Virginia Passes Sensible Abortion Restrictions Law


Via Moonbattery, from The Washington Post:

On a 20 to 19 vote, the Democratic-led Senate agreed to an amendment proposed by [Gov. Robert F.] McDonnell (R) that would limit state funding for abortions to those performed in cases of rape or incest or when the life of the mother is at risk. Nothing in state law previously prohibited Medicaid-funded abortions in instances when the health of the mother was in jeopardy.

Sensible in that this is the actual anti-abortion position taken by most pro-lifers, rather than the straw-man set up by pro-deathers that is ‘underage raped-by-own-family victims in critical condition will have to resort to back alley black market abortionists or wire hangers – thanks to evil, evil Sarah Palin!’.

Also sensible in that it puts actual restrictions on the current post-Roe v. Wade environment where ‘health of the mother’ is loosely interpreted to include emotional health – meaning that a woman can abort her baby because she feels unhappy that the baby is unplanned, that she will have more responsibilities now, that the baby’s dad is a deadbeat no-show (if she even knows which guy got her pregnant) – whatever you wanna say, gal!


9 Responses to “Virginia Passes Sensible Abortion Restrictions Law”

  1. KC Says:

    “this is the actual anti-abortion position taken by most pro-lifers”

    Not from my experience it’s not. What I always hear from pro-lifers is abortion is murder and should not be allowed except in cases of rape or risk to the mother’s health.

  2. Scott Thong Says:

    Isn’t that almost exactly what I said above?

  3. ron Says:

    I recall an interview in which Palin expressed her personal opposition to abortion under all circumstances, even if her teenage daughter got raped. She was also opposed to the morning after pill.

    Queue the music from Monty Python’s “The Meaning of Life”…

    “Every sperm is sacred.
    Every sperm is great.
    If a sperm is wasted,
    God gets quite irate.”

  4. Scott Thong Says:

    If that’s her current stance, then it’s something I can understand. It would be preferable if the baby could be allowed to live – as Mother Teresa said, “If you do not want him, give him to me” – and what wrong did the baby do to deserve its life being ended? Isn’t being punished for who your father was the epitome of discrimination?

    But at the same time, we must account for the girl who is bearing the baby. I suppose you could compare Palin’s reported stance on abortion to her stance on gay marriage – she is personally opposed to it, yet did not deny coverage for same-sex partners when she had the chance to veto.

    Btw, is it pathetic that many on the Right looks to Palin as the champion of their cause? Isn’t there anyone more qualified and mainstream (way higher ratio of character assassination attempts on her aside) to carry the Conservative banner? Sady, that sums up what Conservatives find lacking with the GOP right now.

  5. Ron Says:

    “Isn’t being punished for who your father was the epitome of discrimination?”

    Well, not according to the Bible:

    For I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. (Deuteronomy 5:9)

    A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD. (Deuteronomy 23:2)

    Seems God has issues with letting bygones be bygones.

  6. Cosmic Condor Says:

    ABORTION IS JUST ANOTHER WORD FOR MURDER

  7. Scott Thong Says:

    For I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. (Deuteronomy 5:9)

    A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD. (Deuteronomy 23:2) – Ron

    Deut 5:10 continues with blessings for a thousand generations for those who love the LORD. Note too that if any one generation stops hating/loving the LORD, the punishment/blessing can be immediately ceased (or flipped into the antipode if the generation starts loving/hating instead). This lines up with Ezekiel 18:20 ‘The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son’.

    Deut 23:1-8 is a list of who can enter a certain group – whether it is a large (e.g. all Israel) or exclusive (e.g. elders or leaders) group is uncertain. The reason for this is either a figurative issue (imperfection excluded from God’s holy presence in the temple) or political (those excluded all can be interpretated as having foreign allegiances/influences, see http://biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/Biblequestions/God%20Undeserving.htm for details).

  8. Ron Says:

    The passage in Ezekiel addresses only the sharing of guilt, but says nothing that negates the ‘visiting the iniquities of the father’ part. And no matter how you slice it, the second passage clearly states an illegitimate child (plus ten generations of his descendants) are persona non grata in God’s eyes. So a child born of rape (illegitimate) would indeed be punished for the sins of his father (the rapist).

    According to Bob Marshall (Republican – Virginia House of Delegates):

    “Disabled children are God’s punishment to women who have aborted their first pregnancy. The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children.”

    http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1894168

  9. Scott Thong Says:

    Under the OT code, perhaps it can be interpreted as casting a wide net rather than a specific role. But the NT code specifically encompasses all people, so I believe that covers lineage as well.

    Any declaration of punishment due to so-and-so tends to be easily debunked by just a couple of examples contrary to the thesis.

    However, Boobquake was apparently proven to be true:

    http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/World/Story/A1Story20100428-213019.html

    But various competing theories tell me that voodoo, the CIA or global warming are the real culprits, so there ya go.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: