Pro-life Rhode Islanders are mobilizing in the state to stop a horrifying abortion bill that would legalize the fatal procedure up to the moment of birth, following in the footsteps of recent New York legislation euphemistically named the Reproductive Health Act.
Appearing at a hearing last week concerning Rhode Island's Senate Bill 152, one of the many young pro-life youths expressing opposition to the legislation tackled the Left's common and disingenuous abortion talking points. The young man took on issues ranging from Planned Parenthood's sketchy founding to the Left's insistence that men are not allowed to have an opinion on "reproductive rights."
The young man first called out the coordinated effort of Democrats to pass radical abortion bills, such as New York's passed Reproductive Health Act and Virginia's proposed bill to similarly pass abortion-till-birth. "I found it to be uncanny parallel political thinking when three states can introduce a very similar bill within a span of two months directly after a midterm election," he said, adding: "This bill was not ran on; the concept of pro-choice was ran on. This bill takes Roe v. Wade and expands it to a point ... where we don't know what the repercussions of that on our society are."
"This seems like a calculated attack on life by the DNC in all of their states," he added.
He also questioned Planned Parenthood's motives and the organization's suspect founding grounded in eugenics — led by Margaret Sanger. "Now we're told that the organization has changed; it's new people, they don't think that anymore," he said. "Yet, what is all of this that we're seeing now? They're saying, 'Oh, we’re compassionate because we don't want the poor family to have the baby.' Before it was hatred: 'We didn’t want the poor people to have the babies because we thought they weren't good for society.' But, now, now, we're so loving: 'We don’t want them to have the babies because it’s not good for them. The baby won't be happy; the baby will have a poor quality of life.'"
Questioning the broad "women's health" talking point, the man noted that an Ob/Gyn made the "preposterous claim" that "as a doctor, he doesn’t know when a woman’s healthy, only the woman knows."
Lastly, the young man ridiculed the notion that men are to shut up over such a basic human rights violation as abortion because of their sex:
Men are told that we can’t talk. That when the children are dying, that when we see these things happening, we have to sit down and be quiet. Yet, we have the same gumption to look back into civilizations that commit genocide and say, "Where were you? Why weren’t you standing up? Where were all the people in Nazi Germany?" Well, I wonder if maybe people will look back on us that way and say, "Where were all the people standing up?" We were told that we didn’t have voices, we were told that we didn’t even know morality. As men, we couldn’t speak out about our children.
As noted by LifeNews, "Senate Bill 152 would allow unborn babies to be aborted for basically any reason up to birth, even if Roe v. Wade is overturned, and strike down modest abortion restrictions in the state." The bill is supposed to act as an insurance policy for abortion-on-demand in the state if Roe v. Wade is overturned.
"Though the bill easily passed the state House, its fate is less certain in the state Senate, the Providence Journal reports. Support for unborn babies’ rights is growing, and polls consistently show that most Americans oppose late-term abortions," noted the site. "The state Senate Judiciary Committee appears to be narrowly divided on the bill, and it has not scheduled a vote, according to the report. Five of the nine members appear to support the pro-abortion legislation, but the report identified freshman Sen. Mark McKenny of Warwick as a possible swing vote."