PRENDA fails

UPDATE 7:25p: A breakdown of the votes:

  • Voting yes: 226 Republicans and 20 Democrats (Altmire, Barrow, Boren, Cooper, Costello, Critz, Cuellar, Donnelly, Garamendi, Holden, Kissell, Lipinksi, Lynch, Matheson, McIntyre, Peterson, Rahall, Reyes, Ross of AR, and Shuler)
  • Voting no: 161 Democrats and 7 Republicans (Amash, Bass of NH, Bono Mack, Dold, Hanna, Hayworth, and Paul)
  • Absent: 8 Republicans (Burton, Fortenberry, Guinta, Lewis of CA, Mack, McCarthy of CA, Roby, and Young of FL) and 9 Democrats (Chandler, Doyle, Ellison, Heinrich, Napolitano, Pascrell, Rangel, Slaughter and Velazquez

2:37p: The heartbreaking, infuriating bottom line: The Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act has failed. Vote tally:

TOTAL:
246 Yes
168 No

(2/3 majority was required for passage.)

GOP:
226 Yes
7 No

DEMOCRAT:
20 Yes
161 No

Read more at LifeNews.com.

35 thoughts on “PRENDA fails”

  1. It was a public relations WIN for the Pro-life movement.  That’s right, abortion advocates, the debate is alive and it’s not going away.  The young people entering the pro-life movement have seen their own ultrasounds, and the ultrasounds of their siblings.  Everyday, more and more people put up new, even better ultrasound images of their currently gestating BABIES on facebook and other new media outlets.  The 40 Days for Life campaigns do nothing but grow, and more and more post abortive women and fathers are speaking out about their regret for their lost children.  

    I’m proud of all those who voted on this and for those who voted against it: we all know.  

       26 likes

  2. But if you think about it, how could it have really ever passed? We would need actively thinking Democrats to admit that there are more egregious forms of abortion than others…

    And there are not, in the VERY SAME WAY there are not more inconvenient or invaluable humans. We are all equal, conception to death.

       24 likes

  3. The seven Republicans are Hanna (NY), Hayworth (NY), Bono Mack (CA), Bass (NH), Paul (TX), and Amash (MI). The first five are pro-choice. Paul and Amash object based on some ethereal political theory considerations.
    The twenty Democrats are Shuler (NC), Kissell (NC), McIntyre (NC), Costello (IL), Lipinski (IL), Boren (OK), Matheson (UT), Cooper (TN), Rahall (WV), Reyes (TX), Cuellar (TX), Peterson (MN), Altmire (PA), Holden (PA), Critz (PA), Donnelly (IN), Ross (AR), Lynch (MA), Barrow (GA), and Garamendi (CA).
     

       4 likes

  4. Gimmick?  Joan,  there are no words left for you.  Please go away.  And remember that when the day comes that someone wants to take your life simply because you’re female, or tall or short, or blond or brunette, or gay or straight, or white or black, we’ll be there to say it’s wrong and fight for your life.

    The little girl in the womb is wondering why you don’t give a damn about her choice.  You are chief among hypocrites. 

       32 likes

  5. Prolifist, thanks for the count. I am a constituent of Rep. Amash, and it will not sit will, not at all. Unfortunately he is apparently influenced often by Ron Paul’s obtuseness and most of his “Facebook constituents” don’t actually live in Michigan but are other Ron Paul people. They tend to live out the phrase about the perfect being the enemy of the good. Liberty is great, but life in more important and a law banning sex-selection abortions does not qualify as a “thought crime” or a “hate crime” or some other kind of social engineering, as if a small step to regain the unborn’s natural right to life somehow tarnishes our other liberties.

       9 likes

  6. This bill was lip service to the prolife movement. It was unenforceable and illogical. If one is to accept abortion on demand one must accept sex-selection abortions. If a fetus’ life gets no protection in the event that it is inconvenient it is completely impossible and inconsistent to protect it due to be the undesired gender.

       5 likes

  7. That’s why one is NOT to accept abortion.   Not on demand.  Not ever.  The fight will not end until abortion is illegal, everwhere.

    Pro-life 100%, without apology. 

       17 likes

  8. I’m so proud of my Democrat Rep. Lipinski!  Though I’m a conservative R, and I don’t agree with him on everything, he at least knows that you can’t kill the child in the womb!  Thanks, Rep!

       14 likes

  9. What a relief! Feminists can now go on killing off the future of their movement. Their war on womanhood can continue unabated! What an amazing victory for women, eh? It’s a good thing all those male dem legislators know whats best for us, huh?

       17 likes

  10. Our nations leaders have now just said that is totally fine to abort babies for whatever reason.

       7 likes

  11. I mean, what better way to preserve the future for women than by making sure they’re never born at all? Genius. It totally sends a message to the world about how valued women are if we can target them for execution before they’re born. This will really change how we value women. Great job! MORONS.

       17 likes

  12. Wow.  It’s really hard to justify this one.   The Democrats just voted to allow the killing of unborn babies in case you don’t want a girl, or a dark-skinned baby.  Remember when they used to say that women chose abortion for serious personal and health related reasons?  Looks like the mask has been pulled off that lie.

       19 likes

  13. NC: “If one is to accept abortion on demand one must accept sex-selection abortions. If a fetus’ life gets no protection in the event that it is inconvenient it is completely impossible and inconsistent to protect it due to be the undesired gender.”

    This is true. Sex-selection abortions are not more or less horrendous than abortions for other reasons, but they are less justifiable IF you want to, and I don’t want to, but many do, discuss all the pragmatic factors pro-abortion people try to appeal to. Discussions of poverty, for instance, are stripped away and it can be seen for what it is, the way we pro-life people see it every time, by those whose thinking is typically clouded with misguided empathy. The votes against the ban by pro-choicers then are indeed consistent.

    On the other hand, Planned Parenthood’s stance is totally inconsistent. If they champion “choice” above all else and disqualify the preborn as persons, then why all the discomfort and denial about their role in sex selection abortions? Because it strips away all the ridiculous, but sadly empathy-inducing and politically-manipulating, excuses that they normally depend on, and there it is naked in all its ugliness.

       7 likes

  14. As I said to a reporter today, “If I was the victim of a rape by a family member and that resulted in a, according to the doctor,  deformed baby I would be outraged that my sorry circumstance was used to abort 54 million and counting other babies, much less with such a sickening and feeble excuse!”
    Didn’t King Henry the VIII of England behead wives 2 thru 7 just because they did not give him a male heir? And we know that it is the male sperm that determines the sex of the resulting child.  

       8 likes

  15. @Patty: No, he didn’t (Henry VII).  He beheaded wives two and five and he only married six times, not seven.  And while Anne Boleyn (wife the second), though they officially drummed up a charge of treason, was beheaded mostly for having two miscarriages (because Henry was a complete and utter jerk), Catherine Howard (wife the fifth) was executed for adultery.  And she did actually cheat on him; it wasn’t made up.  So beheading her is, admittedly, way wrong and harsh, but was slightly less out-of-the-blue than what happened with Anne.

    Also, because this got me thinking about it, The Tudors featured way too much sex, but had a theme song that absolutely knocked it out of the park. Season 2 Opening.

       5 likes

  16. The most important thing that happened today was that the public learned that President Obama thinks freedom of choice must include sex-selection abortions, which the recent poll said 80 percent of women think should be unlawful.
    http://www.nrlc.org/Sex-SelectionAbortion/Release053112.html

    The fast-track (“Suspension”) procedure allowed a nice clean vote, with no counterfeit political-cover amendments allowed.  It was a nice, clean roll call vote.  Now you know where everybody stands.  Moreover, the PRENDA was not “killed.”  It simply failed to achieve the 2-to-1 majority required under the fast-track procedure.  It remains alive and could come before the House again, even this year, in a variety of ways.

    The roll call has already been incorporated into NRLC’s House scorecard, here:
    http://www.capwiz.com/nrlc/scorecard.xc?chamber=H&state=US&session=112&x=11&y=17

    NRLC’s response to the House vote, and other pertinent information about this legislation, is here:
    http://www.nrlc.org/Sex-SelectionAbortion/Release053112b.html


    Douglas Johnson
    Legislative Director
    National Right to Life Committee (NRLC)
    512 10th Street, N.W.
    Washington, D.C. 20004
    (202) 626-8820
    federallegislation //at// nrlc, dot, org

       8 likes

  17. @Alice: I couldn’t stand that show. I LOVE Tudor history, but The Tudors was so full of historical inaccuracies and way too focused on the sex, like you said.
     

       4 likes

  18. The Tudors had Henry Cavill. That made up for the fact they combined Henry VII’s two sisters into one character and travelled in carriages that didn’t exist until 300 years later.

       4 likes

  19. I do not understand why a supermajority of 2/3 was needed to pass this bill.

    I see the vote of 246 “Yes” to only 168 “No” is still a very good thing.

       4 likes

  20. Nerd alert, you can remember Henry VIII’s romantic travails and his wives’ fates pretty easily in order: divorced beheaded died, divorced beheaded survived!

       3 likes

  21. To have such a high level discussion is a huge success for this human rights issue.

    This forced Planned Parenthood to declare: “As a women’s health advocate for nearly 100 years, Planned Parenthood opposes sex-selection abortion”

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/statement-cecile-richards-president-planned-parenthood-federation-america-defeat-prenda-bill-wh-39559.htm

    They had to fire (supposedly) the employee on the video to get out of this one.

    At the same time, on NPR yesterday, there was some show with the same old abortion apologists claiming the Lila Rose video was “heavily edited,” and an interviewee claimed that Planned Parenthood is aware that someone has been trying to scam them in this way at many locations for a long time.

    This interviewee also had to claim: sex-selection abortion is a “problem” in other countries such as China and India, but nowhere near the problem here in the states. Well, is it a problem or not?

    It seems that if it is a problem, then one sex-selection abortion would be one too many.

    By the damage-control out there, it is clear Planned Parenthood is aware that there is sex-selection abortion here in the U.S.

    Public acceptance of abortion depends on abortion being a side-issue, with little air time – the “privacy,” “difficult -decision” “don’t judge” veil to protect an investigation of the motives for aborting. This is how it was for years. The recent five years, though, has  seen events happen to crumble that defense. There is a major crack in the wall, and it will come down.

    Here is the article that might be most-recognized for noting sex-selection abortion in the U.S.:
    Almond D, Edlund L. Son-biased sex ratios in the 2000 United States Census. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Apr 15;105(15):5681-2. –That article is free so anyone can go check it out. It was based on 2000 census data. I am not aware of any similar analysis being done with 2010 data.

    The Official Proceedings of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Annula Convention, April 15-17, 2011 had an abstract: abstract # 990682, that again documents sex-selection abortion in the U.S.: Lin, G: “Low Female-Male Birth Gender Ratios Become More Widespread in California as Keepsake Ultrasound Proliferates.”

     Here, “BGR” is birth gender ratio, the number of females born for every 1,000 males born: “BGRs for the general population in California have been in the range 951 to 960, while BGRs for Asians in California have been consistently lower (919 to 948). While the trend toward abnormally low BGRs among Asians was first observed in 1995, it has become more generalized in urban areas of California after 2000. Among 11 metropolitan counties, Asian BGRs below 930 were the exception before 2003, but in the last 4 successive years (2006–2009), a majority of these counties each recorded Asian BGRs <930.” 
      
     As these data get analyzed and published, the true reasons why people are getting abortions will become maore apparent. For so long, it was assumed abortion was rare, and always some tragic heart-wrenching story behind it. Truth is destroying that facade that the abortion lobby/industry has had for so long. The House vote has forced people to take sides and declare whether they are OK with a baby being aborted just because it is female. A major success for the pro-life movement.

       4 likes

  22. Sadly, this really isn’t too surprising.  Ironically, members of the pro-abortion side will still view themselves as pro-woman.  Crazy, crazy world.
     
    joan,
    Congratulations.  You have once again made a complete fool out of yourself.  Quite typical, unfortunately. 
    Please continue to post here.  You make the rest of us feel much more intelligent by comparison.

       6 likes

  23. Well, at least my rep., Mike Fitzpatrick, voted the right way.  Maybe I should write him a thank you note.

       5 likes

  24. Indeed, if you do the math, of the total number of people voting, it didn’t pass by only 7% of the total votes.  That means that by a slim 7%, it didn’t pass.  This should have the abortion industry terrified.  This is the wedge, like no other, that will pry apart their wall and bring Planned Parenthood crashing down.  Like the sucking motion of a large ship sinking, it will also pull down many of the smaller abortion businesses.

    (look out Marie Stopes, you’re next!)        

       7 likes

Comments are closed.