Bill hopes to stop slaughter of kangaroos… while Legislature endorses unrestricted abortion of humans

By Nancy Flanders 

Vermont, a state that recently voted to enshrine the killing of human beings in the womb as a state right, is now looking to pass a law to protect kangaroos in Australia and another to regulate pro-life pregnancy centers.

State Rep. Conor Casey (D-Montpelier) has introduced H. 459, aimed at preventing Nike and other athletic shoe companies from sourcing kangaroos skins for soccer cleats. It is estimated that 70%  of all skins from kangaroos are bought by athletic shoe companies to manufacture ‘k-leather’ soccer cleats. It is also believed that other pro-abortion states, including Connecticut, New Jersey, and Oregon will introduce similar bills.

“Given the innovations in design and fabrics, there’s absolutely no reason for Nike and Adidas to continue sourcing kangaroo skins from animals killed in their native habitats,” said Casey. “I was staggered to hear that 2 million kangaroos are killed a year, including half a million of the juveniles, mainly for use as soccer cleats. These companies can do better.”

Clearly, there is nothing wrong about seeking to stop the use of kangaroo skin in soccer cleats. It is driven by compassion from those concerned about the 500,000 joeys being orphaned as their mothers are killed for their skins — to make cleats. However, the pro-life concern is that the same compassion bestowed on these vulnerable animals and their babies is not extended to vulnerable human beings and their human babies.

Pro-abortion Vermont legislators fought to ensure that abortion is a right throughout pregnancy and now they are trying to take down the pregnancy resource centers that assist the women who don’t choose abortion.

S. 37 is a bill that, among other things, aims to “establish a new unfair and deceptive act regarding pregnancy centers.” It defines “pregnancy service centers” as facilities that have “the appearance of a medical facility” if two or more factors exist, such as offering pregnancy testing or diagnosis, having staff or volunteers that wear medical attire or uniforms, contains one or more exam tables, contains a private or semi-private room or area containing medical supplies or instruments, has staff or volunteers who collect health information from clients, is located on the same premises as a medical facility or share facility space with a medical provider.

The bill accuses pregnancy centers of misleading the public about their services through false advertising. It would give the Attorney General or State’s Attorney the power to make rules, conduct civil investigations, and bring civil actions against pregnancy centers for whatever the law determines to be deceptive advertising.

According to VT Digger, there are at least seven pregnancy centers in Vermont. Pregnancy centers are private facilities that exist to help women who want to keep their babies.

“They’re not deceiving women. They’re very clear,” said Mary Beerworth, executive director of Vermont Right to Life. “How do you trick a woman into carrying a baby to term? That’s what they say: ‘They’re tricking them into it.’ How is that? You’re just saying, ‘Let’s do an ultrasound.’”

Supporters of the law claim that pregnancy centers offer limited services, yet they offer far more services than abortion facilities do.

Pregnancy centers provide specific services for their particular clientele. Most offer free pregnancy tests, STD testing, and ultrasounds. Beyond that, some pregnancy centers are licensed medical centers with licensed volunteer doctors who offer more involved prenatal care — and some offer expanded services that include housing, education, material goods, and other support. Women who want the help of a pregnancy center will find that the staff and volunteers will support them throughout their pregnancy, their child’s birth, the first few years of their child’s life, and perhaps even beyond.

Despite all of these services for women who want to choose life, abortion proponents and the media have labeled these life-affirming centers as “limited services” centers (or, more disparagingly, “fake clinics”) because the centers do not commit or refer for abortion. Pregnancy centers vastly outnumber abortion facilities in the United States, and their willingness to help women free of charge has helped save thousands of babies from abortion. This is why the abortion industry wants to limit the free speech rights of pregnancy centers and shut them down.

In 2016, California’s Reproductive FACT Act tried to force pro-life pregnancy centers to effectively advertise for the state’s abortion industry. In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled against the law, sending the case back to the district court which blocked the enforcement of the law “under the free speech clause of the First Amendment.”

In 2018, the Fourth Circuit struck down a law targeting pregnancy centers in Baltimore, which aimed to force the centers to post a sign saying they do not offer or refer for abortions or face a daily fine. And most recently, a federal appeals court said that New York cannot force pregnancy resource centers to hire people who have had abortions and support abortion.

Yet, states like Vermont continue to attempt to silence pregnancy centers.

Women in Vermont now have the invented ‘right’ to kill their child for any reason through all nine months of pregnancy, though there is currently no one willing to commit abortions in the state beyond 23 weeks unless the mother’s life is at risk (in which case, an emergency C-section is the better option because it is faster than abortion and does not carry the direct intent of killing the child before delivery), or if the child has a diagnosis.

The motivation behind the bill to save kangaroos from shoe companies is fueled by compassion, but shutting down or silencing the safe places that exist to offer life-affirming support to mothers facing unplanned pregnancies lacks that same compassion.

Numerous studies reveal that women who have abortions often suffer depression and are at an increased risk of suicidal thoughts. Their babies, who may be able to feel pain as early as eight weeks, suffer horrific deaths by starvation, dismemberment, and lethal injection. Pregnancy centers offer “cruelty-free” options for women who face pressure to abort, while abortion offers only cruel violent deaths for babies and deep suffering for women.

Republished with permission. Action News publishes pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.  Learn More

Categories: Life&Death

11 replies »

  1. This is because the kangaroos have been enfranchised in both Winooski and Montpelier. The people in the statehouse know only too well the power of a roo with a vote-despite being Australian.

  2. That’s because to the spiritually and intellectually evolved liberal, kangaroos and women’s bodies are sacrosanct. Human embryos are such a nuisance. But we know that abortion kills babies.

  3. The Law in VT allows murdering infants in process of leaving the womb.
    “Partial Birth Abortion.”

  4. I’m so tired of dumb virtue signaling laws like this. Seriously. Stop worrying about Australians. They can deal with Australia. You idiots are supposed to be representing Vermonters, who are perfectly capable of not buying stuff made out of kangaroos if they actually give a… care.

    • I recall a bulletin board upon entry to my kids’ elementary school @ late 90’s in displaying a map and such as it pertained to Australia. It turned out, the entire school was unanimously doing a study of Australia–when they hadn’t even bothered to learn/understand where they actually lived. One of the buzz-words in education at the time was ‘place-based’ learning, emphasizing local/state on outward. As a mother, I felt strongly that my kids needed to know the value of where/who they are in order to ascertain the lives of others. Shortly thereafter, other contributing factors led to my decision to homeschool.

  5. Kangaroo Lives Matter! Alert the street painters and raise the flags!

      • He certainly would! He will also create a task force to study the matter, he will hire a kangaroo to head a new state department to manage the matter, he will offer $10,000 incentive for kangaroos to move to Vermont, and he will also include Koalas and Kookaburras because we must not exclude other minority immigrant species.

  6. Let Australia deal with the Kangaroos, they are in plauge proportions, and need to be culled yearly. The government will stop the cull if it deems the roos are in danger.

  7. Apparently, the killing of wild kangaroos is legal in Australia (cf deerskin). And Nike is apparently not hiding the source. So it’s a consumer choice. This activist nanny-state stuff is really getting tiresome. And offensive.

  8. So…..are the legislators finally realizing that all life is precious ad sacred? No. Just more nonsensical meddling in another nation’s affairs which has no bearing on the lives of Vermonters: the ONLY people whom they have been commissioned to protect & to serve.

    Everyone knows that life begins at conception including over 75% of all scientists. Yet the unborn babies in Vermont somehow don’t deserve personhood status under the law.

    If the lawmakers not stupid, then they’re evil. We decide. And yet I pray for their souls with the hope that somehow, they know not what they do. But if they do know full well……it ain’t looking good.