Colorado Democrats oppose ANY protections for unborn children

Brandon Rittiman moderates an excellent must-see debate on KUSA 9 News' "Balance of Power" between Democrat Representative Mike Foote and former Republican Representative Mark Waller over a proposed fetal homicide bill in Colorado.

Mr. Rittiman begins the debate by asking Rep. Waller why Republicans began by offering by a "personhood with exceptions" bill. Rep. Waller correctly points out that the pro-aborts' complaint about the word "person" is merely a smokescreen. In 2013, Representative Janak Joshi proposed this fetal homicide bill:

If the commission of any crime codified in this title or title 42,C.R.S., is the proximate cause of death or injury to an unborn member of the species homo sapiens, the respective homicide and assault charges for that death or injury may be brought simultaneously with the underlying charges.

Notice that Rep. Joshi's bill did not declare that unborn babies were persons, yet would have allowed prosecutors to bring homicide charges when a perpetrator killed an unborn baby. The pro-aborts killed the bill in committee.

Rep. Foote claims the "Unlawful Termination of Pregnancy Act" passed because the law avoided using "certain words." But it wasn't specific words that needed to be avoided but a particular concept: that an unborn baby can be a victim. This is clear in the interview as Rep. Foote repeatedly refuses to answer Mr. Rittiman's questions regarding the human worth of unborn babies. He refuses to acknowledge that an unborn baby can be a unique victim of crime, separate from the mother.

Rep. Waller ends the show by masterfully explaining why the amount of jail time a perpetrator faces isn't what determines justice. Justice is about recognizing the depravity of the crime and the humanity of the victims. In the case of baby Aurora Wilkins, if she would have breathed just once before dying, her assailant would have been charged with murder. "Justice" that depends on oxygen in the lungs isn't justice but travesty.

Mr. Rittiman begins the after-show debate by asking Rep. Foote why the carve-outs for "acts of the mother", "medical" procedures and "medications" are not sufficient to allow killing the baby through abortion. Rep. Foote uses the oh-so-common and oh-so-stupid claim that the carve-outs are "vague." Pure rubbish. Pro-aborts know exactly what the euphemisms mean, they simply aren't satisfied: they want ZERO recognition of unborn children as victims.

Rep. Foote offers one example but it doesn't work for him. The bill exempts "an act committed by the mother of her unborn child." This is very broad to include anything you can imagine from sky-diving, robbing a bank, committing suicide to self-inducing abortion. But broad isn't the same thing as vague. It is clearly intended to be a universal exemption for the mother for killing her unborn baby, which is unconscionable.

This pretend "vagueness" question illustrates a severe problem with the bill. Pro-abortion legislators claim they don't know what "medical" procedure means and pro-lifers end up claiming that it includes abortion. Any clear thinking person would reject that there's anything "medical" about intentionally killing an unborn baby.

Rep. Waller's otherwise outstanding performance is grossly marred when he twice refers to a "woman's right to abortion." He should know better.


Liquid error: Unknown operator !==
Colorado Democrats oppose ANY protections for unborn children