NRL News
202.626.8824
dadandrusk@aol.com

Gov. Youngkin marches for life, Washington Post says he does so “despite issue’s political cost”

by | Mar 14, 2024

By Dave Andrusko

Editor’s note. This appeared in the March issue of National Right to Life News. Please share with your pro-life family and friends.

The Washington Post will casually crush any pro-life Republican but they save their best slings and arrows for elected officials. If they see a bright future for this individual, the will load up their quivers.

For example, pro-life Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia. You’d never know it but the WaPo’s Gregory S. Schneider is talking about the same event as Olivia Gan Turner, president of the Virginia Society for Human Life—Wednesday’s Virginia Pro-life Day.

Schneider’s headline tells you exactly where he’s coming from: “Youngkin joins Va. antiabortion march despite issue’s political cost”. This is  the second year in a row that Gov. Youngkin joined the marchers.

Schneider gleefully tells us that “Democrats were eager to highlightYoungkin’s opposition to abortion.” Scornfully, Schneider writes of the governor, “He repeated the Republican talking point heard often on the campaign trail that Democrats want to allow abortions past the point of birth.”

Not, you understand, would Democrats ever “advocate abortion after birth — which would amount to infanticide…” Really? They don’t?

A few years ago, during a filmed exchange in a hearing before legislators in Virginia, Kathy Tran, the sponsor of an unlimited abortion bill, admitted under questioning by the then-majority leader in the House of Delegates, Todd Gilbert, that her bill would allow abortion even when the mother is showing imminent signs of giving birth:

Gilbert: So, where it’s obvious that a woman is about to give birth, she has physical signs that she’s about to give birth, would that still be a point at which she could still request an abortion if she was so certified? [pause] She’s dilating?

Tran: Mr. Chairman, you know, that would be a decision that the doctor, the physician, and the woman would make.

Gilbert: I understand that. I’m asking if your bill allows that.

Tran: My bill would allow that, yes.

Back to Schneider. Of course, Democrats are not advocating abortion after birth — “which would amount to infanticide,” right? But they “opened themselves up to the charge several years ago when then-Gov. Ralph Northam (D), a pediatric neurologist, made statements on a radio show about end-of-life care for a baby born with fatal abnormalities.” Pro-lifers, as it were, “pounced” on Northam,

the favorite dismissive ploy of reporters from places such as the Washington Post.

But what did Northam actually say? He would make medical treatment for babies who survive abortions optional—a decision left entirely to the aborted mother and the abortionist.

Guess what? An abortionist has zero incentive to treat that baby. After all the whole point of an abortion is to make the baby dead.

This is not just the position of Democrats in Virginia. You can find equally tender-hearted Democrats in other states who are all too willing to ignore a baby who survives.

How about at the federal level? Recall that Democrats in Congress fiercely fight a bill that would enact an explicit requirement that a baby born alive during an abortion must be afforded “the same degree” of care that would apply “to any other child born alive at the same gestational age,” including transportation to a hospital.

What sweethearts.

Congratulations to Gov. Youngkin. It’s wonderful that in a state where pro-abortion Democrats control both chambers, he is willing to unapologetically stand for life.