Posted on August 15, 2026
Blue States, Black Hearts
Abortion refutes liberal kindness
by
Daniel Clark
Next time you
see a liberal yard sign instructing passersby to "be kind," give a thought to
Baby Gabriel, and the many others like him who are not as fortunate. Gabriel is a surrogate child, whose
biological parents in California had demanded that he be aborted in that state
because he has an underdeveloped heart.
The ailment, though very serious, is treatable with a series of
surgeries over several years.
At the time this disease was
diagnosed, around 22 weeks, the abortion procedure that would have been used is
called "dilation and evacuation," in which the abortionist injects a drug
called digoxin directly into the baby's heart, causing it to die of cardiac
arrest. He then uses a forceps to twist
and pull the limbs from the trunk, removing the body piecemeal. Rather than comply with this, the surrogate
mother from Alaska fled to give birth in Texas, where Gabriel would be able to
receive the first of his needed surgeries.
During the
same week that this was unfolding, Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey signed a
law allowing abortions to be done in her state all the way through the ninth
month of pregnancy, for any reason or none at all. At the event, she surrounded herself with
feminists pretending to represent women, who all smiled while applauding the
signing. One woman in the middle even
laughed.
Massachusetts
has joined nine other states (eight of which fall solidly in the "blue"
category) in their pro-abortion absolutism.
Proponents claim these laws are necessary because of complications that
arise late in pregnancy, but they never explain how it might benefit a mother's
health to kill a viable baby in her womb, rather than take it out alive and
give it a fighting chance at survival. Even
if such a scenario existed, and the baby had to be killed in order to protect
the mother, that would be nothing to clap and giggle about. There's no disputing the need for an abortion
in the tragic case of a first-trimester ectopic pregnancy, for example, but
only a ghoul would celebrate it.
The anecdotal
evidence that is meant to demonstrate a need for late-term abortion invariably reveals
that the complications to which it refers are fetal abnormalities, or the
potential for such. If tests indicate
that an unborn baby might have Down syndrome, for instance, that is presented
as if it medically necessitates an abortion.
The issue here is not maternal health.
It is that the parents don't want to care for a disabled child, which would
be perfectly understandable if not for the fact that the child already exists.
Once a pregnancy is far enough
along for a fetal illness to be diagnosed, feigning ignorance of when life
begins is no longer rhetorically effective.
Anybody can see that a person must first be alive in order to have a
heart condition, but good luck wringing so much as a dram of kindness for that
person out of a liberal Democrat like Gov. Healey.
Back in
the Nineties, President Bill Clinton twice vetoed legislative bans on partial-birth
abortion, a practice that was finally prohibited when the bill was passed a
third time, and signed into law by President George W. Bush. In a partial-birth (or "dilation and extraction")
abortion, the abortionist forces a partial breech birth so that only the baby's
head remains inside, punctures the base of the skull with a pair of scissors, and
then opens the scissors so that he can fit a catheter into the opening and
vacuum out the brain. Even the very
liberal, generally pro-abortion American Medical Association stated that this
procedure is "never medically indicated."
Yet too few congressional Democrats were sufficiently horrified by it to
override either of Clinton's vetoes.
Needless to say, this is a kind of death that very few of us would ever
wish upon even the most sadistic serial killer. Unlike a murderer, however, an
unwanted baby does not qualify for liberal kindness.
Although
Clinton defended his actions with the bald-faced lie that the ban threatened to
"tear women to shreds," the abortion advocates who testified at congressional
hearings affirmed that the complications involved were fetal defects. One after another, they challenged the
veracity of the diagrams of the procedure that were introduced by the bill's
sponsors by declaring, in an obviously orchestrated talking point, "These are
not perfect Gerber babies." Oh, they're not
perfect? Then we'll just have to
kill them in the grisliest manner imaginable, won't we?
with
kindness, of course.
The Shinbone: The
Frontier of the Free Press