|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Press Statement from National Right to Life
Last night, former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris clashed on abortion in the first half-hour during their presidential debate.
Kamala Harris said she would have Congress bring back Roe v. Wade. The bill she’s referring to would allow abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy for any reason.
“Harris’s entire career has had one consistency—abortion. She has ‘joyfully’ supported the destruction of innocent preborn babies and, if elected, would make it a cornerstone issue of her administration,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life.
Kamala Harris has made a career of supporting unlimited abortion. She is the first member of the executive branch to ever visit an abortion clinic and supports the “Women’s Health Protection Act,” (WHPA). The WHPA is a bill that would enshrine unlimited abortion until birth in federal law. The bill would do away with virtually all existing protections for unborn children and their mothers on both the federal and state levels, including parental involvement laws.
As a senator, Harris voted against the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,” which would ensure that an infant born alive during an attempted abortion is afforded the same degree of medical care as any other newborn of the same gestational age.
In addition, under the Biden-Harris Administration, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) suspended safeguards for women undergoing chemical abortions, such as seeing the abortionist in person. The in-person requirement helped to prevent complications resulting from ectopic pregnancies which can be fatal. Ectopic pregnancies can only be diagnosed with an in-person evaluation. The FDA also now permits pharmacists to dispense abortion drugs, and it even allows abortion drugs to be sent by mail.
Tobias continued, “Kamala Harris and Tim Walz will push for the most radical abortion policies possible because the goal of the Democratic Party is no longer ‘safe, legal, and rare.’ Kamala Harris, Tim Walz, and the Democratic Party want unlimited abortion at any cost—including the lives of precious preborn babies and the harm that could happen to their mothers.”
Kamala Harris’s record on life can be found here.
Tim Walz’s record on life can here.
The Democratic Party’s extensive support of unlimited abortion can be found here.
Evidence for abortions until birth can be found here.
Founded in 1968, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of 50 state right-to-life affiliates, is the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots pro-life organization. NRLC works through legislation and education to protect innocent human life from abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Uncategorized
I heard Harris state that she supports a return to Roe v Wade which protects abortion rights only up until the time of fetal viability or about 22 weeks. That doesn’t sound like one of “the most radical abortion policies possible” or “unlimited abortion at any cost.”
The NRLC’s position is extreme. They oppose abortion even after rape or incest or to protect a woman’s health. They also oppose IVF for those unable to conceive without help. Trump has been pandering to these radicals but now states that he supports these exceptions to an abortion ban and IVF.
Please note the constitutional change in Vermont; that not only enshrines that but so much more.
Thankfully the Vermont constitutional change will only make things much worse for those who wish to have abortions, in time it will completely outlaw them. But then we’ll have nobody to blame but the Vermont Dems when the law goes national.
Will have some awesome popcorn with brewers yeast at that celebration.
TGBTG
Mark,
As horrific as the circumstances surrounding the conception of a living preborn child through rape or incest—no matter how tiny he or she is—it is NEVER right to intentionally kill an innocent defenseless human being.
Why should an innocent preborn baby be victimized and brutally murdered for the sins of his or her father? We are not to repay evil for evil, and rape and incest are two horrific forms of evil done to girls and women. The child created in these circumstances should not need to be harmed or die for these crimes. The bottom line is that he or she is a person, and is guaranteed the right to life. Unfortunately, the baby is usually the last one to be considered in these situations.
NO EXCEPTIONS.
Mark,
Harris blatantly lied that late-term abortions are not committed in the USA, as Vermont pro-aborts also lie about. Why then hasn’t one single one of them ever proposed laws limiting abortions after a certain time frame? (For the record, abortion is murder from the moment of fertilization. Time frames are still immoral and evil.)
Harris just recently visited, to her shame, a late-term abortion facility. 25 late-term abortions are committed in the USA every day, and zero reasons are needed because it is her “right.” They speak out of both sides of their mouths. Utter lies and hypocrisy.
Martin, are you voting for Trump? Like the vast majority of voters, he supports legal abortion in the case of rape and incest.
Isn’t that wonderful, first to visit an abortion clinic, last to visit the boarder.
Yes, Chris, there are countless well-documented stories of babies born alive during botched abortions (the only medical procedure in which death of the patient is intended outcome), who are then denied lifesaving medical care and left to die by either active means (snipping their spinal cords, stabbing them in the soft spot of skull, breaking their necks, or drowning them), or by passive means (just letting them die with no care).
You need to get educated about the truth of this satanic barbarous industry and stop letting yourself be deceived by the lies and propaganda of the mainstream media and Marxist, leftist folks who lie and believe the lies which injure and destroy lives and profit from the behemoth abortion industry.
Chris, if you’re really open, I’ll be glad to provide you volumes of true and factual information.
This is the bottom line!!
Harris, dumb, dumber and the Dumbest period! At best a Nut job period!!
Wake up Americans wake up !
They’re eating the dogs! They’re aborting the babies after birth! lol
The mobile clinic pulled up to the DNC convention offering free human sacrifices and male sterilization wasn’t enough to show the world how sick and depraved the psychopants-in-charge truly are? C’mon man!
As abhorrent as that scenario was to moral humans, isn’t that an example of a problem solving itself?
Abortion rights are so popular in the US that they consistently win ballot initiatives in deep red states. Harris is going to win.
Selfishness, sexual lust, and a general lack of responsibility are the root reasons why abortion is popular.
No person is immune to desires of the flesh.
Well, there was one person, but we didn’t like him, so we got rid of him.
James,
Just because an issue is popular, does not make it morally right.
Remember that the majority of Germans under Nazi rule were so deceived by Hitler and the propaganda he generated, they allowed the Holocaust to occur. How is that even possible? “Good Germans” making lampshades out of their neighbors’ skin?
If we fail to learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it. Our country is proof of that as we have permitted—“by ballot initiative” and “popular vote” and erroneous SCOTUS rulings—ten times the amount of Jews slaughtered, gassed, experimented on, tortured, and burned. In the USA, 65 million preborn human babies slaughtered, burned, tortured, ripped apart, experimented upon, and left to die in the name of “popular.”
Might does not make right, and sometimes democracy is demoncracy, depending on the level of propaganda and power of deception exerted by those in power.
James,
One other tragic and sickening reason for the paradox you mention is that so many in the USA do not exercise their right to vote. If all those who are “red” actually voted, there would obviously be a different outcome. Whether by passively believing the false narratives, or actively refusing to vote, those who could make a difference when it is so easy to, fail to do so by not exercising their right and responsibility to make their voice heard.
Vermont through the constitutional change has defined what is inside a woman (if I can say that term) after intercourse, a product of conception (POC). They have not recognized this as a baby or as a person. So, let’s take that on face value as true.
If that is true, then the following will have to be changed.
Men will only be responsible for paying for said removal of product of conception, it is not a person nor a baby, so child support is no longer valid.
The state will no longer be responsible for childcare because it was only a POC, a product of conception.
Sadly, this will also limit insurance companies/hospitals to no longer provide pre-natal care, to do any intervening on premature births, etc. because they are only POC at that point.
Lika many narcissists the argument is framed such that people get what they want and is divorce of reality. Any 3-year-old could clearly tell you a fetus (aka POC) was a baby and a human baby at that, you don’t need much life experience to know this.
Yet this will be the most divisive topic, why? Because we are inherently selfish, inherently filled with lust and sexual desires that we want to satisfy outside of a marriage covenant. We want what we want, and we don’t want to deal with any of the consequences, but our logic defies, nature, science and God’s law in this instance, which is why we struggle. It would be akin to fighting against the law of gravity, the results are going to be predictable.
We suffer needlessly because of our selfish desires.
Thanks for the lecture, but most people disagree with you – even those living in deep-red states – and we live in a democracy. (And good grief, that rant about lust and sexual desire is a little weird – how about mind your own business?)
I don’t understand why those with heart-felt opposition to abortion don’t do more to reduce the number of abortions by promoting age-appropriate sex education in our classrooms and making contraceptives more readily available.
It’s the sex thing, right?
You’re welcome!
We hand out condoms for free in schools, btw, they have plenty of sex education. Planned Parenthood says 50% of the children born were unplanned. Guess their methods don’t work to well huh?
So it’s funny that child is not well enough developed at 16 to drive for a living, have to be 18 in order to change the fat or clean the fryolator in McDonalds.
But a 15 year old is going to be responsible enough to use birth control effectively to prevent a pregnancy? Perhaps the plan doesn’t make sense?
No there couldn’t possibly be a better plan, in areas where there is a Christian influence, what I’ve said is welcoming and common, it’s most certainly not common in Vermont, true that.
Mark,
To answer your question about Trump: I’m very disappointed that he is also missing the crux of the issue and forgetting the humanity and inherent value of the preborn baby, regardless of his or her gestational age. That said, he was probably the most pro-life president we have ever had, and the alternative in Harris/Walz is a no-brainer. They are the most rabid, bloodthirsty abortion ticket ever.
I am trying to believe the best about Trump, thinking that his waffling is simply because he is being poorly advised. I think perhaps he thinks that if he concedes some ground to the pro-abortion crowd, it will gain him some more votes, but I wish he would be 100% honest and uncompromising about the humanity of preborn children and stop talking about a 15-week ban or some other such arbitrary time frame. And I disagree with his saying that the greatest thing about Roe being overturned is that abortion is now a state’s issue. That’s not the point. It is a moral issue. Period. The greatest thing about Roe being overturned is that it exposed the lie that the right to murder babies is in our Constitution.
And I think there should be a federal abortion ban, just as there is a federal slavery ban and an Emancipation Proclamation. Chattel slavery and abortion are the same thing: fundamentally immoral and evil because they deny the humanity and inherent value and dignity of human beings, regardless of their size, gestational age, ethnicity, or skin color. Our founding documents already declare that we are endowed by our Creator with the unalienable right to life AND guarantee equal protection of the law. So, how is it we have departed from these fundamental tenets? To think any of us has the right or authority to deny a person’s humanity and personhood is preposterous.
Harris supports the restrictions on abortion that existed under Roe v Wade. How in the world is that the “most rabid, bloodthirsty abortion ticket ever”?
You’d force the 10-year old rape victim in Ohio to bear her rapist’s child? That’s what denying a person’s humanity and personhood looks like. It’s horribly immoral.
Mark,
You fail to see that Harris supports ZERO restrictions on abortion. For her to say otherwise is simply duplicity in its most evil form. It would be as false and hypocritical as Hitler saying that he supported a ban on gassing Jews younger than twelve years-old.
When you have a conversation about intentionally killing a group of human beings, or making excuses about why it’s okay to enslave another group, it must be all or nothing. For once you, or those in power, or the popular vote decide who gets to live or die and who gets to be free or exist under subjugation, you have already crossed a moral line which no human has the right or authority to cross. Age, size, ethnicity, skin color, religion, or any other external attribute are completely irrelevant when the issue is the inherent value and God-given dignity of every human being, inside the womb or outside the womb.
I understand your outrage at the unspeakably evil sexual violation of this ten year-old girl. Our hearts and souls cry out for justice for her and against the criminal who violated her and stole her innocence and her body and her soul. But in horrifically tragic cases such as hers, we are still talking about a living, innocent, defenseless human baby inside the womb of that ten year-old girl.
Those who are opposed to abortion, except in the case of rape and incest, always forget that this child is 100% as much a child worthy of love, protection, nurture, and care as you and I were when we were growing and developing inside our mothers’ wombs. The circumstances surrounding the baby conceived though the violence and evil of rape and incest do not in any way diminish the humanity of the baby whose mother is a victim of such wickedness. Why should this baby also now be brutalized and victimized and murdered because his or her mother has been brutalized and victimized?
The baby born to this violated ten year-old girl (if the baby had not been aborted) could have been adopted and loved and raised by those who recognized her inherent humanity and beauty. And yet, those who support abortion in cases of rape are only compounding the violence and trauma already perpetrated upon the rape victim by now making her complicit in the brutalization and death of her own child.
Back to what I said about Harris claiming she supports restrictions on abortion: if she were truly honest and sincere, then she, and all who support her, would be passionately advocating for legislation and regulation on gestational age limits. But they never do because:
1.) They do not recognize the humanity and personhood of the preborn child from the moment of fertilization, and
2.) They DO want unrestricted, unfettered, unregulated access to abortion.
But the baby is always forgotten about in these arguments which both fund the insatiable greed of the abortion industry, and win votes from those who are hoodwinked by the virtue-signaling propaganda and false justice of “reproductive liberty.” They conflate this with women’s rights when, in fact, it is women who are being exploited in the most sinister and hypocritical way.
An acorn is not an oak tree and a zygote is not a “person”. I know you disagree and I respect your opinion, but please lose the arrogance. People have sincerely held views that are opposed to yours, and they have every right to them. It’s insulting to suggest that people who disagree with you are “hoodwinked” or “exploited” or “virtue signaling” or “greedy” – especially as a man who can never be forced to bear a child that is unwanted.