The Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and the True Face of the Pro-Choice Movement

forblog

The House of Representatives today approved the bill H.R. 1797, that bans abortions from after 20-weeks of pregnancy up to the day of birth. The House approved the bill on a 229-195 vote with 7 Democrats voting for the bill and 6 Republicans voting against it.

I am currently carrying a 26 week old unborn baby girl named Tessa. She is viable. She feels pain and pleasure, she sleeps, she wakes, she dreams. She blinks and sees and touches and tastes and explores and even gets the hiccups. It deeply disturbs me that only 7 Democratic members of the House of Representatives are opposed to having her skull crushed and brains vacuumed out – after, of course, she’s been brutally dismembered while kicking and thrashing and silently screaming.

And keep in mind, this bill only addresses late-term abortions after 20 weeks post-fertilization, and still allows for abortion if the mother’s life is endangered, or in cases of rape and incest. The bill does not even protect children aged at the many stages of Tessa’s growth, shown above. Top left: Finding out I was pregnant, she already had a heartbeat and was wiggling around at this point in development. Top right: At my 10 week ultrasound, she was reacting to being poked and even threw a fit when I coughed. Bottom left: At 15 weeks we found out that she was a baby girl, even though that was determined at her conception. Bottom right: At 18 weeks, we saw her hiding her face, playing with her hands and sucking her fingers. The H.R. 1797 bill that just passed would not protect her from dismemberment at any of these pictured stages.

My question is, what is the mindset of these barbaric assholes that they will not only stand by complacently while men like Gosnell slaughter viable, pain capable children far older than my baby in the above pictures, but they actually cast a vote in favor of unlimited infant slaughter on demand? And what is wrong with registered Democrats that they are not concerned or dismayed at the voting habits of their elected officials?

This just sheds a great deal of light onto the true face of the pro-choice movement.

In the end, it doesn’t matter to them if a child who would survive outside of the womb is writhing at the end of an abortionist’s scalpel being pulled piecemeal into a sloshing bucket of blood and twitching human tissue. It doesn’t matter if the baby is viable. It doesn’t matter if the baby feels pain.

If pain was truly an issue, the bill would not start at just 20 weeks. During the hearing Dr. Maureen Condic, who is Associate Professor of Neurobiology and Adjunct Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Utah School of Medicine, testified that the unborn child is capable of reacting to pain as early as 8-10 weeks. This is when most abortions in America take place.

Surgeons entering the womb to perform corrective procedures on unborn children have seen those babies flinch, jerk and recoil from sharp objects and incisions. Ultrasound technology shows unborn babies react physically to outside stimuli such as sound, light and touch. Surgeons routinely administer anesthesia to unborn children in the womb before performing lifesaving surgeries.

And it doesn’t matter to the pro-choice movement whether the child is a living human being, because that has been solidly established scientifically for decades now. Under scientific taxonomy every single abortion kills a human being, a member of homo sapiens that is alive and growing. A human that is, and will only ever be, a human being. Elementary school biology states irrefutably at the moment of conception what Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus and Species the biological life form of a fertilized human egg is. Every conceived person is a member of Animalia, Chordata, Vertebrata, Mammalia, Primates, Homo, Sapien.

Denying humanity to a conceived human being is so anti-science it’s laughable. It is an ignorant, faith-based and solidly flat-earther view.

When you account for the humanity of the unborn, the pain of the unborn, and the viability of the unborn, and you still advocate the savage slaughter of human beings just because they are “unwanted”? That is the true face of the pro-choice movement. And it is PATHETIC.

Gingi Freeman on sabfacebookGingi Freeman on sabinstagramGingi Freeman on sabpinterestGingi Freeman on sabtwitter
Gingi Freeman
Gingi Freeman
at
Gingi is a photographer, cosplayer, amateur chef, crazy cat lady, anime otaku, bookworm, generic geek, world traveler, conservative Christian, homeschooler, devoted military wife and stay at home new mother of two little girls.

Gingi blogs about anything and everything that is relevant to being a supermom, stay at home wife, homeschooler and geek girl! You can contact her at gingifreeman@gmail.com or via the contact form on her website at www.domesticgeekgirl.com

Gingi Freeman

Gingi is a photographer, cosplayer, amateur chef, crazy cat lady, anime otaku, bookworm, generic geek, world traveler, conservative Christian, homeschooler, devoted military wife and stay at home new mother of two little girls. Gingi blogs about anything and everything that is relevant to being a supermom, stay at home wife, homeschooler and geek girl! You can contact her at gingifreeman@gmail.com or via the contact form on her website at www.domesticgeekgirl.com

6 thoughts on “The Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and the True Face of the Pro-Choice Movement

  • 19 June, 2013 at 3:31 am
    Permalink

    I, myself, am a God fearing pregnant woman that is very much loves the human growing inside of me. Although My personal choice and beliefs would be not to choose abortion at any point throughout a pregnancy, the government should not have the right to make that choice for women. It is up to a woman what she wants to do with her body and up to her to live with rhat decision or ask for forgiveness from the only One that can judge us: God. I understand your outrage as to why more representatives did not vote for the bill, but the moment we allow the government to control our bodies and what we do with them becomes a slippery slope and gives them too much power.

    Reply
    • 19 June, 2013 at 4:29 am
      Permalink

      Using that same logic, then the government should not control or regulate issues like slavery and rape. Why should the government control what a man does with his own body (even if he wants to use it to rape a woman or molest a child)? Why should the government control what a person does with their property (even if that property is a living human being)?

      To truly embrace the philosophy that we are not – as human beings – entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that the government does not have the duty to enforce and protect those rights, is to enforce the idea of a majority rule free for all where anything goes. (So things like the Jewish holocaust? No biggie. The government has no business controlling what one person does to another human being… right?)

      If the government truly has no business protecting innocent humans from murder, then in all consistency you MUST also embrace the philosophy that rape and slavery and any other number of actions that deny a human being their basic human rights be allowed.

      Reply
      • 19 June, 2013 at 5:08 pm
        Permalink

        We are all entitled to our own opinions. That’s the beauty of democracy and free will. I was not trying to change your opinion or to justify anybody else’s actions. I just wanted to answer the question you posed as to why not more people voted for the bill.

        Reply
        • 20 June, 2013 at 12:52 am
          Permalink

          The majority of Democrats in the House of Representatives did not vote for the bill for the same reason that they did not vote against slavery many many decades ago. It is the same political party with the same political philosophies that result in gross human rights injustices.

          Reply
  • 19 June, 2013 at 3:49 am
    Permalink

    First off, most “abortions” are a normal biological event, not caused by the actions of outside humans. At least 30%, and possibly 50% of all pregnancies get passed out of the body for any reason that might invalidate viability. It’s hard to count it accurately because it occurs so early it is only perceived as a heavy monthly flow. We use euphemistic terms like “miscarriage”, but it’s really the organic, natural form of abortion. It occurs millions of times more than any procedure we initiate.

    The reason some legislators can’t vote for a law like this 20 weeks thing is because it would (among other examples) force a teenager raped by her parent, and kept away from medical examination to prevent discovery of the crime, to have a child against her will, and that is in most people’s minds unconstitutional duress. There are also a number of physical deformities and defects which will cause inevitable fatality within hours of birth, but this law would require that the child be born to suffer. Pregnancies are unsafe for many women to experience. Even late-term abortions are safer for these cases than completing a birth at risk of fatal hemorrhage. The law would not allow this option.

    Reply
    • 19 June, 2013 at 4:34 am
      Permalink

      First, the information about spontaneous abortions in the first few weeks of pregnancy is irrelevant to the issue at hand.. which is the HR 1797 bill that is designed to protect pain capable and viable babies from INTENTIONAL ABORTION / KILLING.

      Secondly, the majority of what you state in your second paragraph is either blatantly untrue or misleading and false.

      As I clearly stated in my article: “The bill still allows for abortion if the mother’s life is endangered, or in cases of rape and incest.” So either you are willfully ignoring this fact, or you were not watching the House on CSPAN and are getting your recapped news from unreliable and / or deceptive sources.

      Thirdly, I had a roommate who was the product of rape. To say that she deserves to die or is less of a human simply because of the circumstances of her conception is barbaric and archaic and is certainly not founded upon any scientific basis.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HEY THERE! Are YOU a Domestic Geek?

Subscribe to Domestic Geek Girl's Weekly Newsletter and don't miss a post!! Receive weekly blog post summaries *** Be the first to know about giveaways *** Enjoy exclusive offers, discounts, specials and MORE!