Police in Pleasant Grove, Utah, discovered over the weekend the bodies of seven dead infants in cardboard boxes, The Salt Lake Tribune reported. All seven of these babies were allegedly killed soon after being born by their own mother, a 39-year-old woman who has now been placed under arrest.
The mother has been charges with six counts of murder. Police believe she committed these crimes over the course of a decade.
This brutal loss of young life is shocking and deeply saddening. Yet as I read the story, I couldn’t help but consider this woman’s actions in the light of what prominent abortion proponents have said about when legal protection can be extended to unborn babies (never)—and whether that right can be withheld from babies even after birth (yes).
Univision anchor Jorge Ramos recently asked Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards at which point she believed human life begins. She obfuscated, answering at first:
“It is not something that I feel like is really part of this conversation. I mean, to me, we work with women…. I guess the way I’d really like to… I think every woman has to make her own decision. What we do at Planned Parenthood is make sure that women have all their options for health care…”
Ramos pressed her further on this obviously uncomfortable (for her) issue. She replied:
“Yah, well, I don’t know that it’s controversial. I don’t know that it’s really relevant to the conversation. But, for me, I’m the mother of three children. For me, life began when I delivered them; they’ve been probably the most important thing in my life ever since. But that’s my own personal decision.”
Thus (at least in Planned Parenthood’s eyes) babies are presumably safe once they are born, right?
A year ago, Florida legislators were considering a bill to require abortionists to provide medical care to infants who survive an abortion attempt. Members of the committee—and, thanks to YouTube, the nation— were shocked to hear a Planned Parenthood lobbyist refuse to condemn infanticide.
Florida State Rep. Jim Boyd asked Alisa LaPolt Snow, representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates,
“If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”
“We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician”
Maybe this shouldn’t shock us. The pro-abortion understanding of which human lives deserve legal protection has always been extreme and wildly at odds with what the vast majority of Americans believe.
Go back fifteen years to a dialogue on the Senate floor between Senators Rick Santorum and Barbara Boxer.
Santorum said: “You agree, once a child is born, is separated from the mother, that that child is protected by the Constitution and cannot be killed? Do you agree with that?”
Boxer replied: “I think when you bring your baby home, when your baby is born … the baby belongs to your family and has all the rights.”
Like this pro-life news article? Please support LifeNews with a donation during our April fundraising campaign!
Santorum pressed her further: “Obviously, you don’t mean they have to take the baby out of the hospital for it to be protected by the Constitution. Once the baby is separated from the mother, you would agree—completely separated from the mother—you would agree that the baby is entitled to constitutional protection?”
“I don’t want to engage in this. I don’t want to engage in this.”
Who can blame her? It’s one thing to privately play the arbiter, deciding whose life is and whose is not deserving of protection. It’s another thing to do so on the floor of the United States Senate.
Our own president conveniently opted out of answering this important question when asked it during a “Civil Forum on the Presidency” at Saddleback Church prior to the 2008 elections.
Then-candidate Obama was asked by Rick Warren,
“At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?”
After a few hems and haws, Obama’s response was
“Whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.”
Perhaps. But his inability to answer that question certainly didn’t stop him from opposing the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act multiple times while in the Illinois Senate.
Brushing aside the issue of when human life begins is a convenience the abortion industry would like to enjoy. The right-to-life community insists on the truth.
And because of that, one day all innocent human life will be protected, despite the feigned ignorance of abortion proponents.