MSNBC: Prohibiting Pre-Natal Murder After 20 Weeks is “Forced Birth”

There’s nothing compassionate about trying to prevent a pre-natal baby from having his skull crushed, his brains sucked out and his body torn limb from limb. In fact, placing any restrictions whatsoever after the 20-week mark is not even “pro-life.” It’s “bizarre.” And it’s nothing but “forced birth.” After all, it’s not like this “mass of tissue” has feelings.

So says MSNBC contributor Joy Reid and host Martin Bashir. Here was Reid’s rant about the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act:

 “It’s so disconnected from the political reality that Republicans face. Republicans face a tremendous deficit with women voters, and so they keep putting on this spectacle over and over and over again… They’re obsessed with this idea of making women — this isn’t pro-life; this is forced birth. They are obsessed with this notion of shaming, compelling, coercing, whatever they have to do to make women give birth. It’s bizarre, but it is what they are about. Most of the legislation that these members of the House of Representatives — mostly all men — have put forward have been about abortion… [W]hat they’re really doing is trying to force women to do what they want them to do. Forcible birth. It’s bizarre.”

 As I’ve said before, I’m not a big supporter of the bill. I understand that it’s being pushed by pro-life organizations and that it’s an attempt to incrementally outlaw abortion at the federal level, thereby potentially saving babies’ lives. I think pro-life legislation should be passed by the individual states, not the federal government. And not only that, if they’re going to outlaw abortion, they should go for it all the way, not with some arbitrary “20-week” threshold. If Georgia Representative Bobby Franklin were alive today, he’d say this legislation is “pro-abortion…with exceptions.” I tend to agree. At the same time, if it were signed into law, I wouldn’t complain.

That aside, it’s the principle that matters. The idea that saving the life of an unborn baby is nothing more than “forced birth” is rather silly. We’re forcing mothers to give birth by not allowing them to murder their unborn babies? It’s as if she’s claiming women are being raped by these vile, Republican men, and these men are forcing their victims to have their babies.

Andrea Yates drowned her 5 kids 12 years ago on June 20. What if someone had prevented her from doing that? Would Joy Reid be there saying that those Republican men forced Yates to go through the pain and frustration of raising a big family?

Are some of these women victims of rape or incest? Sure. But most of them knew what the possible consequences would be from engaging in a certain voluntary and pleasurable act. And then when those consequences manifest themselves prominently a few months later, and they’re repulsed or terrified by the prospects of raising a child, they want to get rid of it. If they’re not allowed to get rid of it after a certain point, they claim they’re being forced into going through the pains of childbirth. But who forced them into that voluntary act in the first place? The Republicans?

And the males that impregnate these women are just as responsible as the women. I know that many times it’s the boyfriend or the husband or the father (or mother) that forces the woman or girl to get an abortion. In those cases, those that do the forcing are guilty of murder. But somehow, forcing a girl to get an abortion is the “right” thing to do. Saving the baby’s life is “forced birth.”