Utah Senate Approves Bill Requiring Abortionists to Give Anesthesia to Babies Being Murdered

Ultrasound IISALT LAKE CITY, Utah — Senators in Utah have approved a bill that would require abortionists in the state to give anesthesia to unborn babies so they cannot feel pain as they are murdered.

“Let’s call it what it is: It is killing babies, and if we’re going to kill that baby, we ought to have the humanity to protect them from pain,” bill author Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, said on the Senate floor.

On Friday, the Senate voted 19-5 in favor of Bramble’s bill, S.B. 234, which applies to babies five months in gestation or older.

“A physician who performs an abortion of an unborn child who is at least 20 weeks gestational age shall administer an anesthetic or analgesic to eliminate or alleviate organic pain to the unborn child caused by the particular method of abortion to be employed,” it reads.

The bill provides the exceptions of an adverse affect of the anesthesia on the mother, or if “the abortion is performed because the fetus has a defect that is uniformly diagnosable and uniformly lethal.”

Bramble’s legislation is based on studies that state babies can feel pain at 20 weeks gestation, although some opine that it is sooner. The most common abortion method at 20 weeks is dilation and extraction (D&E), where the child is removed piece by piece, and his or her body parts are laid onto a tray and reassembled to ensure that every bit of the baby was extracted.

The senator said that he would prefer to outlaw abortion—with exceptions, calling the practice “barbaric,” “horrendous” and a “death sentence” on innocent children, but believes being able to do so hangs on overturning Supreme Court opinion.

  • Connect with Christian News

 

“If we could prohibit all abortions except in the rarest of circumstances, if we could overturn Roe V. Wade, I would be a proud sponsor of that bill,” Bramble told reporters.

As previously reported, Gov. Gary Herbert has stated that he is in favor of the concept of Bramble’s bill. He said that he is personally opposed to abortion, but also remarked that if the practice is considered legal in America, it should be carried out as “humanely” as possible.

“You know, abortion is a very emotional issue,” he told reporters at a news conference last month. “Rather than get into the abortion debate, I guess the question is: If we’re going to have abortion, what is the most humane way to do it?”

Abortion supporters protested Bramble’s bill last week, lining up outside of the Senate chambers in pink hospital gowns and holding signs such as “Keep politicians out of the exam room” and “Abortion is healthcare.”

S.B. 234 now moves to the House of Representatives for passage.

Nearly 60 million children have been murdered in the womb since the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court ruling of Roe v. Wade.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • http://www.slowlyboiledfrog.com/ DavidHart-slowlyboiledfrog.com

    These anti-choice zealots are consistent — Until their 14-year-old gets knocked up by a Black guy. Then they quietly take a few days in New York or some other blue state to fix the problem.

    • Amos Moses

      Yeah, where is the choice…..in keeping your legs closed and your junk where it belongs….in your pants.

      • gizmo23

        My wife and I have 2 children both while using birth control

        • Amos Moses

          Ok, and………….

        • Ken M

          Right…

    • Oshtur

      Your problem is that you think you understand decent people, but you really have no clue, because you never socialize with them. Don’t assume that because the people in your sorority have no conscience that other people are like you.

    • bowie1

      They also have the choice to get help from a crisis pregnancy centre to help them become better mothers. The best solution is to help both get into a better situation and it really should fall on more than help from a small operation.

      • gizmo23

        I notice you don’t say anything about the fathers

        • bowie1

          Fathers should also be responsible for the baby and provide financial support but some try to evade that responsibility.

  • jael2

    What if we insert the word two year old, instead of 20 weeks? After all, a two year old is much harder to handle than a 20 week old. What about a 90 year old who is draining the public resources?
    The majority of these so-called pro-life legislators, are nothing more than regulators ( and then you can kill your baby), have blood dripping from their hands. They are acknowledging that these are indeed children that feel pain, and the only comfort and support they can offer is sedation? How noble!
    Abortion is murder; period! It’s a violation of the sixth commandment of God. As a nation, we either
    obey it, or we will face the fierce wrath of Almighty God.
    Perhaps when our blood is flowing in the streets, we will have a better understanding of what it means to shed innocent blood.

    • Jalapeno

      A two year old does not depend on another’s body. They are not comparable.

      • Lanita Arnold Hammons

        Murder is murder…inside, or outside of the body when it has to do with a life God created!

        • Jalapeno

          Sure… They still aren’t comparable though.

    • Lanita Arnold Hammons

      Amen….you are absolutely correct!!!

  • bowie1

    It is not the greatest solution but perhaps it will be a less painful death. Even those who die by euthanasia want comfort but what will it be like for them after they pass into the hereafter.

    • jael2

      The only biblical solution is to stop murdering the preborn, the weak, and the infirmed. God who is the giver of life, is the only one who should take innocent human life. The murderers are the ones who need to stand trial for their crimes against humanity.

      • bowie1

        Yes, that would be better but how do they get it done with strong opposition happening?

      • gizmo23

        So you would put women on trial for murder? Just wondering

  • Josey

    I hear the bell tolling and we are drawing nearer to His return, Christ that is. This world is getting more callous and wicked by the minute. Personally, I am ready for God to wrap it up but not my will Lord Yours be done, You alone know the day and hour but we can see it is going to be soon by the signs You have given us. This is a wicked generation!

  • Marie A.

    I seriously cannot believe i just read this. My mind cannot comprehend that those who know a baby can feel pain murder it anyway??

    • Jalapeno

      Don’t worry, the fetus can’t feel pain, this is just a political move.

  • Amos Moses

    Because cutting a child from a womans belly is much easier than say…closing your legs….. or keeping your hands off each other.

    • Elie Challita

      I assume you’re for comprehensive sex ed, as well as cheap and reliable contraception, including IUDs?

      • Amos Moses

        “comprehensive sex ed””cheap and reliable contraception, including IUDs”

        By whom, and i am not even sure what that means and what context?

        Ass-u-me only makes an as…….. you know the rest.

        • Elie Challita

          I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but humans have never eliminated illicit pregnancies, no matter how much you told to tell people to close their legs. Back in your “good old days” people would either have a back-alley abortion, or a precipitated wedding before the bump would start to show.

          Not to mention that the most conservative areas of the US have the highest rate of teen pregnancy, so clearly your people aren’t living up to their own ideals, are they?

          So far the only way to actually reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancies has been through comprehensive sex ed in schools (primarily public schools) and easy access to contraception that is more effective than condoms, like IUDs or the pill.

          So do you support the latter initiatives?

          • Amos Moses

            “humans have never eliminated illicit pregnancies, no matter how much you told to tell people to close their legs.”

            So that is an excuse to stop telling them?

            “So far the only way to actually reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancies has been through comprehensive sex ed in schools (primarily public schools) and easy access to contraception that is more effective than condoms, like IUDs or the pill.”

            So the solution is to teach them how to avoid responsibility for the acts they commit? Hmmmm… and you then wonder why we are where we are?

            Look, i get that people “want to have fun”. But there are consequences for the “fun” and removing the consequences does not “fix” the problem, and so we now have the attitude that it is ok to openly kill a child.

            No, that is not a solution. That is slow suicide.

          • Elie Challita

            By all means, keep telling people not to have sex. They’ll agree, and then go right ahead and do it anyway like they have for the last few million years.

            Do you care more about reducing unwanted pregnancies, or about pontificating at people?

          • Amos Moses

            “Do you care more about reducing unwanted pregnancies, or about pontificating at people?”

            Sorry to tell you, they are not mutually exclusive……… it is not either or…..
            Want to stop unwanted pregnancies?……Then keep it where it belongs until it is appropriate. Or take responsibility for the acts committed. Killing an innocent because someone could not control themselves is a really really, REALLY poor response.

          • Elie Challita

            They’re not mutually exclusive, but conservatives like you have overwhelmingly focused on the latter, and done almost nothing for the former. Again, conservative areas have some of the highest teen pregnancy rates.

            All I’m saying is that you wouldn’t have to ban abortions if unwanted pregnancies didn’t occur, and one of the most effective ways to prevent those would be, for example, to provide an IUD for any woman who wants one.

          • Amos Moses

            ” Again, conservative areas have some of the highest teen pregnancy rates.”

            Sorry, so what…………

            “All I’m saying is that you wouldn’t have to ban abortions if unwanted pregnancies didn’t occur, and one of the most effective ways to prevent those would be, for example, to provide an IUD for any woman who wants one.”

            So how many “unwanted pregnancies” ( that is just a euphemism for the word “Child”, you know, a person) occurred before it was “legal”? What stopped them? That it was dangerous? GOOD! IT SHOULD BE! Consequences for actions.

            The history of “abortion” was to kill black children……. and not so coincidentally…. most of those “aborted” are black….. so are you a racist? And if you are not…. why do you advocate a position that began as and continues to destroy black babies predominantly?

            See, you want to fit the position into some paradigm of “conservative vs liberal”” Right vs Left” when it is not…….. It is about Right vs WRONG…… and it is WRONG to kill children of any age or race…… Their size, location, environment or dependence is not an issue.

            But you do not want to hear those facts.

          • Elie Challita

            Right, which is why so many other countries with no sizeable black population adopted it much before we did…
            Again, the best way to prevent abortion is to not get pregnant in the first place. And the best way to not get pregnant in the first place is to use surefire contraception methods like IUDs, and to make those available to everyone at almost no charge.
            Do you support that initiative?

          • Amos Moses

            And which countries would those be and when,,,, and even if it is true, So What, Does not change one single iota of truth, namely, that it is part of the history of eugenics that this country fostered post civil war to control newly freed slave, who just mostly happened to be black.

            “However, the term “eugenics” to describe the modern concept of improving the quality of human beings born into the world was originally developed by Francis Galton. Galton had read his half-cousin Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, which sought to explain the development of plant and animal species, and desired to apply it to humans. Galton believed that desirable traits were hereditary based on biographical studies, Darwin strongly disagreed with his interpretation of the book.”

          • Elie Challita

            I’m glad to hear you admit that the theory of evolution, in and of itself, has absolutely nothing to do with racism, and that those connotations stemmed from the interpretations of already racist individuals.

          • Amos Moses

            It has everything to do with racism…… the title alone is…
            On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life

            And it is an Amoral theory and anyone who believes it is also amoral. Witness by the fact of all the amoral “theories” they ascribe to believing.

          • Elie Challita

            But you just said that Darwin vehemently denied the racist implications that Galton was hanging on his theory. Which one is it? Why are you contradicting yourself? Or are you lying?

          • Amos Moses

            Well it was actually from Wiki. But Galton did believe it, Sanger did believe it, Hitler, who gave Sanger an award, believed it…… and the list goes on, and on and on….. This country had eugenics courts at one time… they have morphed over time to the “family” court system…..

            More from Wiki….
            “Eugenics became an academic discipline at many colleges and universities and received funding from many sources.[17] Organisations formed to win public support, and modify opinion towards responsible eugenic values in parenthood, included the British Eugenics Education Society of 1907, and the American Eugenics Society of 1921. Both sought support from leading clergymen, and modified their message to meet religious ideals.[18] Three International Eugenics Conferences presented a global venue for eugenists with meetings in 1912 in London, and in 1921 and 1932 in New York City. Eugenic policies were first implemented in the early 1900s in the United States.[19] It has roots in France, Germany, Great Britain, and the United States.[20] Later, in the 1920s and 30s, the eugenic policy of sterilizing certain mental patients was implemented in other countries, including Belgium,[21] Brazil,[22] Canada,[23] Japan and Sweden.[24]”

          • Elie Challita

            Yeah, I never disputed the existence of eugenics. That has absolutely no bearing on the validity of the theory of evolution, however. Nor does it have any impact of the accessibility of abortion:
            As long as a woman willingly chooses to undergo an abortion, before viability and free of any coercion, I fail to see where you could inject racism or eugenics into the mix.

          • Amos Moses

            ” That has absolutely no bearing on the validity of the theory of evolution, however. Nor does it have any impact of the accessibility of abortion:”

            The consequences of belief in evolution have a direct impact on the amorality that leads to the ideas of eugenics and then to abortion. “Viability” is just another euphemism.

            ” I fail to see where you could inject racism or eugenics into the mix.”

            By the beliefs of Sanger who founded PP and wrote extensively on the subject.

            “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. And the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
            – Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976

            “Today eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.
            “I think you must agree… that the campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics… Birth control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the eugenic educator.
            “As an advocate of birth control I wish… to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the ‘unfit’ and the ‘fit,’ admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation.
            “On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.”
            – Margaret Sanger. “The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.” Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5

            “Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”
            – Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922, page 12

            “Birth Control is not merely an individual problem; it is not merely a national question, it concerns the whole wide world, the ultimate destiny of the human race.
            “Hordes of people [are] born, who live, yet who have done absolutely nothing to advance the race one iota. Their lives are hopeless repetitions… Such human weeds clog up the path, drain up the energies and the resources of this little earth. We must clear the way for a better world; we must cultivate our garden.”
            – Margaret Sanger. Birth Control: Facts and Responsibilities, 1925

          • Elie Challita

            Again, completely immaterial. Nuclear physics were used to murder an unprecedented amount of civilians in a single blow, but that doesn’t mean that the science itself is inherently murderous.
            The mere fact that eugenicists have consistently failed to prove the genetic superiority of one race over another should be the final nail in the coffin of their ideas.

            As for Sanger’s stances: I’m sure you’re adept at quote mining the living hell out of her, but even if you were completely right it’s still absolutely irrelevant. Contraception works more effectively than an abstinence only approach, and is superior to having unwanted pregnancies. You also forget to mention that Sanger herself was pretty much anti-abortion. Lying for Jesus again, Amos?

          • Amos Moses

            “You also forget to mention that Sanger herself was pretty much anti-abortion. Lying for Jesus again, Amos?”

            With lies like “….Sanger herself was pretty much anti-abortion”, why would i need to lie? But if you have any evidence of it, then put it up.

            …..”evolution” is amoral and leads to the lines of thought that it is ok to destroy life we find objectionable….. as has been shown by its proponents.

          • Amos Moses

            BTW, the definition of “quote mining” is “How dare you use the words of the person I am defending against them”… actually quite a lame excuse to not prove your point…. if you had one.

          • Amos Moses

            “Sanger herself was pretty much anti-abortion.”

            Upon reflection, i will give you partial points on that…. sure enough she was against abortion….. for certain people…… WHITE people and RICH people…… Those not “feeble-minded” and those who contributed to the advancement of the “preferred races”.

          • Elie Challita

            No, she was also against abortion for poor people and minorities.
            A big part of her argument, especially in the papers I’ve posted, is that the poor and uneducated are much more likely to ignore a religious leader’s call for abstinence, and less able to care for children after that inevitable pregnancy.
            That’s exactly why a huge part of her efforts was aimed at providing poor, uneducated, or minority communities with robust sex ed and access to contraception: So they could stop having children that even they did not want to have, without resorting to back-alley abortions instead.

          • Amos Moses

            “I fail to see where you could inject racism or eugenics into the mix.”

            “I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.” (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

            The Negro Project: Planned Parenthood, founded by Margaret Sanger, has it’s roots deeply steeped in Nazi ideals. Sanger was, first and foremost, a eugenicist – one who believed in the inferiority of non-white races. In 1939, she proposed the infamous “Negro Project,” a plan developed at the behest of public-health officials in southern states, where she writes, “the most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the Minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Sanger also attempted to set up birth-control clinics in poor New York City neighborhoods to target “Blacks, Hispanics, Slavs, Amerinds, Fundamentalists, Jews and Catholics.”

            SANGER WAS CLOSELY TIED TO ERNST RUDIN, WHO SERVED AS HITLER’S DIRECTOR OF GENETIC STERILIZATION. AN APRIL 1933 ARTICLE BY RUDIN – ENTITLED “EUGENIC STERILIZATION: AN URGENT NEED” – FOR SANGER’S MONTHLY MAGAZINE, THE BIRTH CONTROL REVIEW, DETAILED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NAZI SOCIETY FOR RACIAL HYGIENE AND ADVOCATED ITS REPLICATION IN THE UNITED STATES.

  • WorldGoneCrazy

    Convicted murderers are killed more humanely than the human in the womb.

  • Mex Seiko

    Somehow I’m bothered by this, because it feels like a compromise with 1 condition. The baby was being executed before, now it’s executed under anesthesia. If we believe that an innocent is being executed, why are we making the execution “better?” We are joining in the execution as if holding the instrument steady.

  • lizk

    this is still calling it murder, for we were all created by God in His image. People can get them adopted to people who want children but can not.

  • Gena B

    Who were the 5 voting against it? Wow. Who knows what they feel and at what stage?