The Party of Death: Iowa Dem says colicky (crying) baby is reason for abortion

From LifeSite:

The Iowa House of Representatives passed a bill recently to ban telemed abortions – abortions done with the dangerous RU 486 drug where the abortion clinic prevents a woman from seeing the doctor in person.

During the debate on the pro-life measure, one Democratic legislator suggested that a colic, crying baby is a good reason for an abortion. Pro-choice? No, here’s the definition of abortion on demand.

From a local news source (video below):


In particular, longtime abortion proponent Beth Wessel-Kroeschell of Ames railed against House Republicans for advancing the legislation. She also read off a laundry list of inconveniences a baby would cause for women, including colic. Colic is an infant crying for more than three hours per day.

Wessel-Kroeschell has been dubbed a “champion” for abortion by Planned Parenthood. She was clearly advocating for abortion as a form of birth control while speaking on the House floor.

Ain’t she a peach?

Some video of this charming example of the Democrat Platform:

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Emanations from Penumbras, Liberals, The Coming Storm, You must be joking! and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Dr. Edward Peters says:

    Good grief.

  2. Bea says:

    Colicky crying baby? That means it’s already been born.
    Next step infanticide?

  3. iPadre says:

    Those pushing this charge must be possessed by Legion. We all know that some women in situation do not think of the reality of the life within them during a crisis situation. However, no rational human being would reason like that woman in the video and other politicians. Our nation needs one big exorcism!

  4. benedetta says:

    That is the undisguised and hideous message in favor of abortion. Just kill already, no try, no hope, no parenting, no attempt. One hears this message underpinning so much of what the party of death stands for, here and now attempting to impose worldwide. Who are they to say the planet is better off without these children? How many high schoolers do you know are walking around with “colic”. Yeah. Party of Death.

  5. OrthodoxChick says:

    Well, they threw God out of their platform, why not infants? Disgusting. What’s terrifying is that half the country is behind them rather than recoiling in horror at the mere mention of such things.

  6. StJude says:

    Lord help us.

  7. Palladio says:

    “We as women know about babies.” “We know where our limits are.” Ergo, let women handle the unborn baby killing.

    That’s an argument?

  8. pannw says:

    @Bea, that was exactly what I thought when I read that.

    Anyone who supports that Party is taking a fast train to Hell. Yes, I judged. I also pray they jump off it before it goes into the abyss. God help us all.

  9. incredulous says:

    For thousands of years, Satan has been tricking women into undermining societies in their rebellion against authority. Same old story, only now with the technological capability to murder millions of people a year. And we ain’t seen nothing yet, baby…

  10. NBW says:

    Gosnell, Kroeschell, they think the same. Vote her OUT!!!

  11. frjim4321 says:

    That’s really not what she saying.

    She was advocating elective abortions which cannot be condoned.

  12. Mojoron says:

    I think the guy in the rear was playing poker on his screen, he wanted nothing to do with that imbecile.

  13. APX says:

    If you can’t/ aren’t prepared to raise a baby, I have a helpful tip for you…

    This isn’t difficult. The primary end of sex is procreation. If you don’t want procreation, don’t have sex.

  14. Juergensen says:

    Let me guess: she’s “Catholic” and receives the Eucharist on Sundays as her bishop doesn’t want to make the Communion rail a “battleground”.

  15. Jeannie_C says:

    I wonder if this woman had colic as a baby? Did she exhaust her mother keeping her up all night? Did she behave as babies tend to behave? If her mother had killed her for those reasons it would have been infanticide. But no, she lives, and she lives to justify the killing of unborn babies.

  16. frjim4321 says:

    The primary end of sex is procreation. APX

    Last time I checked basic Catholic teaching regarding marriage is that the unitive and procreative ends of marriage are equal.

  17. Lin says:

    SICK, SICK, SICK! And the sad thing is, there are many priests, religious, and Catholic laity who support the party of DEATH! Catechesis, catechesis, catechesis!

  18. benedetta says:

    frjim4321 says:
    12 February 2014 at 9:07 pm

    The primary end of sex is procreation. APX

    Last time I checked basic Catholic teaching regarding marriage is that the unitive and procreative ends of marriage are equal.

    But, Father Jim, your secular relativist liberal outlook must dictate that we are evolved animals whose instinct is to have sex and procreate?! Thus, the Party of Death cannot impose the moral values of the Catholic Church on the rest of the animalistic procreatively driven secular society?! Is not that the tenet of the Catholic-ish Democrats? I thought the procreative animal instinct that we are all unable to choose differently against is what justifies the Party of Death’s vociferous advocacy of abortion, and more of it, so much as possible for all everywhere situated. Remember Biden: “I understand” why you all who rule China want to have the forced sterilizations, the lots of abortions, the one child schtick.

  19. Bea says:


    “By its very nature the institution of marriage and married love is ordered to the procreation and education of the offspring and it is in them that it finds its’ crowning glory”

  20. Nicolas Bellord says:

    Goodness me what a nuisance babies are but are not adults even worse? Perhaps the whole human race should be put down.

  21. Kerry says:

    My Dear Beth Wessel-Kroeschell,
    Did your mother teach you that?
    Sincerely, K. H.,
    South Dakota

  22. A baby with colic is a baby in PAIN. A baby with something wrong with it, eg. gas, that is painful and making it cry.

    So instead of fixing the colic by altering the feeding routine and burping the baby, and perhaps sleeping him in a different position, or massaging him, you should kill him before he’s born.

    That way he has no pain from colic. Or anything else, for that matter.

    This is the same old argument that drives euthanasia – it prevents ‘suffering’, but the suffering it prevents is that of the person who is standing by, fit and healthy. It simply kills the person who is actually suffering.

  23. CatherineTherese says:

    Benedetta: How many high schoolers do you know are walking around with ‘colic.’
    Ha! I’m stealing this ;)

  24. Imrahil says:

    Seems that Chesterton’s remark is in place:

    The births we prevent may be the births of the best and most beautiful children; those we allow, the weakest or worst. […] Until I see a real pioneer and progressive leader coming out with a good, bold, scientific programme for drowning babies, I will not join the movement.

    [as, alas, all things need to be clarified: Of course Chesterton would not join the Birth-Control movement either if someone did proceed to officially advocating infanticide, but makes known his disgust with their even internal inconsistency and, as he says, cowardice. Forgive me for the dry clarification. It is only for those who would have wanted one.]

  25. benedetta says:

    Yeah, back to frjim4321’s whopper…how inspired by the procreative and unitive aspects in marriage between one man and one woman, according to the natural law has the Party of Death been over the past decades?? How does expanding Big Abortion serve that human dignity?? I do not think this Democratic politician had the procreative and unitive aspects of marriage in mind when she proposes abortion for anyone fearing a newborn with the colic.

  26. Imrahil says:

    Rev’d dear @Fr Jim,

    that is an academic question without relevance to concrete life. Now I happen to like academic questions without applicative relevance, but it means in this case that you have no basis for your contradiction of the dear @APX’s admonishment.

    Instead, granting by hypothesis that “primary” be technically incorrect – which is not clear at all -, you just, forgive the expression, nit-picked a technical error (as we assumed by hypothesis) in his words because you had nothing to say for a real contradiction.

    For whether or not we have “equal” or “primary” or perhaps “both”, the Church teaching obviously says that procreation is a and an inexcludable aim of marriage. That’s quite enough for the dear @APX to say, well, if you don’t want a child, don’t have sex.

  27. pmullane says:

    Ah yes, the Democraic Party Platform:

    “Hey you, yes you loser, you can never work, your too useless, just sit on your useless behind and we’ll give you money every week cause you cant work cause your useless. Pregnant? dont make me laugh. You cant be expected to raise a baby. What if its Colicy and your up 3 times a night listening to it screaming. You cant do that you failure, your not able. What if its disabled? Your not capable of bringing up a disabled kid by yourself. You cant be a mother you useless failure. here, take this pill and kill your baby because its better off dead than having to rely on you as a useless mother, you useless waste of space.”

  28. LarryW2LJ says:

    I pray for her repentance and conversion. Barring that, she WILL one day have to stand before her Creator and answer for her plans to thwart His design. I hope she wakes up, comes to realize what she is doing and begs for God’s forgiveness and mercy.

  29. eyeclinic says:

    Remember “It takes a village to raise a child…”. Wait…who said that…?

  30. robtbrown says:

    benedetta says:
    Yeah, back to frjim4321?s whopper…how inspired by the procreative and unitive aspects in marriage between one man and one woman,

    It seems more a non sequitur than a whopper (double, with cheese).

    The original statement said “the primary end of sex is procreation.” Fr Jim seems to have answered as if it had said “the primary end of sex is reproduction.”

    Because procreation only applies to rational creatures, the unitive aspect is not merely physical (cf reproduction). That is why the procreative and unitive goods of marriage cannot be separated.

  31. teomatteo says:

    “Because procreation only applies to rational creatures, the unitive aspect is not merely physical (cf reproduction)”

    Robt, you are saying that the meaning of ‘procreative’ is not equal to the word ‘reproductive’. That is good. I’ve been enlightened today.

  32. midwestmom says:

    I can explain this woman’s thinking. She’s envisioning the new norm of motherhood: single woman, no education, insufficient income, supported by the state, no reliable mate in the picture. So, yes, a crying baby becomes a huge inconvenience in an already dismal situation.

    What the state is doing to priests, it is doing the exact opposite for women. They are special creatures with excessive rights, including that of murder.

  33. Cosmos says:

    As noted above, she is not saying its fine to kill a colicky infant. She is saying its fine to abort any baby as a preventative measure to make sure that the mother doesn’t get overwhelmed. Colic was an example of the kind of thing that might overwhelm a mother.

    That is more than bad enough, even if its not “infanticide”!

    The answer is not catechesis! Ignorance is not the issue here. She needs to repent and believe!

  34. benedetta says:

    What “liberal” authoritarian paternalistic “Let US HELP YOU” Democrats have in mind when they speak this way is “Let us help you to …eliminate…” to alleviate your fear of colic in a new born for a month or two…or so…and further “Don’t make US deal with your disabled child” and further on…use our enhanced and expanded abortion services for elimination so much as possible. Do not give life and all life’s loves and adventures and hopes a second thought.

  35. benedetta says:

    When Pelosi and friends speak of abortion as a “sacrament” or “sacred” would that be similar to the way the Mayans or others effected ritual sacrifice of humans to an idol?

  36. Angie Mcs says:

    “Ain’t she a peach?”

    A rotten peach.

  37. Torpedo1 says:

    took the words right out of my mouth. The other thing I wanted to add is this. I think we’re suffering in this culture of death from a real disconnect from our own bodies, especially as women. I always tell the young students who work with me daily, that if I could give a talk to young women especially, about sex and their bodies I’d say this. Your body doesn’t know you aren’t married, it doesn’t know you aren’t even out of your parents home. It doesn’t know you have no independent financial support and it doesn’t stop and think about any of that. All it’s doing, is what it was designed to do and when you have sex without knowing anything about your cycle or anything like that, you have a chance at making a baby. I loved natural family planning for what it taught me about my own body, about it’s design and I love having that connection with myself and with what I am designed to do. In this culture, we treat our bodies as bags of meat, to be modified as we see fit in order to meet our out of control passions. we are grown-up children, toddlers who throw tantrums when we don’t get our way. May God have mercy on us for what we have done.
    Oh yeah, what she said about the people with learning disabilities… excuse me? Should I be killed because I’m blind? Should I have been killed by my parents when I was born three months premature and was hospatilized 4 times? When I had open-heart surgery at 6-weeks old? Did my mother, “know what her limits were?” did she just say, oh well, too hard. She’s going to die anyway and I’ve already got 2 other healthy kids at home? No. She sat in that hospital chapple, praying that I would live, and that if I didn’t, if it was God’s will to take me, that she knew there would be an angel in heaven watching over her. She never thought once that it would be too hard and she didn’t care how great the sacrifice was. Sorry, but that just makes me furious.

  38. Laura98 says:

    Just Wow!! So now, any baby that is an inconvenience should be aborted before it becomes that inconvenience? Well… my baby was pretty good… but those toddler years.. I tell ‘ya! ;) Ever try chasing a 2 year-old with a broken foot? Maybe I should’ve thought ahead – at least according to these Progs. *rolls eyes* And I agree with Torpedo1. It kind reminds me of Nazi eugenics programs (some of which were also practiced in America). We don’t want any imperfect babies/children now do we? Makes me sick too.

    Road to Perdition indeed…

  39. nykash says:

    I saw the headline earlier and was disgusted. So a baby has colic… the answer is to kill it? Has medical science advanced to the point where you can tell what might happen months or years later? Please. You cannot claim to love babies while sacrificing them on the altar of selfishness at the same time.

    My son had colic: there were months of sleepless nights, various tricks, and lots of crying. Anyone suggesting that we simply terminate him in utero (or after birth, which is the next step in the minds of liberals) would get a VERY clear response.

    The Democratic Party should rename itself The Devils Party… the war on God is clearly underway and being stepped up considerably.

  40. Sonshine135 says:

    Abortion has incrementally led to people having serious discussions over infanticide. Homosexuality has incrementally led to people having a serious discussions over pedophilia. All of those Catholics that seemingly supported abortion and homosexuality head for the hills when you show them this. People will learn the hard way that compromising one’s morality is never a good idea.

  41. Mom2301 says:

    Not really doing Iowa proud, I’m sad to say.

    There is no way to know during pregnancy if your newborn will have colic, not sleep through the night until she is 13 months old or any other of the zillions of “inconveniences” moms and dads deal with. However, I am 100% certain that every baby will cause “inconvenience” of some kind. The thing about parenthood is that it requires one to make many sacrifices. Unfortunately, we live in a time where self-sacrifice is waning and being replaced by self-satisfaction. It’s sort of turning John the Baptist’s words inside out “You must decrease so I may increase.”

    I guess the argument Ms. Wessel-Kroeschell is really making is that any reason for an abortion is acceptable even if it is stupid.

  42. frjim4321 says:

    LOL, my “whopper” which I lifted almost directly from that ultra-liberal manifesto Humanae Vitae:

    “This particular doctrine, expounded on numerous occasions by the Magisterium, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage pact” (“Humanae Vitae,” No. 12).

    I know some of you may not like my political affiliation but give me some credit for knowing pretty much all of basic Theology of Marriage 101.

  43. benedetta says:

    frjim4321 no one doubts that you as a priest will be able to cite Humanae Vitae…(?)…no…the LOLS we’re getting come from your implication that the Party of Death gives one hoot about all that good human dignity…stuff. Which aspect of marriage do you think this Democratic politician has in mind when she proposes more abortion as the solution to the problems with kids today??

  44. Andrew says:


    It is interesting to check the English version of the aforementioned quotation (Humane Vitae 12) against the Latin text of the same, which should state that “both are inherent IN THE MARRIAGE ACT” (… ambae IN ACTU CONJUGALI INSUNT) instead of “both are inherent TO THE MARRIAGE PACT”. I think that makes a significant difference. In each marital act the two aspects, the unitive and the procreative remain inseparable. It is not just a question of the overall marriage pact. Who translats these things?

  45. Supertradmum says:

    The entire Midwest is dying. This use to be the bread basket of the world and now the entire farming industry is in decline, as well as those manufacturers of agricultural machinery or connected industries. One can “feel ” the death here of the souls of those who voted for Obama, voted for ssm, and are pro-abortion.

    The Church in this state has been weakened for decades by homosexuals and pedophiles. It has also been undermined by Liberation Theology and modernist heresies.

    The growth of witchcraft and gross paganism in the Midwest and the common use of drugs also add to this death wish of the onetime center of America for morals and church-going people.

    Read this…. if you so desire. I know we are on the cusp of a huge, nationwide change.

  46. Gail F says:

    mom2301 wrote:

    “There is no way to know during pregnancy if your newborn will have colic, not sleep through the night until she is 13 months old or any other of the zillions of “inconveniences” moms and dads deal with. However, I am 100% certain that every baby will cause “inconvenience” of some kind. The thing about parenthood is that it requires one to make many sacrifices. Unfortunately, we live in a time where self-sacrifice is waning and being replaced by self-satisfaction.”

    That’s actually what she’s saying — that babies mean all sorts of inconveniences, forever, and that women should kill them unless they’re sure they can handle it. She is a sick excuse for a human being. Unfortunately, this is part of the PLATFORM of the Democratic party, and however they say it, this is exactly what they mean, too.

  47. midwestmom says:

    The absurd logic in this legislator’s argument is that women have a right to bump off their own progeny if said progeny has the mere potential to make mother’s life, or even the occasional day, less than ideal. Is she pretending that most women have played no part in their own pregnancy?

    Let’s shine a light on the inequality here and also grant NFL players the right to kill their coach when he works them too hard. Why do only mothers get this right?

  48. jflare says:

    “That’s really not what she saying.

    She was advocating elective abortions which cannot be condoned.”

    So…she’s not really saying..what?

    Everyone: Her list of “inconveniences” pretty much declared that infants and children are, um, infants and children. Which, sadly, is to say that her concerns are..old news.
    I DID find it disturbing that she mentioned how WOMEN know whether they’re ready to be parents..but never mentioned whether MEN had any comprehension of the matter. Nor did she bother remembering how women typically are impregnated in the first place.
    If pressed, she’d probably insist that women have the right to have sex when they choose, regardless of whether they’re married. She’d probably trot out the old stereotypes about abusive men and whatnot. Too bad the women have proven to be equally..”virtuous”.

  49. Palladio says:

    “Why do only mothers get this right?” Because they are now, as women, a law unto themselves in the minds of low-information liberals.

  50. midwestmom says:

    This legislator is advocating homocide inequality.

  51. RafqasRoad says:

    Torpedo 1 at #37,

    AMEN SISTER!!!!!!! The terrifying undercurrent of the speaker’s train of thought has diabolical implications for those of us who live with disability; more sharply poignant for the unborn and newly born with disability. as another micro-premi survivor (born at 26 weeks back in 1970), I find the ‘brave new world of rights’ advocated by such individuals horrid to say the least!! are we worth less? As a gentleman with turner’s Syndrome articulated on a documentary that aired in Australia a few years ago now ‘do they want to wipe us out’???

    No, dear readers, there are nothing short of satanic consequences to the popular secularist train of thought re the unborn and newborn with disability that cause those of us with disability to shudder and rise up with righteous indignation long before any religious niceties concerning the subject enter the arena.

    how are we truly valued in this postmodern age of individualism, hedonism and ‘me’ism’? how are we valued by the dominant power-wielders of society – the Able-bodied???

    And who has the right to determine whose life is more onerous than another’s??? Lines in the sand invariably grow to encompass ever broadening categories.

    I have sat in secular community welfare class where individuals openly stated proud as punch they’d abort a blind child if they learnt of its disability pre-birth – with me in the room!! And the lecturer permitted this!!!!! god help us.

    St. Lucy, pray for us,
    Bl. Margaret of Castello, pray for us,
    Bl. Hermon ‘the cripple’, pray for us,
    St. Rafqa, pray for us.

    Finally, for those who believe it acceptable to abort the likes of us, or those with learning disabilities, do read Exod 4: 10-12.
    Additionally, pray for those with Downe’s Syndrome – 90% of unborns diagnosed with this condition never take a single breath nor do they see the light of day – these stats from a secular university special education lecture.

    My life is valid, the lives of others with disability are also valid.
    With such laws, will we ever see the likes of the amazing Fr. Cyril Axelrod again – literally a one in a billion priest. He was in Australia last year and I missed the presentations he was giving – to receive the Lord from the hands of this humble and holy man – I would give a great deal.

  52. Torpedo1 says:

    At Rafqa’s Road,
    Often times, I don’t get mad at arguments like these, and then someone brings out the argument that people who have disabilities don’t deserve to live. Then, all I can think of is that speech from Network. “I’m a human being Explative damn it! My life has value!” I don’t like to be an angry member of the pro-life movement, but sometimes, that one statement, shouted out, demonstrates all of my frustration in a nut shell. I do not need to be fixed, I do not need to have my sight to lead a wonderful life. I believe I was meant to be this way and my being blind provides me to view the world in a way others would not be able to. well, that’s how I feel about it.

Comments are closed.