“The Federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act was introduced primarily by Republicans.”
Yes, they did. And while that wasn’t nothing, both that law and the ban on partial birth abortion are at best very minor scratches at the surface. The youngest premature child to survive, who was presumably not born as a result of an abortion, was born at 21 weeks 6 days. The chances of a child surviving who is born at less than 24 weeks is very low.
Abortions that are performed after 21 weeks represent less than 2% of all abortions performed. So if a child is aborted after 21 weeks (unlikely) and actually survives the procedure and is born alive (also unlikely), and survives being extremely premature (unlikely still), we can say that the Federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act will have actually saved him or her.
I wonder if even one child has survived to date as a result of the passage of this law?
The Federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act and the partial birth abortion ban were well gnawed polical bones thrown to the pro-life community. Their impact is slight, and represent very little progress given that Roe v Wade reared it’s ugly head in 1973.
What the BAIFA was aimed to do was stop a particularly evil way of killing unborn children. That you would seek to obfuscate and play misdirection on this is telling of your deceitful presence at FR.
You know what induced labor aboriton is, yet you try to play a deceitful game to obfuscate the truth of the evil. You are disgusting. But then you're posting yourself as a Democrat so we expect nothing less than disgusting from you.
You deceit-filled poseur: “I wonder if even one child has survived to date as a result of the passage of this law?” Well, by stopping the particular method for killing alive unborn children via forced premature labor and abandonment to die struggling to try and breathe, the answer to your demonic ploy is that untold millions of children will not be miurdered by the abortion method you’re seeking to obfuscate. Get thee behind us, Satan