Society devolves into darkness as Missouri’s heartbeat bill rebuffs infanticide momentum

Dr Randy Tobler

The Randy Tobler Show
March 08, 2019 - 12:09 pm

Last week we talked with Missouri State Rep. Nicholas Schroer about HR 126, the so-called “Heartbeat Bill,” which many news outlets have labeled among the strongest in the nation. 

It penalizes the performance of an abortion after the detection of a heartbeat…typically no later than six weeks after the last menstrual period or a month after conception, a class B felony.  Penalties include up to a $1000 fine and irrevocable revocation of a doctor’s license.  The only exceptions are for “medical emergencies,” and according to the bill's text, my take is there’s no exception for extreme psychiatric conditions, including suicidal intentions.

I’m concerned the bill doesn’t fully address the real scenarios that may put a mother at real risk in situations where a pregnancy is by any reasonable standard hopeless, yet must be continued.  And like most similar bills already passed and on the way in several other states, there are no exceptions for rape or incest.  From an ideologically pure and consistent standpoint, that last is arguably proper.  From the perspective of the preborn human infant (a/k/a ‘embryo’ or ‘fetus’), is that human life any less separate or unique because of the parental lineage?  Not making a political judgment here, just reminding everyone of the importance of logical consistency when we debate these matters.  No doubt, the MO Senate will amend the bill before (and if) passage, and I suspect it may be improved a bit.  Beyond that Governor Parson’s pen, which it is thought will sign a bill assuming it retains the essential elements.    

Importantly, though, it incorporates the bill's ‘trigger bans’ that require a SCOTUS reversal of Roe v. Wade, which some think may happen given Justice Kavanaugh’s addition to Gorsuch on the bench, giving a potential conservative nod to pro-life decisions.  However, Justice John Roberts has shown (witness pro-Obamacare rulings) his penchant to avoid too much disruption and he’s assumed the role of Anthony Kennedy as the Court’s swing vote. Of course, a court challenge will ensue.  Naturally, a leftist judge will give an injunction and in all probability, SCOTUS will address this and the many pro-life bills like it in due course. 

READ: Missouri House passes bill to ban abortions after heartbeat is detected

So why the aggressive “bring it on” stance by Rep. Schroer and the Missouri Legislature (with bipartisan support, by the way)?  It’s an appropriate and necessary reaction to recent legislation passed in NY and failed in Virginia.  The potential for infanticide is now statutory in pockets of the US of A, where our founding documents celebrate and preserve the right to pursue life, the antithesis of abortion’s consequences.  I recognize the anguish an unwanted pregnancy brings and we shouldn’t diminish it, but to prioritize it with reckless disregard for another human being's is morally at least a debatable inconsistency and logically hard to defend rationally.

On this March 2 show, I quoted from a ghastly piece out of the Journal of Medical Ethics, on of the prestigious British Medical Journals, justifying infanticide (“after-birth abortion!”) 

Here’s the Abstract:

Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.

Access the entire abomination here: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2011-100411

Yes, the medical literature has published an other-world, jaw-dropping article claiming that a perfectly formed human baby can be killed after he or she is born, with an indeterminate time limit as to how late.  The authors only specify that the psychologists and neurologists could collaborate to determine when development had progressed enough to flip the ‘potential person’ (and therefore arbitrarily terminable) to an ‘actual person’, protected against infanticide.  You can’t make this stuff up.  But it’s in the mainstream literature and has a nose under the tent of leftist relativism and all the horrors the last national socialist tide brought…. the Holocaust. 

Now more than ever a strident, if arguably dogmatic, voice for life is needed.  The Missouri General Assembly and Governor should scream “WE PROTECT LIFE” at the top of their lungs.