Last updated on April 1st, 2022 at 09:47 am<\/p>\n
California Governor Gavin Newsom fancies himself a future presidential candidate and is doing what he can to appeal to the radical \u201cprogressive\u201d base of the Democrat party that plays such an outsized role in national Democrat politics. He apparently thinks that abortion is his golden ticket to the White House, especially in light of the likelihood that the US Supreme Court may overturn, or substantially pare back, it\u2019s hotly-disputed creation of a \u201cright\u201d to abortion established in its decades-old Roe v Wade<\/em> and Planned Parenthood v Casey<\/em> decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Polls show that Democrats overwhelmingly support abortion as a constitutional right, so Newsom is moving to position California as a \u201csanctuary state\u201d when it comes to promoting abortion. He\u2019s formed a \u201cCalifornia Future Of Abortion Council\u201d to develop proposals to not only ensure the continued availability of abortion in California \u2013 for residents and nonresidents alike \u2013 but to vastly expand so-called reproductive rights to include abortion even after birth. In other words, infanticide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Under legislation (Assembly Bill 2223) to implement one of Newsom\u2019s abortion Council\u2019s recommendations, \u201cpregnant persons\u201d (otherwise known as women) would be protected from criminal or civil penalties for any \u201cactions or omissions\u201d related to her pregnancy, \u201cincluding miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion, or perinatal death.\u201d Not only that, anyone who \u201caids or assists\u201d a woman in exercising her \u201crights\u201d under the legislation is absolved of any liability. Further, if a law enforcement officer or other authority were to arrest or charge someone with a crime related to an act protected by the legislation, the officer could be personally sued and damages awarded against the officer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What is going on here? It\u2019s one thing to protect a woman\u2019s \u201cright\u201d to abortion, it\u2019s another thing entirely to extend that \u201cright\u201d to a child that has already been born.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Whether AB 2223 authorizes infanticide hinges on the meaning of \u201cperinatal death.\u201d Tellingly, the legislation itself does not define the term so we are left to other definitional sources. While medical definitions vary, all of them include the death of newborns up to seven days after birth. Thus, it would seem clear that \u2013 absent a Court ruling to the contrary \u2013 under the provisions of AB 2223 a baby born alive could be killed for up to seven days, and perhaps longer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Keep in mind that in California a woman has the right to abort her child for any reason, or no reason at all, through the entirety of her pregnancy as long as she claims doing so is necessary to protect her mental or physical health. AB 2223 would eliminate the \u201chealth exception\u201d entirely and extend this expanded right to \u201cterminate\u201d children seven days old or maybe even older. So, a woman could give birth to a healthy baby but maybe there\u2019s something about the child that bothers her. Perhaps its skin color is too dark, or too light. Or its eyes look slanted, or not slanted enough. Maybe the child cries too much. Or the baby is a girl and the woman wanted a boy, or vice versa. Perhaps the child is born with a condition that will require future medical care. Or maybe the woman is suffering from post-partum depression and no longer desires to be a mother. All of these circumstances, and any other reason (or no reason at all) would seem to give rise to legal protection for the woman \u2013 and anyone she selects to \u201caid or assist\u201d \u2013 to kill the child and thus have it suffer a \u201cperinatal death.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n I have a hard time believing that progressive Democrats are down with killing a defenseless newborn child because of a mindless commitment to a \u201cwoman\u2019s right to choose.\u201d As a Californian, I\u2019ve followed Gavin Newsom\u2019s career in public office for many years \u2013 from a local Supervisor to San Francisco Mayor to Lt. Governor and now as Governor. It\u2019s my view that he won\u2019t wear well on the national stage. The guy oozes arrogance, condescension and insincerity. He makes Kamala Harris with her incessant cackling and smirks look like Margaret Thatcher. But regardless of whether turning California into a sanctuary state for abortion is good politics or not for Newsom, there\u2019s something far more important here about his Future of Abortion Council legislation, AB 2223.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s about whether we want to live in a civilized society any longer, a society where human beings are entitled to certain rights and protections under our national and state Constitutions and laws, or whether things like a newborn child\u2019s right to life can be sacrificed to expediency, political or otherwise. I pray there is still some semblance of decency left among California\u2019s Democrat elected officials and they defeat AB 2223.<\/p>\n\n\n\n May God have mercy on my state, and our nation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Under legislation sponsored by Gavin Newsom’s Future of Abortion Council, a woman could give birth to a baby and still “abort” it. Perhaps the child’s skin color is too dark, or too light. Or its eyes look slanted, or not slanted enough. Or the baby is a girl and the woman wanted a boy, or vice versa.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":35,"featured_media":134176,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"give_campaign_id":0,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"mc4wp_mailchimp_campaign":[],"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":{"subtitle":"","format":"standard","video":"","gallery":"","source_name":"","source_url":"","via_name":"","via_url":"","override":[{"template":"1","single_blog_custom":"","parallax":"1","fullscreen":"1","layout":"right-sidebar","sidebar":"default-sidebar","second_sidebar":"default-sidebar","sticky_sidebar":"1","share_position":"top","share_float_style":"share-monocrhome","show_share_counter":"1","show_view_counter":"1","show_featured":"1","show_post_meta":"1","show_post_author":"1","show_post_author_image":"1","show_post_date":"1","post_date_format":"default","post_date_format_custom":"Y\/m\/d","show_post_category":"1","post_reading_time_wpm":"300","zoom_button_out_step":"2","zoom_button_in_step":"3","show_post_tag":"1","show_prev_next_post":"1","show_popup_post":"1","number_popup_post":"1"}],"image_override":[{"single_post_thumbnail_size":"crop-500","single_post_gallery_size":"crop-500"}],"trending_post_position":"meta","trending_post_label":"Trending","sponsored_post_label":"Sponsored by","sponsored_post_name":"","sponsored_post_url":"","sponsored_post_logo":"","sponsored_post_desc":""},"jnews_primary_category":{"id":""},"jnews_social_meta":{"fb_title":"","fb_description":"","fb_image":"","twitter_title":"","twitter_description":"","twitter_image":""},"jnews_override_counter":{"view_counter_number":"0","share_counter_number":"0","like_counter_number":"0","dislike_counter_number":"0"},"footnotes":""},"categories":[804,805,808],"tags":[17879,475,9330,5725,5211,17880],"class_list":["post-134175","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-breaking-news","category-foreground","category-life","tag-ab-2223","tag-abortion","tag-gavin-newsom","tag-infanticide","tag-kamala-harris","tag-sanctuary-state"],"yoast_head":"\n