The Born Alive Infants Protection Act shouldn’t even be necessary, but in our post Roe v. Wade culture of death, it is. It exposes the ultimate contradiction at the hear of the pro-abortionists world view. The decision to abort always separates some little human beings from others by mere act of petty human will. That’s just not fair. Why are we aren’t we protecting the lives of all babies? Whether their mothers want them or not.

The most puzzling lie of all comes from an AP story about this issue.

“The House voted today to define a fetus that is fully outside a woman’s body as having been born alive, which would give the fetus legal protection”

The pro-abortionists have always told us it’s a fetus until it comes out of the mother. Now they want to call it a fetus even after it has come out of the mother?

Our country is in a sad state of affairs when we need another law that outlaws infanticide. We shouldn’t need this law, but the radical pro-abortion agenda makes it necessary. It’s common sense, if a baby is alive when it emerges from the womb, it’s no longer a "fetus" that can be disposed of. Pro-abortionists want to be able to kill (or let die) an infant born alive after a botched abortion. That can’t be allowed in this country, even when Roe v. Wade is still the law of the land.

The House bill doesn’t even mention fetuses, but the American press shows their pro-abortion bias again. Since when is a baby that has already been born, not "partially born," been considered a fetus? The AP article was inaccurate because it claims the legislation is aimed at restricting "partial-birth" abortions. That’s just not true. Maybe they should have taken the time to look the bill up on Thomas.gov?