With the start of a new Congress, Democrats remain as pro-abortion as ever, in contrast to pro-life Republicans who have just taken the majority. While it may seem amusing to point out how inarticulate and nonsensical they and their arguments have become, even to the point of refusing to oppose infanticide, the reality is their position remains a horrifying one. On Wednesday, as Sarah highlighted, the House voted in favor of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.
"210 Democrats" was trending over Twitter on Wednesday night in reaction to the amount of House Democrats--all but two--who voted against protections for babies born alive from abortion. Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), one of the few remaining pro-life Democrats left, voted in favor of the bill, while Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-TX) voted present according to Fox News' report on the vote.
Thursday morning also saw "Nadler" trending, in response to Rep. Jerry Nadler's (D-NY) particularly incoherent argument claiming that requiring an infant born alive from an abortion be transported to the hospital was somehow dangerous to the infant. This is opposed to letting the infant die of exposure, or actively killing him or her.
Recommended
This wasn't the only commonsense pro-life initiative, though, as House Republicans also brought up a resolution condemning the surge of pro-abortion violence against pro-lifers.
On May 2 of last year, someone leaked the draft opinion of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, which POLITICO reported on, showing that the U.S. Supreme Court looked to use it to overturn Roe v. Wade. The Court ultimately handed down that decision on June 24 of last year. We still do not know who leaked the decision, and Democrats, including in the White House, have been quite transparent about how they do not seem to care.
Since then, there has been an explosion of violence against pro-life organizations, including pregnancy centers and even churches. According to a compiled list of incidents from the Family Research Center (FRC), as of January 2, 2023, there have been 125 attacks involving vandalism, threats, and/or violence.
The text of the resolution mentions that "following the leak and issuance of the Dobbs decision, radical anti-life advocates have defaced, vandalized, and caused destruction to over 100 pro-life facilities, groups, and churches." In addition to laying out examples of such offenses, the resolution also calls out the Biden administration for its failures to properly address the problem:
Whereas the Biden Administration has failed to take action to respond to the radical attacks on pro-life facilities, groups, and churches, or to protect the rights of these organizations; and
Whereas these attacks on pro-life facilities, groups, and churches have included vandalism, arson, incendiary graffiti, and other damage: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress—
(1) condemns recent attacks of vandalism, violence, and destruction against pro-life facilities, groups, and churches;
(2) recognizes the sanctity of life and the important role pro-life facilities, groups, and churches play in supporting pregnant women, infants, and families; and
(3) calls upon the Biden Administration to use all appropriate law enforcement authorities to uphold public safety and to protect the rights of pro-life facilities, groups, and churches.
In distorting the meaning of the resolution, Democrats have a penchant for whataboutism.
Speaking from the House floor on Wednesday, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) came off as particularly ineloquent on the matter.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D), arguing against a resolution condemning attacks on pro-life pregnancy centers:
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) January 11, 2023
"We have to make sure that people who are pro-life and pro-people who support abortion rights, and we support life, are included in opposing violence." pic.twitter.com/9uwhISGUlJ
"I am against all forms of violence," the congresswoman said, despite how she went on to vote against the resolution, "including violence against anyone of the majority of Americans who support abortion rights." She went on to mention statistics of violence against these abortion supporters, since 1977--a span of decades as opposed to months--though she seriously flubbed the numbers, before correcting herself.
"Since 1977 there have been 100 murders, um, uh, there have been, I'm sorry, there have been 11 murders, uh 11 murders, 47 bombings, 900--uh 196 arsons, 49 um, uh, assaults, and mill--and thousands more illegal attacks on people who support abortion rights," she read from her notes in a painfully frazzled way.
Her inarticulate speech got worse from there as she went on to declare "let's include everyone in here when we talk about no more violence. We have to make sure that people who are pro-life and pro-people who support abortion rights, and we support life, are included in opposing violence."
When it comes to truly being against all forms of violence, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who voted in favor of the resolution, reminded from the House floor that violent incidents against abortion supporters were prosecuted, with pro-lifers supporting that prosecution, in truly being against all forms of violence.
Jordan also emphasized that the point of the resolution was to indeed condemn violence, calling it "as apple pie as it gets" and later in his remarks "as basic as it gets." He demanded to know why the supposedly non-politicized Department of Justice (DOJ) hasn't prosecuted these crimes. "It sure looks like there's a conflict, it sure looks like there's a double standard," he pointed out.
During a hearing called by the then pro-abortion Democratic House majority in July, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) who served as the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee and is now its chairman, took several minutes to go through a long list of these incidents.
It wasn't merely these pro-abortion Democrats who distorted the resolution's meaning. They also had help from radical pro-abortion groups and from their allies in the mainstream media.
As mentioned in Wednesday morning's coverage of Republicans bringing up pro-life initiatives like the born-alive bill and a resolution condemning violence, Planned Parenthood Action Fund and NARAL Pro-Choice America described the initiatives in a particularly misleading way.
NARAL described the born-alive bill as "one that would allow politicians to interfere in personal family decisions (H.R. 26, the so-called 'Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act')," and seemingly dismissed the pro-abortion violence, claiming the resolution is "meant to muddy the waters and detract from their extremely unpopular anti-reproductive freedom agenda."
Planned Parenthood said that the initiatives aim to "peddle misinformation about abortion care to address a made-up problem" and "disingenuously condemn violence at anti-abortion facilities while ignoring the mounting violence and threats against people who get abortions and abortion providers."
It's worth reminding that a study released in October from the Crime Research Prevention Center showed that pro-life organizations were 22 more times likely to be met with violence than pro-abortion ones.
NARAL and Planned Parenthood also released on Wednesday condemning the passage of the pro-life initiatives, with Planned Parenthood specifically lamenting in the headline how the House passed "Deceptive and Stigmatizing Anti-Abortion Bills."
Our friends at Twitchy also highlighted how people took issue with Yahoo! News' Tom LoBianco categorizing the initiatives as "anti-abortion measures."
Three Democrats voted in favor of the resolution, including Rep. Gonzalez mentioned above, Rep. Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, and Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington state.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member