It had to happen. If it was successful in NY, it would be attempted in other states..
Read at LifeSite about a bill in Virginia that would allow abortion even at the point of giving birth. Good heavens… is “abortion” even the right word at that point.
Known as the Repeal Act, Virginia House Bill 2491 would eliminate current restrictions on late-term abortions.
According to the bill’s summary, the proposed law:
-
Eliminates the requirement that an abortion in the second trimester of pregnancy and prior to the third trimester be performed in a hospital.
-
The bill eliminates all the procedures and processes, including the performance of an ultrasound, required to effect a woman’s informed written consent to the performance of an abortion; however, the bill does not change the requirement that a woman’s informed written consent be first obtained.
-
The bill eliminates the requirement that two other physicians certify that a third trimester abortion is necessary to prevent the woman’s death or impairment of her mental or physical health, as well as the need to find that any such impairment to the woman’s health would be substantial and irremediable.
-
The bill also removes language classifying facilities that perform five or more first-trimester abortions per month as hospitals for the purpose of complying with regulations establishing minimum standards for hospitals.
Loading ...
The subtitle of this bill is Ruth Bader is almost kaput, and so is Roe v Wade.
They are moving to ensure abortion on demand in NY if Roe is overturned.
Father Z, I can’t believe what I am seeing and hearing. This is horrible.
I’m a lifelong Virginian and completely dismayed by this proposal in the Old Dominion. Even more grievous is Governor Ralph Northam’s full backing of this bill. The governor is also a pediatric neurologist who was once a colleague of my husband’s. He knows better than most the development and viability of a fetus in the third trimester.
That is how politics work, expect a lot of states to follow New York’s lead.
Other states are already following New York, the same bill is being pushed in New Mexico, Rhode Island and a couple of other states. People can show up to speak against them. If enough people show up to speak against it then it can be blocked, it’s worked before. Keep offering up rosaries that they get blocked/removed and as reparation for the evil, the power of the rosary and our Lady’s intercession cannot be defeated!
A very quick search finds this, from http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/…/acprof-9780199654543-chapter-12
“The right to destroy is an inherent component of the right to property. It has traditionally been called the jus abutendi: the right to consume, transform, and abuse. … International law is beginning to craft exceptions to the right to destroy in certain situations.”
It seems to me, that since what is being destroyed here is a human being what is being implicitly claimed is an ownership of that human being; i.e., slavery.
The last I knew, slavery was prohibited by the 13th Amendment.
Is this different from what they used to call “partial-birth abortion”, or is that name out of fashion…?
from CCC
II. RESPECT FOR THE DIGNITY OF PERSONS
Respect for the souls of others: scandal
2284 Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.
2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”86 Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing.87
2286 Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion.
Therefore, they are guilty of scandal who establish laws or social structures leading to the decline of morals and the corruption of religious practice, or to “social conditions that, intentionally or not, make Christian conduct and obedience to the Commandments difficult and practically impossible.”88 This is also true of business leaders who make rules encouraging fraud, teachers who provoke their children to anger,89 or manipulators of public opinion who turn it away from moral values.
2287 Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged. “Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come!”90
Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us.
It appears Rhode Island’s (c)atholic governor intends to do the same.
I think canonists often forget that while excommunication is a medicinal penalty, designed to point out to a soul their grevious error and draw it back to the church, there is a secondary aspect to medicine. It can help prevent infection.
One aspect of any penalty is its preventative nature. If people see at least some being seriously punished, fewer will risk it.
By not administratively declaring or by means of trial punishing Catholics who not just promote, but facilitate abortion (and the most gruesome kind), others will eventually disbelieve the church is serious, and will be encouraged to dive deeper into the Satanic mess.
Cuomo may not be drawn back by excommunication, but if it makes others reconsider, even briefly because of the bad press, and sends a clear message, it would be worth it, I think.
If nothing continues to be done : qui tacit consentire videtur. The bishops by their inaction will bear part of the responsibility for how many murders?
Were I a bishop, God forbid, I would mark Msgr Morlino’s words about the onus of the episcopacy, and fear that if I didn’t stand up in the face of this stuff, I’d end up right next to these minions of Lucifer in hell. For the sake of their own souls when will the bishops man up?
Usquequo, Domine?
—Good heavens… is “abortion” even the right word at that point.—
Of course it isn’t. But this does demonstrate that abortion was never about, “My body, my choice.” It seems that even after the umbilical cord is cut (i.e. there are TWO individual bodies), murdering the new child still remains to be the primary mission…..as it always has been.
We knew that all along.
Kent Wendler: Thanks, interesting point about the 13th Amendment. Though in retaliation the Party of Death would probably weaponize the exception clause (“…except as a punishment for crime…”) and declare “fetuses” not merely a “womyn’s health” issue but also a “crime of toxic masculinity.”
robtbrown: Good point.
The GOP has ample room for improvement, but the Party of Death, per Hosea, is sowing the wind with monstrosities and may reap the whirlwind.
This is the response to the governor from Bishop Burbidge of Arlington, Virginia, one of two Catholic bishops in the state. Thank you, bishop Burbidge!
https://www.catholicherald.com/Faith/Bishop_Burbidge/Bishop_Burbidge_responds_to_Governor_Northam_s_extreme_abortion_comments/
Thankfully this did not pass in Virginia —THIS time. It will be back because evil never gives up.
The woman that introduced this terrible bill introduced another bill that afternoon to save a particular kind of caterpillar from extinction. Strange priorities.
Thank you for your comment Father Andrew.
“Were I a bishop, God forbid, I would mark Msgr Morlino’s words about the onus of the episcopacy, and fear that if I didn’t stand up in the face of this stuff, I’d end up right next to these minions of Lucifer in hell. For the sake of their own souls when will the bishops man up?”