will always fight to protect it.”
The position is not a new one as Walker co-sponsored legislation in 1998 while he was a member of the Wisconsin state legislature to ban abortions after 20 weeks.
The letter adds:
Life is a value I learned from my parents, and it’s a value I have cherished every day, predating my time in politics. My policies throughout my career have earned a 100% rating with pro-life groups in Wisconsin. Just in my first term I signed numerous pieces of pro-life legislation and I will continue working for every life.
In my past four years as governor, we have made substantial progress in the fight for our pro-life values in Wisconsin. We defunded Planned Parenthood. We prohibited abortion from being covered by health plans in a health exchange. We passed legislation assuring the women and their unborn child are better protected under law – through placing stringent requirements on medical professionals and requiring the provision of thorough and vital information to the mother.
I was raised to believe in the sanctity of life and I will always fight to protect it.
Pro-life groups were delighted by Walker’s letter.“Wisconsin Right to Life is very happy to hear that Governor Walker intends to sign a bill that would protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain,” stated Heather Weininger, Executive Director of Wisconsin Right to Life. “In light of this excellent news, we urge the Wisconsin State Legislature to pass a bill to protect pain-capable unborn children as soon as possible.”
In 2013, Gov. Walker signed an ultrasound bill (Senate Bill 206, also known as Sonya’s Law) that ensures that women seeking abortions are given the opportunity to see their unborn children through ultrasound. The legislation also requires abortionists to have admitting privileges within thirty miles of their facility. This is the kind of pro-woman, pro-life bill that not only has proven to save the lives of unborn babies, but it has closed down abortion clinics that can’t comply with basic health and safety requirements. Sure enough, abortion centers in Wisconsin closed down after Walker signed the bill into law.
In an ad during his re-election campaign, Walker put forward a clear cut pro-life message showing compassion for women and unborn children: “I’m pro-life. But there’s no doubt in my mind the decision of whether or not to end a pregnancy is an agonizing one. That’s why I support legislation to increase safety and to provide more information for a woman considering her options.”
Walker has been a tireless advocate for women and unborn children, and when the bill passed, Wisconsin Right to Life applauded his efforts to protect citizens in their state.
The former legislative director of Wisconsin Right to Life, Susan Armacost, said “We thank Governor Walker for signing this important piece of legislation into law. Sonya’s Law will empower women to make truly informed decisions regarding how they will proceed with their pregnancies and will protect the lives of women who experience complications after their abortions.”
Since the ultrasound bill helps protect women and provides them with more information, you would think groups like Planned Parenthood and Emily’s List would support it. But instead, they oppose it and say it causes undue burden for women seeking abortions. This is because abortion businesses lose money when women change their mind about abortion. And since 78% of women who see an ultrasound of their unborn baby refuse abortion, its really bad for business.
Since Governor Walker took office in January 2011, the pro-life movement in Wisconsin has made monumental gains. Walker signed into law a state budget that included a provision to prohibit the UW Hospital Authority from being involved in performing abortions and from using taxpayer dollars to pay medical students to learn how to perform abortions. Walker steered Wisconsin Well Woman funds to local counties instead of Planned Parenthood.
Governor Walker also signed bills that allow Wisconsin to opt out of abortion funding under Obamacare, to protect pregnant women from coerced abortions and to prohibit RU486 chemical web cam abortions.
Ultimately, Walker and his record will appeal to pro-life Republicans looking for a replacement for Obama, who has been called the Abortion President.
As Armacost said: “Governor Walker’s deep belief in the sanctity of all human life is evident in the courageous actions he has taken to build a culture of life in Wisconsin. His concern for the most vulnerable members of the human family is reflected in the common sense and compassionate laws he has signed into law. Those initiatives will greatly benefit unborn children, women who are considering abortion and taxpayers of our state.”
Pro-life voters can also be assured that Governor Walker is an effective pro-life governor — after all, abortion activists wished he were dead. But he and his prospects for 2016 are very much alive.
Wisconsin Right to Life provided LifeNews with a lengthy dossier on Walker’s pro-life record, including votes while he was a member of the state legislature:
Abortion Funding: As an Assembly Representative, Walker voted against taxpayer funding of abortions for public employees. As Governor, Walker signed into law a state budget provision to prohibit the UW Hospital Authority from being involved in performing abortions and from using taxpayer dollars to pay medical students to learn to perform abortions. Also as Governor, Walker signed legislation allowing Wisconsin to opt-out of taxpayer-funded abortion coverage under ObamaCare.
Funding Abortion Providers: As an Assembly Representative, Walker voted to prohibit taxpayer dollars from going to organizations that provide or promote abortions. As Governor, Walker signed into law a state budget provision to prohibit Title V taxpayer dollars from going to organizations that perform abortions. Also as Governor, Walker steered funds from the Wisconsin Well Woman program to local counties instead of Planned Parenthood.
Protecting Unborn Children: As an Assembly Representative, Walker voted to recognize an unborn child as a separate victim of a criminal act against the pregnant mother, to prohibit partial-birth abortions, and to protect unborn children at risk due to drug or alcohol use by the mother.
Protecting Families: As an Assembly Representative, Walker voted to strengthen Wisconsin’s law requiring parental consent before a minor’s abortion. As Governor, Walker signed legislation returning sex education curriculum to local control and allowing abstinence-only programs.
Protecting Women: As an Assembly Representative, Walker voted for the Woman’s Right to Know Act which requires that women be given full information prior to an abortion and establishes a 24-hour waiting period. As Governor, Walker signed legislation to protect women from coerced abortions; to prohibit unsafe RU 486 chemical web cam abortions designed to expand abortions into local communities; to require that a woman view an ultrasound of her unborn child 24 hours before an abortion can take place; and to require abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion clinic.
Alternatives to Abortion: As an Assembly Representative, Walker voted for tax exemptions related to adoption expenses; to improve adoption laws; to expand funding for adoption assistance for children at risk of developing disabilities; and for a provision to allow a woman and her unborn child to be considered as a family eligible for BadgerCare.
Conscience Protections: As an Assembly Representative, Walker authored legislation to strengthen conscience protections for medical professionals and institutions.
Other: As an Assembly Representative, Walker voted in favor of legislation to prohibit lawsuits based on the “wrongful” life of an unborn child and to prohibit the sale of body parts of aborted babies.
Why is it that the right never bothers to state the obvious?
Those supporting abortion rights lack compassion.
Oh, we don’t want to get the left mad, do we?
They are already mad. …...In both ways.
This one is another one. Why do you want to add more?
And when dealing with Madmen, you use their own tactics against them.
Why must the Right always be absolute? We can use this incrementalism against the left as they do us. We compromised ourselves out of the argument. Why?
It is possible to limit their reach without doing things that are immoral and unconstitutional.
But again, if you have the governmental power to limit their reach, you have the governmental power to cut off the murderous arm.
Could be. But the question is one of prudence, the application of right reason to a particular situation.
Since we don't know that every Christian will mobilize as you have suggested, and, since we are not certain of how effective that might be, is that a risk thats reasonable to take if being wrong results in deaths that could be prevented?
From a moral standpoint to merely tolerate but not intend a lesser evil so that a good can be achieved would be a reasonable effect. The moral act involved in this legislation is not the intent to kill babies but the desire to save some.
We can get a half a loaf now, save millions of lives, though not others, and then try for the whole loaf,
Or, we can refuse to back partial limits now because we want the whole thing or nothing, spend 20 years re-educating the public while twice as many die, and then try for the whole ban.
I recommend the former course.
Moving the ball in the right direction isn’t call surrender, it’s called winning.
I’d love to see the Supreme Court reverse Roe vs. Wade, but that hasn’t happened...yet.
Supreme Court opinions and laws that violate the laws of nature and nature's God are null and void. So said Cicero, and Aquinas, and Blackstone, and Hamilton. And they were right.
Here’s the difference between you and me: you’re making Utilitarian arguments, and I’m making moral and constitutional arguments.
Utilitarianism is a godless ideology. It has an appearance of wisdom on the surface, but it never works out in the long run. Why? Because God decreed at the beginning of the creation that you would reap what you sow. All things reproduce after their kind.
Doing what is right may look likely to be “unsuccessful” in the short term, but it always wins in the end, if prosecuted to the end by men and women of principle and courage.
As for the Utilitarian strategy you, and American politicians like Walker, continue to promote, we already know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it doesn’t work.
But look, if forty years of obvious utter failure won’t convince you of that, most likely nothing I can say in by brief time on this thread is likely to make any difference in your thinking.
>>Here’s the difference between you and me: you’re making Utilitarian arguments, and I’m making moral and constitutional arguments.<<
Here’s another difference. Our arguments are actually making progress and your arguments amount to spitting into the wind.
Before you can make change you first have to get people to listen to you, and when you disparage the people who should be your allies in the fight, you pretty much shut that possibility down at the outset.
Enjoy life up on there on the mountain....alone.
>>most likely nothing I can say in by brief time on this thread is likely to make any difference in your thinking.<<
Yes, you can be pretty certain of that given the insults you’ve cast already, so please don’t bother.
A murder is defined as killing an independent living human being. At 20 weeks gestation, the fetus has survived independently of the mother. So there should not even be a debate about whether it is murder.
All children are dependents of their parents. That dependency creates duty on the part of those parents. Doesn’t matter what stage of development they’re at. The moral obligation is the same.
Your supposed progress is a mirage. Abortion on demand continues unabated. Regulating mass murder has done nothing to stop it. If anything it has made it stronger, in the same way pruning a plant makes that plant more productive. Close a clinic, they open another modern, efficient mega-killing center. Create another minor regulatory requirement, they find more efficient means to kill millions more children via chemical weapons of mass destruction.
You’re never going to stop this holocaust as long as you continue to disregard and discard the principle of God-given, unalienable rights and equal protection under the law. If you think you are, you’re simply fooling yourself.
When progressives progress it is not a mirage, their success shows up in the data.
The only data you can gather that will reflect any true progress toward ending the abortion holocaust in America is by counting the number of elected officials who are truly committed to keeping the primary obligation of their oath to provide equal protection for the right to life of every person within their legitimate jurisdiction.
Fewer/more babies killed does not enter the equation?
Check.
Constitutionality and the obligations of the oath don’t enter the equation?
If every person is not provided the equal protection for their supreme right that the supreme law of our land absolutely requires, your rights, none of them, are secure.
And by the way, the claim that these bills produce fewer abortions is simply not true. It’s a mirage. In fact, these bills assure the continuation of abortion on demand, because they surrender the only moral, constitutional, and legal arguments against any and all abortions.
Those who disarm and surrender are what is known in war as casualties. And casualties do not win wars. The idea that they can or do is absurd.
We live in a country governed by laws and the constitution.
(Regardless of Obama who does not believe in either).
If laws are not changed towards pro-life agenda, what you or I desire is irrelevant. Because without laws on our side, what we desire has no practical value. Abortions on demand, at any stage of pregnancy will continue. We can shout at the top of our voices and it is just hot air. It is irrelevant in the real world. I prefer living in the real world.
To get laws changed, hearts and minds of voters must be won. If majority of voters believed in life at conception, we would already have laws proscribing that. But we don’t. Which means you and I are in the minority. We can blog all we want on FR, but that means nothing unless laws are changed.
What is a realistic method to pass more pro-life laws? Can it be accomplished in one fell swoop? Does not look to me that is possible, with the present congressional constituency. One man can not change the laws. Not even the president. The SCOTUS has to go along. As a first step, I will accept the 20 weeks rule. Every journey starts with one step. It is foolish for a hungry man to reject a partial meal. Sure, it will not fill his belly, but it will enable him to fight on for another day. Governor Walker should be admired for proposing something which has a realistic chance to become a law.
You don’t ever change hearts and minds by abandoning the principle of God-given, unalienable rights and equal protection under the law. All you do is teach the people that you don’t care about those things, and therefore that they don’t matter when it comes to the rule of law.
I never said to give up. In summary, what I said is it can only be accomplished in steps.
Do you have a method to pass a law in congress to ban all abortions immediately? Please tell us how. Wishful thinking is not a realistic method.
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.