In the past few months, I have received several pro-life emails from the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) alleging that California’s recently passed law AB 2223—which removed the 24-week limit on abortions, including legal protection for the fetus—authorized aborting newborns up to 28 days after birth. In response to such allegations, leftist outlets such as Reuters, AP, and FactCheck.org asserted that, in the words of Factually.co, the bill as introduced sought “to shield people from civil or criminal liability” tied to “pregnancy outcome[s], including miscarriage, stillbirth, abortion or ‘perinatal death.’”
This was language intended by the sponsor and allies to protect against “prosecution for pregnancy loss” and self-managed abortions. The sponsor clarified the intent and filed amendments to narrow the language to perinatal death “due to a pregnancy-related cause.” The ACLJ contended that changing “prenatal” to “perinatal” opened up a possible interpretation of allowing post-partum killing of the infant. The critics held that the ACLJ’s assertion was based on intentionally misinterpreting ambiguous language in the bill.
Actually, as I see it, neither interpretation is needed to evaluate the morality of AB2223. Removing the 24-week limit authorizes aborting viable infants, which the late senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a life-long Democrat, characterized as infanticide.
It Is well known that, as a result of advances in medicine, babies born in the seventh month of gestation have excellent prospects for survival. Moreover, only China and North Korea allow abortions up to the baby entering the birth canal. By comparison, member states of the infamously debauched European Union have restrictions on abortion ranging from 10 to 16 weeks, with 13–14 weeks being the most common (that is, the first trimester). In other words, late-term abortions in Europe could be justifiably regarded as criminal acts. As a non-lawyer, I could envision voluntary manslaughter as an appropriate charge.
At the other end of life, assisted suicide and even euthanasia are becoming more socially acceptable. According to CBN, 16,499 deaths in Canada (about one of every 20) were facilitated by Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID), Canada’s euphemism for euthanasia. While the government defends the program, maintaining it to be a sacred freedom of a humane society, many citizens say otherwise:
Nearly one-fifth of the 23,000 people who requested MAID, had a “grievous and irremediable medical condition,” such as diabetes, autoimmune conditions, and chronic pain, and were denied assisted suicide. But about 4% of people who were approved for assisted suicide did not have a terminal diagnosis or reasonably foreseeable death. Nearly 23% of people overall reported “isolation or loneliness” as a reason for seeking euthanasia. Medical practitioners reported that about 50% of people requested it because of being a “perceived burden on family, friends, or caregivers.”
Other concerns were that MAID may be expanded to include the mentally ill and “mature minors,” and that disabled people are being pressured to join the program. Sounds to me like a way to reduce spending on socialized medicine. It echoes the 1976 movie Logan’s Run, in which a future society enforces population control for environmental reasons by putting to death everyone who turns 30.
Another aspect of societal decay is the increasing justification of crime. San Francisco virtually decriminalized shoplifting of goods valued at less than $950 to alleviate poverty at the expense of businesses. It also tolerates homeless people living, urinating, defecating, and taking narcotics on the street. Six hundred jurisdictions around America refuse to cooperate with immigration enforcement; one judge even allowed a deportee to escape through a back door of the courthouse before ICE arrived. Twenty-one blue state attorneys general are suing to prevent the federal government from finding the identities of illegal immigrants who were given commercial drivers licenses to drive 18-wheelers despite neither knowing English nor having passed a driving test.
Removing the 24-week limit authorizes aborting viable infants, which the late senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a life-long Democrat, characterized as infanticide.
Even violence has its supporters. Luigi Mangione ambushed and fatally shot United Health Care CEO Brian Thompson in the back and became a folk hero, with hundreds of thousands of dollars contributed for his defense. Three attempts have been made to assassinate President Trump, and conservative activist Charlie Kirk was gunned down at a college speaking event, with many leftists rejoicing. And remember the riots following the death of George Floyd in a struggle with police that left 35 dead, 1,500 police injured, billions of dollars in property damage, and even an attempt to firebomb a landmark Washington church. The result: few rioters were arrested, even fewer were convicted and received a slap on the wrist, and vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris called for the uprising to continue through Election Day.
Last but not least is the war on children. Schools show pornographic videos to kindergarteners. Unscrupulous health professionals and ideologically warped teachers push emotionally disturbed children into gender dysphoria, the belief that they are really the opposite sex trapped in the wrong body, and act as enablers, persuading them to change their clothing and names at school without their parents’ knowledge. California has even banned teachers from notifying parents of the change, which can lead to hormone treatments and surgical mutilation—and, if parents do find out, they are pressured by being asked whether they would rather have a transgender child or a dead child by suicide. Transgendering then leads to “trans women” athletes competing against and sharing locker rooms with biological women. In Washington state, a female wrestler was sexually assaulted during a match by a competitor who, unknown to her, was biologically a male. Yet another outrage is that the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a man can’t be charged for possession of AI-generated child pornography as long as it doesn’t depict real children.
How did we get into this mess? As the quotation above from John Adams implies, Jewish and Christian commentators from Dennis Prager to Victor Davis Hanson ascribe the deterioration of societal mores to the decline of religion. Once morality is reduced from God-given commandments to a matter of personal choice, we end up with a situation that has been described as “everyone has his own Shulchan Aruch.”
We need another Great Awakening like the one in the late seventeenth century to return to the right path. America has organizations that can lead the charge. We just need to listen to them.
