In a stunning moment of honesty for an organization that is usually so careful to cloak its abortion practice with other more benign services, Planned Parenthood publicly supported allowing a baby born alive after a botched abortion to be killed.
A lobbyist for Planned Parenthood affiliates in Florida testified last week against legislation aimed at protecting the life of an infant born alive after an attempted abortion.
Here is the actual testimony of Planned Parenthood lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow to Florida legislators, as reported by the Weekly Standard:
"[I]t is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief," said Rep. Jim Boyd. "If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”
"We believe that any decision that's made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician," said Planned Parenthood lobbyist Snow. . . .
Rep. Jose Oliva followed up, asking the Planned Parenthood official, "You stated that a baby born alive on a table as a result of a botched abortion that that decision should be left to the doctor and the family. Is that what you’re saying?”
Again, Snow replied, “That decision should be between the patient and the health care provider.”
She unmistakably repeats her answer several times. The official position of Planned Parenthood is that life of a baby born alive after a botched abortion, struggling for life on the abortion clinic table, should be legally in the hands of the doctor, the mother, and her family – despite the fact that the baby has now been born. Then, after these repeated assertions, she appears to suddenly realize what she has been openly advocating.
She was asked one final time be Representative Oliva, “I think that at that point the patient would be the child struggling on the table, wouldn’t you agree?” The Planned Parenthood lobbyist suddenly changed her answer, "That’s a very good question. I really don’t know how to answer that.”
Disgusting and despicable.
There is no other way to describe it. A human being grasping for life deserves all the protection of the law. There is no other possible answer.
Yet, Planned Parenthood has no problem with, and in fact opposes a law aimed to prevent, infanticide. Of course this comes from the same group that called President Obama, who opposed similar legislation when he was in the Illinois state house, their “champion.”
Even more disturbing, the Planned Parenthood lobbyist later admitted when asked about how Planned Parenthood clinics handle a baby born alive after a botched abortion, “We don’t know how prevalent this situation is.”
As this is an organization which receives nearly half its annual budget from taxpayers, this is a question that deserves an answer.
Of course Planned Parenthood is usually very careful, and unfortunately effective, in cloaking its abortion mill business in other terms. The fact of the matter is that Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in America.
Planned Parenthood would have you believe that none of your tax dollars (half their budget) in any way help, support, fund or prop up their abortion business.
If you found out that the local baseball team received half of its funding from tax dollars, but that those dollars only went to fund “non-baseball” related services such as food (concessions), clothing (fan gear), information and counseling services (program guides and ushers), and building services (the stadium and parking lot), wouldn’t you find that a bit disingenuous?
Obviously, any time you provide significant funds to an organization with a singular, overwhelming focus (a majority of Planned Parenthood’s clinic income comes from abortion) you are propping up that organization and their primary function.
The sad irony in this situation is that our tax dollars could very well be paying this Planned Parenthood lobbyist’s salary to advocate against laws protecting children from infanticide.
Planned Parenthood doesn’t deserve a dime of our tax dollars, and this is just one more piece of disturbing evidence that brings this point home.
There has not been a case that is as on track to reverse Roe v. Wade quite like this one. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization came after a challenge against the Mississippi law that banned abortion after 15 weeks. The State of Mississippi asked the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade and...
The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) just filed an amicus brief in Zimmerman v. City Austin , urging the Texas Supreme Court to hear a case involving the use of taxpayer money to support abortion related services. Texas is at the forefront of the effort to defund Planned Parenthood. In...
Mississippi’s Attorney General Lynn Fitch has just filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade and allow for individual states to determine the options for life and abortion. The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization , is related to a Mississippi law that was enacted...
Since 1976 federal law has used the Hyde Amendment to protect U.S. taxpayers from directly funding abortions. This law has held up throughout multiple court cases and Administrations. Now, the Hyde Amendment is in jeopardy of being repealed. President Biden and the Left are attempting to eliminate...