At a House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing last week, legislators discussed a bill that has at least 120 co-sponsors in the House. The bill is called the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, and it would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks on a national level.
One of the hearing participants was Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat from New York. He said that the hearing was a farce and “just another battle of the Republican war on women”:
“I would urge my colleagues to think about the extent to which he, Dr. Gosnell, represented the poor quality of health care services available in poorer communities. We should be working to make sure that high quality health care is provided to the uninsured to make sure the full range of health care services, including family planning services that are available to people with money are available to the poor and uninsured as well. If that means funding a Planned Parenthood clinic in every neighborhood to put guys like Gosnell out of business, so be it.”
Putting a Planned Parenthood in every neighborhood wouldn’t prevent future Gosnells. It would make them more acceptable and commonplace. There’s really no difference between what Gosnell was doing and what the rest of the abortion industry does on a daily basis. Sure, maybe his clinic was dirtier than other clinics, but he was still murdering babies.
This is the typical liberal response. There might be a few bad apples in the women’s “reproductive health” industry, but that doesn’t mean it’s all bad. We just need to throw more money at it. That’ll fix it.
Liberals also say they want abortion to be “safe, legal and rare.” If they truly want it to be rare, they should work to make it difficult for a woman to murder her unborn child. How is placing Planned Parenthood clinics in every neighborhood going to make the murder of unborn babies rare? It seems it would make abortion more prevalent.
And speaking of liberals wanting to throw more money at the problem, why not take the opposite approach and prohibit funding to Planned Parenthood or any entity that performs abortions? That’s just what the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act would do. Sponsored by Representative Roger Wicker from Mississippi, it would enact a “single, government-wide prohibition on taxpayer funding of abortion in all federal programs.” Currently, it has about 95 co-sponsors in the House and 21 in the Senate.
At the very least, there should be absolutely no taxpayer money going to fund the murder of unborn babies.