If you cannot afford a baby, abort it?

While watching the debate on the Pain-Capable Unborn Protection Act, I felt a little ashamed. How did the Republicans come off as looking more compassionate toward women and their unborn children than my own Democratic Party, which has traditionally advocated for the most defenseless in our society?

Nonetheless, I was proud of the four courageous Democrats who voted to ban this gruesome procedure. They were able to see beyond the politics of abortion and vote to protect viable infants and their mothers from violence.

{mosads}Opponents of the 20-week ban say it is unconstitutional because the Supreme Court already decided (42 years ago, mind you) that women should be allowed to have abortions up to 24 weeks. Yet, the advancements in science have upended this belief that viability begins at 24 weeks. The New York Times recently did an expose on the denial of care to viable 22-week-old newborn children. 

Whether people believe a prenatal child can feel pain or not, science is pretty clear on fetal development. All organs are present and functioning by 12 weeks, which is why many developed countries draw the line on abortions at 12 weeks. After that the child just needs time to grow. The prenatal child is almost ready to open its eyes by 20 weeks. Look at an 18-to-20-week ultrasound and it is hard to disagree that the image shows a little person. 

It has become a popular pastime to accuse opponents of abortion of “playing doctor.” During the debate on HR 36, one Congresswoman even donned a white doctor’s coat to make her point. But really? Putting aside parlor games, the science is clearer and more advanced than it was 42 years ago when we had no ultrasound or in utero cameras and we were told the prenatal child was just a mass of cells.  

It is time for Congress to trust the science of today rather the science of 42-years ago. 

As much as we would like the decision to be between a women and her doctor, the social-science data indicates women who have abortions are subject to coercive forces and the decision is often driven by shame and fear. Women mostly say their decision is based on the inability to finish their education, “being a single mother “or “having relationship problems” which can be code for “coercion” from friends, family and society. Defense of one’s young is a natural human instinct and we have to ask ourselves why we as a society encourage women to do harm to themselves and their unborn child. 

Another recurring theme from opponents was that poor women need abortions because they cannot afford one more mouth to feed. I would expect this type of argument from Republicans who consistently vote against a social safety net for working women including affordable health insurance and a minimum wage of $10 per hour. Of course Republicans try to justify this lack of compassion for working women with arguments about freeloaders and potential job losses, every one of which has proven false.  

I am proud that my party generally fights for the underdog, the underserved, and the poor.  However, ignoring the smallest underdog and not even recognizing her or his existence is a radical minority position. It is time for Democrats to go back to its moral foundation as exemplified by Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey’s famous quote, “It was once said that the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.” 

Financial difficulties can be overcome with the kind of assistance provided by the pregnancy resource centers, by some government programs including extended paid maternity leave, and flexible job accommodations which Democrats support. There is no question that Democrats, of all people, should be saying that in the richest country in the world, it shouldn’t happen that women kill their pre-natal children because of poverty or coercion.

Sadly, at the end of the day, this debate will only provide a Republican opportunity for sound bites to defeat Democrats in the 2016 election.

It is time for the Senate Democrats and our president to take up the mantel of Hubert Humphrey to provide equal protection of the law for our most vulnerable and dependent women and children.

Day is executive director of Democrats For Life of America.