- Washington Post: “The Abortion Ban Texas Is Debating? It lready Exists in 12 Other States”
The Texas Senate will reconvene on the Monday following Independence Day to resume the battle between the freedom of women to destroy their unborn babies and the freedom of those babies to live. In a tense race-to-the-finish with dueling demonstrators outside singing “Amazing Grace” and “Hail, Satan,”1 the Texas Senate closed its pre-holiday session by voting for a more restrictive abortion law—one that would protect babies four weeks sooner than present law and cause many substandard clinics to close.
The legislative process, disturbed by an angry mob in the gallery, became mired in technicalities. And with an 11-hour filibuster, during which she was deemed to have violated Senate rules three times, Senator Wendy Davis succeeded in running down the clock to midnight. No politician turned into a pumpkin, but the vote did. Though the Senate voted to pass the bill, the vote was two minutes too late.
Snatching a second chance for victory from the jaws of a technical knock-out, Governor Rick Perry vowed not to let technicalities de-rail this legislation for life. He has called for another special session to consider Senate Bill 5.2 So the bill’s proponents and opponents are readying for a 30-day high-stakes game. The companion bill has already passed in the House. If Senate Bill 5 passes, the Lone Star state will join a dozen others in prohibiting abortion of babies after 20 weeks, in this case measured from fertilization.
Governor Perry, explaining why he is eager to see this bill passed, especially in the wake of Kermit Gosnell’s homicide convictions, and the equally horrifying case of Douglas Karpen recently come to light in Houston,3 said:
The horrors of the national late-term abortion industry are continuing to come to light, one atrocity at a time. Sadly, some of those same atrocities happen in our own state. In Texas, we value all life, and we’ve worked to cultivate a culture that supports the birth of every child. We have an obligation to protect unborn children, and to hold those who peddle these abortions to standards that would minimize the death, disease and pain they cause.4
Gestational age5 is conventionally measured from the onset of the last menstrual period. The time of fertilization is roughly two weeks later, and, as the more precise reflection of the unborn baby’s age, it is a reminder that the abortionist is responsible for gathering all available data to ascertain an unborn baby’s actual age lest a “fudged” calendar lead one child to death that might have escaped. And in a somewhat symbolic sense, such a date calls attention to the fact that the unborn child, having now reached the age when he or she might survive outside the mother’s womb, has actually been a living human being since the moment of fertilization. If the Texas Senate passes this bill, it will signify a hard-won freedom—the freedom to live—for at least some of the unborn in the nation’s second most populous state.
The unborn of all gestational ages will indirectly receive some protection under the new law. Abortion clinics will be held to the same standards as free-standing surgical clinics, and doctors performing abortions will be required to have hospital privileges at a facility within 30 miles. Doctors will not only be required to ensure that their patients have access to medical follow-up care but also to carefully determine the age of the fetus whose doom is being sealed. And patients seeking prescription abortifacients must come to a clinic to take the drug, ensuring that the drug is taken only by the person it is prescribed for. The bill’s opponents are furious, saying that 37 of the state’s 42 abortion clinics will have to close or remodel, forcing women to drive up to four hours to have their babies’ lives destroyed.
Granted, one would think that careful medical histories, safe facilities, and access to emergency care in case of complications would be the norm in an industry that supposedly prides itself in “keeping abortion safe,” but the abortion industry characteristically protests every attempt to regulate it. (Doctors whose offices provide other sorts of medical and surgical care may not enjoy the many regulations they too must obey, but they do not generally stage protests when directed to maintain high standards.) The abortion industry tends to demand an exception for itself, citing the rarity of complications. The wrongful death of one of Kermit Gosnell’s adult patients illustrates the need to force abortion clinics to comply with safe standards.
The American judicial system has not been kind to the unborn. Forty years ago the United States Supreme Court in the matter of Roe v. Wade declared laws prohibiting first trimester abortions to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court created a constitutional right of privacy in order to justify the nullification of anti-abortion laws, but technically that “constitutional right” to abortion does not extend unconditionally to the entire nine months of pregnancy. The woman’s “right to privacy” created by the Court morphs according to the gestation of the unborn person whose ultimate right to live stands to be violated.
The Supreme Court artificially divided the nine months of pregnancy into “trimesters” and created a different rule for each. Roe v. Wade declared unconstitutional all laws preventing first trimester abortions and only allowed restrictions in the second trimester to protect “the health of the mother.”6 Rulings that deemed mental stress to be a threat to maternal health essentially removed all practical restrictions. Only beyond the point of “viability” were state laws restricting abortion “in the interest of promoting the potentiality of human life”7 still permissible. (Viability is the time when the baby may survive outside the womb.) Pro-abortionists have focused their energies on preserving the “constitutional right” that the Court mysteriously “discovered” for women on the fateful day, January 22, 1973.
Sickened by the staggering 55 million babies murdered8 in the United States since Roe v. Wade, many states have passed abortion restrictions. (See the interactive map at www.washingtonpost.com.) The usual pattern, sadly, is that legislative restrictions are immediately challenged in the courts and often set aside by judges. While proponents of the lives and health of Texas women and their babies regroup to pass this bill, opponents have declared their intention to create technical problems and delays in hopes that even if SB5 passes again, a court will throw out the law on a technicality.
The point of viability is not carved in stone. In 2004 the world saw its first 25-week baby survive. Since the second trimester ends around the 27th week (about 25 weeks after fertilization), it is clear that babies born near the end of the second trimester have a reasonable chance of survival.
The age at which a baby born prematurely may survive has marched backwards to now a record-setting 21 weeks and 5 days.
With advances in medical science, the age at which a baby born prematurely may survive has marched backwards to now a record-setting 21 weeks and 5 days from the first day of the last menstrual period. This translates to approximately 20 weeks after fertilization. Therefore, given that there is evidence that babies shortly beyond this milestone can perceive pain as well as the well-documented fact that some babies at that age have survived, Senate Bill 5’s sponsors have set their goal at that point.
Texas Senate Bill 5 excludes situations in which the mother is endangered, including ectopic pregnancy,9 as well as situations in which the baby in question has an untreatable, imminently lethal defect.10 While it in effect only protects babies far enough along to survive without their mother’s body to protect them, Senate Bill 5 is written so as to ensure a reasonable base of legislative support and a good chance of dodging judicial challenges. It is fitting that the state whose abortion law was challenged in Roe v. Wade—Texas—appears about to pass a law with restrictive provisions affecting a greater population than any other to date. We must hope and pray that such laws are only the first in a turning tide of national disgust over the slaughter of millions. After all, most abortions take place in the first trimester.
Unless there is a fundamental shift toward accepting the sanctity of human life on a biblical basis, however, we cannot hope to see a permanent end to the legalized murder of over a million of America’s unborn babies each year. Ultrasound image abound in America, so most people these days are quite aware that the fetus is a real baby, though they quibble about the human status of the baby in the early days and weeks. So why the outpouring of protesters to preserve the right of Texans to kill babies that are already practically old enough to survive? It is a self-centered and sinful philosophy that demands one’s personal plans and convenience outrank the right of another human being to exist and the authority of a Creator God. Many are concerned that any legal restrictions might trend toward more. After all, a “right” which the Supreme Court invented could someday be “un-invented” and swept away.
We applaud the effort to begin turning the tide on “Roe” in Texas and hope the legislators supporting Senate Bill 5 negotiate the legal minefield being laid for them, but we must realize that this is only a first step.
- Watch this powerful pro-life video by Dr. Tommy Mitchell below—and you can also download it here for free. We encourage you to forward this video to as many people as you can so they will be equipped to have strong biblical and medical reasons to oppose the evil of abortion.
- When Does Life Begin?
- Your Body—A Gift from God—Your Most Precious Gift to Your Spouse
- TIME: Abortion Rights Have Diminished Since Roe v. Wade
- Pro-Abortion Writer: Pro-Life Support is a Dirty Trick
- Flesh and Blood
- Embryo Protection
- Semantics Don’t Change Truth: The social motivations behind new definitions
- Roe v. Wade: 40 Years Later
- This information is intended for general education purposes only and is not intended as professional medical advice. The information should not be relied upon as a substitute for medical advice from your doctor or other healthcare professional. If you have specific questions about any medical condition, diagnosis, or treatment, you should consult your doctor or other healthcare provider.
And Don’t Miss . . .
- Since time out of mind, politicians have denigrated and demonized those who disagree with them through ad hominem attacks, and never more so than when they wish to divert attention from other issues, such as disagreeable critiques of their own performance. The latest reference by President Obama to those who differ with his position on the causes of climate change as the “flat-earth society” is a stellar example of this ploy. Obama’s proposed 2014 budget includes a 6% increase in spending on climate change research, up to $2.65 billion—yes, with a b.11 Note that rhetoric has lately changed to “climate change” from “global warming” in the wake of official reports from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the British Meteorological Office that global warming has failed to even approach the gloomy heights predicted. Not only is the direction and magnitude of climate change at issue, but so is the cause. Mainstream dogma blames man-made activity and therefore proposes a political solution. This is the version preached by President Obama, who plans an end-run around Congress by directing the Environmental Protection Agency to institute regulations with sweeping economic consequences. The President is basing his plans on science which has failed to make accurate predictions, so we wonder who is the real flat-earther in this story? Read more about those failed predictions in “Climate Change Predictions Prove Miscalculated” and learn about creation scientist Dr. Larry Vardiman’s accurate predictions about global cooling—predictions based on an understanding of biblical history—in “And Now—Global Cooling”. Also, see Ken Ham’s blog for a free download offer and discounts on some of AiG’s global warming resources.
- Speaking of flat things, be sure you know what evolutionists are saying about unusually flexible flat feet at “Flexi-feet: Did Some Humans Fail to Leave Them in the Trees?” If you’ve missed the news about the latest claimed transitional forms, check out “Turtle in the Gap.” And find out how God has equipped nature’s champion divers with a special form of oxygen-carrying protein in “Power swimming up the evolutionary ladder.”
- Many Americans are winding up Independence Day celebrations this weekend. It’s vital, in the wake of the recent Supreme Court decision that Americans don’t declare independence from biblical morality. If you’re a little unclear about how to answer claims that homosexual behavior is just natural, read “Feedback: When Did You Choose to Be Straight?”
- Be on the lookout next week for the latest news about the history of horses and find out about an impressive case of botanical identity theft, and who knows what else will be in the News?
For More Information: Get Answers
Remember, if you see a news story that might merit some attention, let us know about it! (Note: if the story originates from the Associated Press, FOX News, MSNBC, the New York Times, or another major national media outlet, we will most likely have already heard about it.) And thanks to all of our readers who have submitted great news tips to us. If you didn’t catch all the latest News to Know, why not take a look to see what you’ve missed?