Tag Archives: Trent Franks

Proggies enraged: House passes 20-week abortion ban, with Trump White House support

baby at 20 weeks

A baby at 20 weeks, from BabyCenter.com:

“Your baby weighs about 10 1/2 ounces now. He’s also around 6 1/2 inches long from head to bottom and about 10 inches from head to heel – about the length of a large banana. Your baby is swallowing more these days, which is good practice for his digestive system. He’s also producing meconium, a black, sticky by-product of digestion. This gooey substance will accumulate in his bowels, and you’ll see it in his first soiled diaper. “

From TheBump.com:

Your 20-week fetus now has working taste buds. He or she is gulping down several ounces of amniotic fluid each day—that’s significantly more than before. If you haven’t already had your mid-pregnancy ultrasound, you will very soon, since this prenatal test happens between weeks 18 and 22. This is a detailed 20-week ultrasound—you’ll see parts of baby you might not have dreamed possible, including the chambers of his or her heart, the kidneys, and the brain hemispheres. The technician will also likely be able to tell you baby’s gender, so let them know if you want to find out if you’re having a boy or a girl.”

But, but…reproductive rights!!!!!

From Fox News: The Republican-controlled House on Tuesday approved a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy — a measure backed by the Trump White House but still facing long odds in the Senate. The measure passed 237 to 189.

“So often we get caught up in the policies of this issue and we forget that these are babies, for goodness sake,” Alabama Republican Rep. Martha Roby said in a speech on the House floor. “They feel pain and we need to protect them.”

The measure faced strong opposition from abortion-rights lawmakers.

“When abortion is banned, it does not go away,” Oregon Democratic Rep. Suzanne Bonamici said on the floor before the vote. “It drives women to unsafe back alleys and to dangerous self-induced abortion.”

The White House said Monday that it “strongly supports” the efforts to “secure critical pro-life protections” and that the bill provides children with the “stronger protections” they deserve.

“The bill, if enacted into law, would help to facilitate the culture of life to which our Nation aspires,” the White House also said in a statement. “Additionally, the bill would promote a science-based approach to unborn life, as recent advancements have revealed that the physical structures necessary to experience pain are developed within 20 weeks of fertilization.”

The measure, if enacted into law, would allow the procedure after 20 weeks in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother and would not penalize women. However, it would criminalize other abortions after 20 weeks and punish abortion providers with a maximum five-year jail sentence.

The landmark 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade protects women’s right to have an abortion. However, more than a dozen states now ban them after 20 weeks.

“It’s science: unborn babies feel pain by at least 20 weeks. Late, dismemberment abortions are too extreme for America. #TheyFeelPain,” bill sponsor Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., tweeted ahead of the vote Monday.

Franks’ bill enjoyed the support of fellow conservatives in the GOP conference and from the influential Susan B. Anthony List pro-life group.

However, the bill needs the unlikely support of at least eight Democrats to pass in the narrowly GOP-controlled Senate.

South Carolina GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham has companion legislation that could be introduced as early as Tuesday, a congressional source told Fox News.

Senate Democrats rejected a similar House bill in 2015.

“20 week abortion bans are: unpopular, unconstitutional, part of the agenda to ban ALL abortion,” tweeted Planned Parenthood.



House Democrats defeat bill to outlaw sex-select abortion

If you were to ask me to single out one attribute that most describes liberals/Democrats/Progressives the Left, my answer would be:


The Left say they’re pro-woman — “feminists” — which is why they are in favor of the woman “exercising choice” over “her body”, which are code words for letting women be the sole arbiters as to whether the human life growing in a woman’s womb be allowed to live or die.

Here’s why their so-called “pro-woman” stance on abortion is a crock of horse manure —

Sex-select or gender-based abortion is rampant in China and India. In China’s case, sex-select abortion is an unintended consequence of the Communist Party government’s one-child-per-couple “population control” policy. To qualify, the sex-select part is an unintended consequence; the abortions are not just wholly intended consequences, they are mandated by the state for any woman who’s already had the one allowed child. In the case of India, the government does not restrict Indians to only one child. Abortions are voluntary, not state-coerced, acts.

In both countries, however, traditional culture values males more than females. And so, sex-select abortions in practice mean that, more often than not, it is females who are aborted.

That is gendercide.

The graph below shows the results of sex-select abortions in China and India. Note that the natural worldwide male-to-female birth ratio is 105 to 100. The grossly skewed ratios of nearly 125 to 100 in N.W. India and China are a window on the millions of female babies who are aborted.

In the United States, too, sex-select abortion targets female unborn, especially among immigrants from Third World countries. At least one poll has found 77% of Americans opposing the practice.

One would think that the Left, given their supposed pro-woman stance, would be opposed to sex-select abortion.

Not so.

Yesterday, a bill sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks (R-Arizona), to outlaw sex-select abortion in the United States was defeated in the U.S. House of Representatives.

LifeSiteNews reports, May 31, 2012, that despite a strong majority (246 v. 168), H.R. 3541, the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA), failed to gain the two-thirds margin of support (i.e., 290 votes) needed for passage. The bill would make it a federal offense to knowingly perform a sex-selection abortion or coerce a woman into such a procedure, or to transport a woman across state lines or into the United States to obtain a sex-selection abortion. The woman herself is not liable for prosecution.

Republicans voted overwhelmingly in favor of the ban on sex-select abortion: 226 voted “yea”; 7 voted “no”. The seven Republicans who voted “no” are:

  • Justin Amash (Michigan)
  • Charles Bass (NH)
  • Mary Bono Mack (Calif.)
  • Bob Dold (Illinois)
  • Richard Hana (NY)
  • Nan Hayworth (NY)
  • Ron Paul* (Texas)

In contrast, the majority of Democrats — 161 in all — voted “no”, which means they voted in favor of sex-select abortion. Only 20 Democrats (Altmire, Barrow, Boren, Cooper, Costello, Critz, Cuellar, Donnelly, Garamendi, Holden, Kissell, Lipinksi, Lynch, Matheson, McIntyre, Peterson, Rahall, Reyes, Ross of AR, and Shuler) voted “yea”.

8 Republicans and 9 Democrats were absent.

*Ron Paul’s reason for opposing HR 3541 is because the bill is unconstitutional. He argues: “Congress’s jurisdiction is limited to those areas specified in the Constitution. Nowhere in that document is Congress given any authority to address abortion in any manner. Until 1973, when the Supreme Court usurped the authority of the States in the Roe v. Wade decision, no one believed or argued abortion was a Federal issue.”

A day before the House vote, Barack Obama announced his opposition to the bill. Another prominent opponent of the bill is Planned Parenthood (PP), which was caught on video published this week encouraging sex-selection abortions in Texas and New York. PP says it opposes “gender bias” but confirmed it does perform sex-selection abortions upon request. In a press release Thursday, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) warned legislators that it would score the PRENDA vote as a vote against “women’s health.”

So, the next time some liberal-Democrat-Progressive leftist proclaims she or he is “pro-choice”, ask them about all the female babies who will be aborted because the majority of Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives voted against a bill that would outlaw GENDERCIDE in America.

H/t FOTM’s beloved Grouchy Fogie.


Lesbian Episcopal priest calls abortion “a blessing”

Katherine Hancock Ragsdale

Remember this face. It is the face of evil, although she wears a clerical collar.

Her name is Katherine Hancock Ragsdale. Her title is “Very Reverend” [gag]. She’s a lesbian Episcopal priest, and the president and professor of theology of the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Mass.

Penny Starr reports for CNS News, March 8, 2012, that Ragsdale testified at a House hearing against a bill that would make it a federal crime to transport minor girls without parental consent across state lines to get an abortion. Ragsdale said she would break the law to help minors cross state lines to kill the unborn human lives in the girls’ wombs.

Appearing as a Democratic Party witness at a hearing of the House Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution chaired by Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), Ragsdale recalled the time she took a 15-year-old girl she had never met before to get an abortion:

“Although New Hampshire was closer to that girl’s home than Boston, as it happened, I did not take her across state lines. Nor did I, to my knowledge, break any laws. But if either of those things had been necessary in order to help her, I would have done them. And if helping young women like her should be made illegal I will, nonetheless, continue to do it.”

Ragsdale cited her vows as an Episcopal priest as the reason why she would “have no choice” but to break the law.

Ragsdale, a lesbian, is well known for her activism for homosexual and abortion rights. At a Jan. 24, 2010 event organized by the Jane Fund, a Massachusetts-based group that raises funds for abortions, Ragsdale delivered a speech in which she said she was “angry and fed up” at people who had spoken out again her sexuality and her radical stance on abortion:

“When a woman gets pregnant against her will and wants an abortion – it’s the violence that is the tragedy; the abortion is a blessing.

When a woman might want to bear and raise a child but fears she can’t afford to because she doesn’t have access to healthcare or daycare or enough income to provide a home —it’s the lack of justice that is the tragedy; the abortion is a blessing.

When a woman has planned and provided for a pregnancy, decorated the nursery and chosen a name, and, in the last weeks, discovers that her fetus will not live to become a baby, that it has anomalies incompatible with life, and that preserving her own life and health, and sparing the fetus suffering, require a late-term abortion – it’s  the loss of her hopes and dreams that is the tragedy; the abortion is a blessing.

And, and here’s one that really gets me in trouble, when a woman simply gets pregnant unintentionally and decides this is not a good time for her to bear and care for a child – there is no tragedy. The ability to enjoy healthy sexuality without risking a pregnancy that could derail her education or career, the development or exercise of the gifts God has given her, is a blessing.

Now just in case there are any aspiring headline writers listening – let me be clear – motherhood also is a gift and a ministry and a blessing – but not for everyone, and not always right now.

Abortion is a blessing – sometimes a joyful relief; sometimes a painful choice – but a blessing still.”

In that same speech, Ragsdale also said that Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, gave women “freedom from slavery to our reproductive systems.”

See also:


GOP Talks Impeachment

Ben Johnson of The White House Watch reports, July 9, 2011, that Obama’s threat to bypass Congress and raise the debt ceiling has stirred significant talk of impeachment — and not just on talk radio. Republican Congressman Pete Olson of Texas has confirmed some of his colleagues are talking about initiating impeachment hearings.

Scott Keyes of ThinkProgress.org asked Rep. Olson: “Congressman Tim Scott of South Carolina yesterday in a town hall said if President Obama were to just ignore the debt ceiling, then he might be favoring bringing up articles of impeachment. Is that something that you’ve heard discussed much among your colleagues?”

Olson replied, “A little bit,” then quickly pivoted to repeating talking points about the debt ceiling. So Think Progress’s Lee Fang followed up: “So Congressman Scott, is he just a lonely voice or are there a large number of people who are talking about this?”

Olson answered, “He’s not a lonely voice.”

Congressman Olson’s statement confirms that a number of Congressmen are discussing a motion to remove Barack Obama from office. Tim Scott is not the first member of the present Congress to raise impeachment. There are other examples:

Click here to sign the petition to impeach Obama. Click here to learn more about the Impeach Obama Campaign.

H/t Tony Caputo.