U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal is at it again. Earlier in the Congressional session,
Mr. Blumenthal proposed a gun restriction bill that U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid nixed. Mr. Reid is a Democrat who, unlike Mr. Blumenthal, occasionally
concerns himself with the political well-being of fellow Democrats, and so the
Speaker made sure the bill never came up for a vote. The proposed gun bill
championed by Mr. Blumenthal and his compatriot in the Senate, Chris Murphy, easily
could have passed the scrutiny of dominant Democrats in Connecticut’s General
Assembly, but the Blumenthal-Murphy war on the second amendment to the U.S.
Constitution caused major agita among many Democrats looking down the barrel of
upcoming elections.
Never mind, Mr. Reid
was there to wipe every Democrat’s tear, and any prospect of a gun restriction
bill was aborted at its fetal stage. Today, the Blumenthal-Murphy effort is
useful only as a campaign prop in the Northeast and California.
Bills that do not
pass have no real-world consequences, good or bad, and such bills cannot
boomerang politically on their authors. They are dead letters, mostly love
letters to one or another special interest that have in the past contributed
money and time to the appreciative author of the bill. Such bills allow
everyone to win. The congressman wins because he has satisfied ravening
interest groups. Citizens who might have been affected by the dead letter win
because their lives will not be thrown into turmoil by a bill that, if passed,
likely would have had disastrous unintended consequences. But precisely because
the bill has not passed, it may be useful as a burnishing tool to brighten the
reputation of Senator Take A Bow.
Mr. Blumenthal is
famous for taking bows. He was also famous as Attorney General of Connecticut,
a position he maintained for more than twenty years, for having sued or
threatened to sue everyone who crossed his path. Having been elevated to the
U.S. Senate, Mr. Blumenthal is now pursuing a career as the first consumer
protection senator from Connecticut.
Mr. Blumenthal’s
posture with respect to abortion regulation therefore is more than odd. But it
is not likely that those in Connecticut’s media who genuflected every time they
received a memo from Mr. Blumenthal announcing his intention to sue yet another
small business owner will notice the hypocritical pirouette.
Mr. Blumenthal’s
latest campaign bill, the “Women's Health Protection Act," would prevent states from regulating abortion
facilities, even Kermit Gosnell’s post-birth chop shop.
The bill will be opposed by the usual suspects, orthodox Catholics and Jews –
Mr. Blumenthal is a reformed Jew of the progressive persuasion – but religious
opposition is easily rebutted. Says Mr. Blumenthal, in an e-mail blast to the
abortion on demand lobby he hopes will finance his next election, “… the Hobby
Lobby decision is a devastating blow, but here's the worst part: This won't be
the last attack from anti-women, right-wing extremists. They will continue to
do everything in their power to strip away a woman's right to make her own
healthcare decisions – unless we stop them now.”
As is the case with
almost all Mr. Blumenthal’s obiter
dicta, the soupçon of truth in his statements is wondrously mixed with
misdirection and muddied thinking. The
Hobby Lobby decision was not devastating to the contraception and abortion
industry.
Much of the legislation
that followed in the wake of the prosecution of Hermit Gosnell, the infanticide
doctor, required abortion providers to observe common sense regulations
intended to secure the health of women, particularly those who endure late term
abortions, always fatal to the fetus and sometimes dangerous to the mother. Polls on late term abortions,
especially partial birth abortions, a process in which an abortionist withdraws
a baby’s head from the birth canal and kills the baby by piercing its brain
with a scissors, consistently demonstrate a deep and widespread repugnance for most
late term abortions, except when the abortion is employed to prevent the death
of the mother. One may observe in passing that those fetuses in the womb that
have evolved past twenty weeks, the point at which a baby in the womb feels
pain, generally are referred to by prospective mothers as “babies.” Late term
abortion un-mothers mothers, kills late term “babies” and occasionally inflicts
an intolerable psychological strain on those who elect to have abortions. These
are not truths that reach us from the pulpit; they are well documented, scientific
and sociological truths.
And there’s the rub
with Mr. Blumenthal’s bill: Not only does Mr. Blumenthal’s bill forbid states
to do what Mr. Blumenthal has done every day of his more than twenty years’
service as Connecticut’s Attorney General; the bill also asks us to shut our
eyes to the obvious truths brought before us by scientific improvements.
Science always marches on, and sometimes it marches over our most carefully
nourished misconceptions. Ultrasounds have done far more than pulpit
preaching to convince women that a twenty-week-old fetus, while not yet a
senator, is never-the-less more fully human than the undifferentiated protoplasm of a week-old fetus. Even the mothers of week-old fetuses SHOULD be protected from unscrupulous money directed “doctors”
such as Mr. Gosnell.
The theology of
orthodox Jews on abortion derives from the notion of “quickening,” the point at
which the mother feels life in her womb. It has been scientifically
demonstrated that a twenty-week-old fetus feels the abortion instruments
dismembering its flesh and bones. It shrinks from the fatal touch of the
abortionist, the way those us in Connecticut have sometimes winced
uncomfortably at Mr. Blumenthal’s tireless
efforts while Attorney General to regulate everything in his state from soup to
nuts – every hour of every day for more than twenty years.
The law introduced
by Mr. Blumenthal and Mr. Murphy draws a red line against reasonable regulation
in the case of abortion providers. The federal law proposed removes, as if it were
an easily dispensable impediment, the discretion state legislatures need to
insure the health of women. It would repeal through a sweeping federal fiat all
laws respecting abortion facilitators that had been put in place by state
legislators to assure the well-being of abortion clients. Unfortunately, the
common sense of a prospective mother, the twenty-week-old fetus that feels pain
and flinches from a fatal attack on its life, the hundreds of millions of
pregnant women who have studied the ultrasound images of their babies, and the
common sense of ages, not to mention the unheeded preacher in his pulpit, all
cry out that Mr. Blumenthal’s law will not advance the health and well-being of
women – even as he declares in his campaign documents that those who disagree
with his assumptions, mostly Republicans, hate women and wish them ill.
Comments
Blumenthal doesn't need money, and his general chances of being re-elected have to be reckoned as favorable. It's (false)religious fervor that drives him. His world is one in which Abraham Lincoln forever leads us against the forces of inequality and repression. If he weren't such a fanatic he would continue to impress his electorate with further complaints about the Chevy Corvair or large bottles of sugary drinks rather than with the facilitation of late term abortions. The gynos demands are unlimited, and Blumenthal's disregard of the Constitution's separation of powers ditto. But, even given their extreme Lincolnian natural rights interpretation of who we are, can't they agree that the unborn baby community has rights?
------
In a blast e-mail aimed at collecting names and other information about women who object to the ruling, Blumenthal said “the Hobby Lobby decision is a devastating blow, but here's the worst part: This won't be the last attack from anti-women, right-wing extremists.”
“They will continue to do everything in their power to strip away a woman's right to make her own healthcare decisions – unless we stop them now,” Blumenthal’s e-mail said.