Pages

Monday, November 9, 2015

Abortionists only want to preserve fetal tissue if they get paid for it

Screenshot from an undercover investigation on abortion centers' failure to report child rape

The Center for Medical Progress undercover videos make one thing abundantly clear: abortionists commonly preserve the remains of abortion victims. Whether you believe this practice has been conducted legally or illegally, there's no question that it happens regularly.

The abortion lobby would have you believe that the preservation of fetal tissue is a good thing, and that research on fetal tissue will one day yield cures for serious diseases. It's not about wanting a Lamborghini. It's all for a good cause.

Turns out, they're considerably less altruistic when the good cause is preventing child exploitation.

Oklahoma passed legislation requiring abortionists to take fetal tissue samples from all abortions where the mother is younger than 14, and send those samples to law enforcement to investigate rape. When a girl that young becomes pregnant, it's a good bet that a same-age classmate is not the father. In the vast majority of such cases, the pregnancies are caused by predatory adults. We've seen time and time again that statutory rapists use abortion to cover up their crimes, and abortion centers turn a blind eye. By requiring abortionists to preserve DNA evidence, Oklahoma aims to close a dangerous loophole.

The law would have gone into effect yesterday if not for a lawsuit by the "feminist" Center for Reproductive Rights, on behalf of Oklahoma abortionist Larry Burns. The Center for Reproductive Rights describes its client as "a physician with over 42 years of experience providing safe abortion care in Oklahoma." In fact, he's settled several malpractice lawsuits out of court.

In their press release, they claim that the law targets "health care providers with onerous criminal penalties simply because they provide abortion services." But in the actual lawsuit, they rely on a purported technicality: they claim that the fetal tissue preservation requirement should have been passed as a separate law, and not together with other abortion regulations.

If the Center for Reproductive Rights had wanted to only challenge the other abortion regulations, they could have. By including the fetal tissue preservation requirement in their lawsuit, they made their position clear: abortionists shouldn't have to produce evidence that could put away child rapists. Fetal tissue preservation is wonderful—but only when abortionists get paid for it.

No comments: