Good morning
@ThereRoseaLamb
And look, the democratic process worked in your favor. The bill was passed because the majority that voted for the bill felt that babies that are somehow born after an abortion attempt will get medical care. And while certainly every life counts, out of 10,000 abortions there were only 3 such cases. And of course, the law only now makes it mandatory to give medical aid, but it would have been the doctor's, or medical staffs decision to do so, before the law. There has never been a law that one cannot give life saving measures to a baby that was supposed to be aborted. And I support the new law also. I do believe that if a baby is born alive, then we should take care of its medical needs.
Failed abortions where infants are born alive are extremely rare. In Minnesota, which tracks those cases, there were over 10,000 abortions performed in 2017 and only three cases where an infant was born alive, according to a
department of health report. None subsequently survived.
'Born-alive' bill passed by House Republicans would require care for infants born alive after failed abortion - ABC News (go.com)
And apparently one of the reasons that there were so many votes not to pass the bill is because there already are laws that cover the issue:
Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine
argued that the bill was unnecessary, as a 2002 born-alive bill had “reaffirmed” that “infanticide is already illegal in every state.” Kaine said in a statement: “I support that law, which is still in effect. There is no need for additional federal legislation on this topic. “
So, apparently all of this brouhaha is over a bill that was just a redundancy to laws that are already on the books. This apparently was mostly performative legislation. Makeing a big show to re-invent laws that already exist. Of course, it's also worth noting that this is something that happened in January of 2023.
And as I've claimed, the issue isn't really about whether or not abortions are legal or not. The root of the issue is why do so many people find themselves in a place where they feel that one is necessary? Just like with drugs. To stop the flow of illegal drugs, then you have to stop people from wanting to buy them. If you want to stop abortion, then stop the process that puts someone in a position where they feel led to have one. Teach sexual abstinence to your children. Make having marital affairs illegal. Do what the Scriptures say and stone such people. Stop producing televison entertainment that promotes having sexual relations as just some casual thing that everyone does on their first date after pie and coffee.
God created the union of one man and one woman within the confines of marriage to have sexual relations to procreate. Man has turned it into just something that we can all have fun with and enjoy... but ooops sometimes the consequences of such fun and enjoyment can be disastrous and a new human being is conceived in all the fun and games and it isn't fun and games any more. So, you want to stop abortion? Stop the need for abortion.
That idea actually has support among both parties to some degree. It seems to be especially hard for the parents of a child who is practicing immoral sexual activity to condemn it in their own child. So, a lot of republicans are finding that they are forced to accept such behavior or cause a major stink in their own family.
History was made last month when 47 House Republicans joined all Democrats in
passing legislation that would federally protect same-sex marriages and roll back a 25-year-old law that defines marriage in the United States as between one man and one woman.
Which Republicans voted for the bill on same-sex marriage and why - Washington Post
So, you're losing that fight among your own. About one fourth of the republican representatives in the house voted to 'sanctify' marriage between two people of the same sex, or whatever sex they claim to be.
Like I've always said. These issues are a symptom and a sign to the believer that the days that Paul wrote of, are upon us.
And look, if you had a reasonably decent human being to lead your cause, I could support some of these issues over what the democratic position is on them. But I'm not into making a deal with the devil to 'maybe' get someone in the office of the President that might do good on these matters. And if you've been keeping track on the GOP contenders new stance on abortion, he isn't going to promote your cause in this either.
Remember, this is the guy who throughout his 2016 campaign promised you, swore to you, that on day one he would rescind the ACA. How did that work out? His response was, "who knew that health insurance could be so tough?" And I contend that most of these issues for which you believe he's going to save the nation from will wind up with that same response. "Who knew that abortion legality could be so tough?"
I have voted for republican presidents in the past. But I'm not voting for this one. Sorry. The bad just far outweighs any good that I think he 'might' achieve. He didn't get his wall built either. Couldn't get Congress to approve funding and was only able to work in dribbles and drabs as he was able to redirect, read steal, money from other approved programs. That's not a leader in my book.
God bless you and vote wisely,
Ted
