Minnesota Senate passes the PRO Act

At around 3:30am this morning, the Minnesota State Senate passed the PRO Act, aka the Protect Reproductive Options Act by a straight party line vote of 34-33. The bill already passed the Minnesota House on a straight party line vote, too.

The DFL campaigned last summer on the promise that they wanted to codify Roe v. Wade into law. That's what the DFL promised. That isn't what the DFL delivered. The key section of the PRO Act states "Every individual has a fundamental right to make autonomous decisions about the individual's own reproductive health, including the fundamental right to use or refuse reproductive health care. (b) Every individual who becomes pregnant has a fundamental right to continue the pregnancy and give birth, or obtain an abortion, and to make autonomous decisions about how to exercise this fundamental right."

What isn't in the bill is as important as what's in the bill. What isn't in this bill are any restrictions. The bill says that each "individual has a fundamental right to make autonomous decisions about the individual's right to continue the pregnancy ... or obtain an abortion." Not even the woman's husband has the right to object. Period.

About a week ago, I wrote this post, which I titled Introducing the DFL's Pro-Infanticide Act. I intentionally included Daniel Patrick Moynihan's famous quote about partial birth abortion. In his quote, Sen. Moynihan said "It is as close to infanticide as anything I have come upon in our judiciary." Sen. Moynihan wasn't a pro-life advocate. He was staunchly pro-choice. Despite that, he was able to see partial birth abortion for what it is -- infanticide. Since the PRO Act doesn't prohibit late-term abortions, that means it doesn't prohibit partial birth abortion. That's the definition of infanticide.

The bill now goes to Gov. Tim Walz's desk, where he can be the first U.S. governor to legalize infanticide:

Thus far this session, Gov. Walz a) has announced that he'll sign this nation's first pro-infanticide bill into law, b) submitted a budget that spends most of a projected $17,600,000,000 surplus and c) has stated as his goal that Minnesota would be the best place for children. This will be Gov. Walz's legacy. It isn't a stretch to think that he'll be remembered as the worst governor in Minnesota's history.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue...
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp...
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio...
Read more