April, 12, 2012,
On Tuesday, March 27, a House Judiciary Committee meeting produced these statements from Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.): that said.....“Some parents are violent. Some parents are rapists.”
In consequence, Nadler believes a new bill that requires parental notification for minor females who cross state lines to secure an abortion is “fundamentally flawed,” because it assumes that parents have their children’s best interests at heart. This is an old argument routinely used by the state to usurp the parental role, and it has been thoroughly refuted by The New American’s William F. Jasper in the article linked to in this sentence. In a testy exchange with Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) Rep. Nadler also said “We’re not dealing with human beings at this point.” Nadler needs to know that there are bypass laws on the books to protect minors in hard cases involving abuse or neglect.
Also at the committee meeting Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) tried in vain to create an exemption that would allow grandparents or older siblings to take minors across state lines for abortions in lieu of parents, but that failed. In her plea she stated “Doctors, not congress members, should be the judge when it comes to deciding the best care for women.” (Yes, she voted for Obama Care.) She cited “medical emergencies” in minors as the reason for her concern, another old refuted argument.
For the first half of the 20th century, it was well recognized and supported by U.S court cases that parents have complete authority -- God-given -- over their children. It wasn’t until the latter half of that modern century up to the present time that we have seen representatives in government uninvitedly assuming parental roles. The strong tone of objections to something as simple as the Child Interstate Abortion Nullification Act, H.R 2299 is proof positive that it’s vitally needed legislation.
House Resolution 2299 would make it illegal to transport a minor across a State line with the intent that such a minor obtain an abortion without parental notification. This bill also would make it illegal, and punishable, to circumvent the over 30 state-level laws currently in place that require abortion notification for parents of minors by transporting a minor across a State line. These laws are in place to protect minor children. Abortion is not a simple ear-piercing, nor does it have the effect of an aspirin, both actions that need parental approval in certain situations. Abortion is a potentially dangerous medical procedure, whether it be a surgical or chemical abortion, with life-long emotional and psychological consequences.
If a minor was assaulted, raped, sexually abused, etc., surely our representatives in Congress would acknowledge that parents have a right to know about such situations. Without this bill male predators who use secret abortions to cover up their heinous crimes with minor girls would be protected, as would the huge profits of blood money that abortion providers continue to collect for the killing of the unborn.
Some of the bill’s summarized provisions are:
- Amends the federal criminal code to prohibit transporting a minor child across a state line to obtain an abortion with the intent to evade the right of a parent under any law in the minor’s state of residence that requires parental involvement in the minor’s abortion decision. Makes an exception for an abortion necessary to save the life of the minor.
- Imposes a fine and/or prison term of up to one year on a physician who performs or induces an abortion on an out-of-state minor in violation of the parental notification requirements in this bill. Requires such physician to give 24-hour actual or constructive notice to a parent of the minor seeking an abortion, subject to certain exceptions.
The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act protects the fundamental rights of parents. With 161 co-sponsors, it has a more than a fair chance of being passed in the House. The Senate has a companion bill, S. 1241 S. with 32 co-sponsors.
Has your Rep. already been contacted on the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security?