With their position on the bill on infanticide, do democrats show a desire for death?

AHuman conscience should have trouble understanding that 44 Democratic senators blocked Monday a bill that would protect newborns from death or negligent homicide if they survived an attempt to abortion.

Yes, by the way, polls indicate that Democrats could suffer politically from their harshness.

In the Senate, all but three Democrats voted against the Born-Alive Rescue Survivor Protection Act, which would simply require that doctors "exercise the same degree of professional competence, care and diligence to preserve the life and health of child survivors of an abortion attempt as they would for all other children after ordinary live births.

Much of the media coverage of the establishment obscures this fact, so let's repeat it: this bill applies only to babies who are alive, breathe the air of the day, separated from the mother's body, do not are in no way "fetuses", but unequivocally, fully formed human beings. These are babies that the doctors tried, but failed, to abort. They are there, presumably in the maternity ward, fighting for life.

This bill states that doctors can not turn against Gosnell, praying for the lives of babies who breathe, nor sit back and watch a baby who could survive with minimal assistance, instead of s & # 39; to choke. That's all. This is the kind of thing that until about ten years ago would not have been a subject of controversy for decent human beings.

It is not a question of abortion. The bill would not stop a single abortion. It is infanticide or, frankly speaking, murder. This protects the children from murder. Yet 44 Democrat Senators voted against it, saying it would somehow threaten women's health (undeniably a total lie) or hinder legitimate consultations "between women and their doctors of trust".

But how can there be a legitimate discussion? The options are three: kill the breathing baby, let him rest until he dies, or provide ordinary care while he is alive. This bill criminalizes the doctor's refusal to provide ordinary care. That's all.

This is not a simple hypothesis. Virginia, New York and Vermont have enacted laws this year that could allow such infanticide. Babies sometimes survive abortion attempts, which has happened many times before the monstrous Kermit Gosnell kills them. Babies who survive an abortion attempt can grow and grow and live differently.

Despite all the attention paid to infanticide and late abortions, at least some poll data show that Democrats may regret opposing this bill. Marist, a pollster who conducts surveys on abortion attitudes for more than a decade, announced this week a "drastic change" in favor of promoting life, against the threat of abortion. Abortion, including among Democrats and young voters, under various measures of self-identification. along the spectrum 'life' vs 'choice'.

Marist's new global numbers bring the pro-life and pro-choice sides to exact parity, which is about what other surveys have shown for some time. Since pollsters use different sampling methods, it would be interesting to see if other pollsters that already had an approximate parity will show a shift from parity to a real pro-life majority.

Anyway, the number of Marists should make the Democrats think. The recent radical measures for very late abortions and infanticides clearly do not work very well with the general public.

Thirteen years ago, the Democrats screamed when Ramesh Ponnuru of the National Review wrote a comprehensive and thoughtful book calling them together, the media and the "Death Party". By refusing to condemn infanticide – Democrats are likely to conclusively prove that Ponnuru was right.