NRL News

The District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act & the price of following the pro-abortion party line

by | May 29, 2012

By Dave Andrusko

We’ve written a great deal about the “District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” most recently at “Thank Goodness, I can still cringe”  To its [dis]credit, the Washington Post has paid little attention to a measure that would ban abortions on pain-capable unborn children, beginning at 20 weeks fertilization age (22 weeks LMP) in the District of Columbia.

When it did, the Post took the only approach any sane supporter of tearing pain-capable unborn babies limb from limb could take: whining about who got to testify before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the House Judiciary Committee. That and running a puff piece about a man whose heart is so frozen he can actually perform these ghastly abortions.

But while the Post didn’t have the reportorial energy to interview any of the three physicians who did testify before the subcommittee, it did summon up a kind of editorial pseudo indignation over Congress “running the affairs of District residents.”

National Right to Life has long since demolished this tiresome canard. The editorial page of the Washington Post may wish the Constitution read otherwise, but in fact Article I, Section 8 provides that Congress shall “exercise exclusive jurisdiction in all cases whatsoever, over such District . . .”  And because the Constitution makes the nation’s capital an exclusively federal jurisdiction, it is Congress that has the immediate responsibility to act.

Needless to say, from the Post’s perspective, there are no (can BE NO) serious, legitimate reasons to oppose the current District of Columbia policy, under which abortion is legal without limitation to the moment of birth. It’s all gamesmanship, all politics. So naturally the Post grouses that the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is “being aggressively pushed by the National Right to Life Committee, which sees an opportunity to make political points this election year.”

If the writer[s] of the Post editorial had actually attended the subcommittee hearing, you have to wonder would they be so cavalier about what it is—or, rather who it is—that the bill is intended to protect? Could they have been so concerned about minutiae if they listened to Dr. Anthony Levatino, who once performed abortions before becoming pro-life?

He told the Subcommittee

“Picture yourself reaching in with the Sopher clamp [an instrument for grasping and crushing tissue] grasping anything you can. At twenty-four weeks gestation, the uterus is thin and soft so be careful not to perforate or puncture the walls.  Once you have grasped something inside, squeeze on the clamp to set the jaws and pull hard – really hard. You feel something let go and out pops a fully formed leg about six inches long.  Reach in again and grasp whatever you can. Set the jaw and pull really hard once again and out pops an arm about the same length. Reach in again and again with that clamp and tear out the spine, intestines, heart and lungs.”

And then, holding the Sopher Clamp as he spoke, Dr. Levatino concluded his testimony with

“you know you did it right if you crush down, a white material runs out of the cervix. That was the baby’s brains. Then you can pull out skull pieces. Many times a little face will come back and stare back at you…And if you think that doesn’t hurt, if you believe that isn’t an agony for the baby, please think again.”

(This can be seen at–-MhKiaD7c&

Of course, in all likelihood, even if the writer of the editorial had been three feet away, he or she would still offer the same let’s-talk-about-anything-but-what-happens-to-the-baby drivel. After all you either follow the party line, or you don’t.

The difference would be that they would never, ever get the image of that “little face’ staring back at them out of their mind.

Your feedback is very important to improving National Right to Life News Today. Please send your comments to If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at

Categories: Legislation