THE MEDIA IS COMPLICIT IN HELPING GOVERNOR CUOMO ACCOMPLISH THE TRAVESTY OF THE NEW ABORTION LAW

Posted on January 30, 2019 by abyssum


CATHOLIC LEAGUE

FOR RELIGIOUS AND CIVIL RIGHTS

New Yorkers Kept Ignorant Of Abortion Law

January 30, 2019Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a 
poll that says New York Catholics support the new abortion law:
 
The media, and now even a polling company, are to blame for keeping
New Yorkers ignorant about the new abortion law signed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Consider the following.
 
In the January 30 edition of the New York Post, there is a news story on
the New York State abortion law. “In the most recent Siena survey,” it says, “59 percent of Catholics backed Albany’s push for an updated abortion
law, while only 30 percent were opposed.”
 
When I read that sentence, I knew it was inaccurate. Non-Catholics, never mind Catholics, would not support the law if they had an accurate
understanding of what it says. They do not, thanks to the media. Siena
College Research Institute is also to blame.
 
Regarding the media, virtually every news story on this issue reported that Cuomo’s law simply codifies Roe v. Wade. Many New Yorkers, like other Americans, have become accustomed to the 1973 decision, so the alarms don’t go off when they learn of a new law which makes that ruling concrete. But that summary is dishonest.
 
Here are three aspects of the law that the media skirted: a) the right to terminate a pregnancy through term; the right to allow babies born alive as a result of a botched abortion to die unattended by staff; and the right of non-physicians to perform abortions.
 
Some stories said abortions would be allowed beyond 20 weeks, but they never said that would include partial-birth abortions where the child is 80 percent born. Allowing for infanticide was never mentioned. And the public was never told that the non-physicians who are allowed to perform abortions include optometrists, chiropractors, dentists, and podiatrists.

Cardinal Dolan said it well when he said the law “drops all charges against an abortionist who allows an aborted baby, who somehow survives the scissors, scalpel, saline and dismemberment, to die before his eyes.” New Yorkers were never told that.
 
The Siena poll which says Catholic New Yorkers approve the law by a margin of 59 percent to 30 percent is badly flawed. It did not address any of the three aspects of the law that I noted. It simply probed whether respondents agreed if “New York’s law on abortion [should be made] consistent with the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade.” That is not what Cuomo’s law is all about.
 
What if respondents were told the truth? They were in 2013 when Cuomo tried to get his law passed then.
 
A poll of New Yorkers by the Chiaroscuro Foundation found that 75 percent opposed the provision allowing non-physicians to perform abortions and that 80 percent opposed allowing unlimited abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. They were not asked about allowing a baby who survives an abortion to die unattended. Also, the poll did not disaggregate on the basis of religion, so we don’t know what Catholics might have said, never mind what practicing Catholics might have said.
 
No one can be expected to come to a reasonable conclusion about any issue unless he is accurately informed about its contents. New Yorkers were not informed by the media, and the Siena poll did not tap into the truth of the matter.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A LINE IN THE SAND FOR LIFE
By Peter Rosenberger
From one geographical extreme to another, American state assemblies strode into the viability and quality of life issue in groundbreaking ways during January. Starting with Hawaii’s new Our Choice Our Care Act launched on January 1, 2019, medically-assisted death marched closer to being considered ‘normal.’  Before January ended, New York legislators applauded the new freedom extended to the state allowing late term abortions via the Reproductive Health Act. 
A common thread weaves through the move by both states.  An ambiguity, one could say an arbitrary line in the sand, presents itself through both actions regarding viability.  Hawaii allows patients deemed to die within six months to end their life with medical assistance. 
Yet why six months? What group decided that six months is the cut off for a life to possess meaning rather than, say, seven months and thirteen days?  
In New York, the health of the mother is a factor. A Virginia legislator already introduced the dialogue of health applying to mental health. New York allows non-physicians to perform abortions.  Will those non-physicians assume responsibility for evaluating the mental health of the mother?
These and other unsettling questions indicate a rush to an agenda rather than to medical reality. If government can designate life as ‘qualified to terminate’ if less than six months remain, when will they adjust that line? If a child is deemed unable to exist outside the womb without care at 8 months and 28 days, can that line be moved to 9 months.  What about ten months?  
The Governor of Virginia has already pushed the line that New York codified during a radio interview on WTOP.  
“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” said Mr. Northam, a former pediatric neurologist. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. – The Washington Times 1/30/2019 
The governor later clarified that this would only be done with infants with extenuating circumstances such as severe deformities. The Governor didn’t offer who or what committee decides which deformities served as a life worthy or not. 
In addition, one can’t help but notice that the Governor used the word infant – not product of conception, tissue, or fetus. He used the word “infant.”
Sadly, the lines have been drawn, erased, drawn again, and now an undisguised agenda emerges.   
Clearly politicians desire entrance into the ‘who lives/who dies’ conversation. The more frightening aspect, other than New York’s standing ovation and pink-lit empire state building celebrating the landmark law, is that politicians seem to feel the authority and qualifications to speak into this matter.  
When “six-months seems to good enough to me” allows a verdict on quality and value of life, and “…infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired” are guiding principles for politicians, the question naturally arising is, “what—or who—is next on their list?
How many parents at the breaking point while caring for special needs will listen to the New York state legislature or the Governor of Virginia – and see an escape clause for their heartache? How many families see a child born with a deformity and listen to elected officials as to letting that child live.  
Should family members of a loved one suffering from a fatal disease expected to end his life within a year —petition Hawaii to push it back from six months to twelve? 
 When the state grasps, for whatever reasons, authority to wield or permit death, society itself suffers. History offers lengthy lessons on states assuming power to kill or allow death.  
Wrapped in the guise of caring for the individual, politicians nevertheless now brandish a power that no government has ever wielded responsibly. If politicians can set a date, then they can set another date. If they determine that a newborn’s opportunity to live is now up to a discussion, what else can they determine?
 Those (and their caregivers) living with down syndrome, cerebral palsy, chronic pain, multiple amputations, paralysis, spina bifida, Alzheimer’s, traumatic brain issues, mental illness, and a host of other challenges —now wait in the wings to learn what the state next deems as “viable.”  
As citizens, we now need to draw a line in the sand of our own, a line for life. The only thing deemed ‘unviable’ should be the careers of the politicians supporting these acts.  
Peter Rosenberger is the host of HOPE FOR THE CAREGIVER radio broadcast weekly on more than 200 stations. He has cared for his wife, Gracie, who lives with severe disabilities for more than 32 years. @hope4caregiver 

About abyssum

I am a retired Roman Catholic Bishop, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to THE MEDIA IS COMPLICIT IN HELPING GOVERNOR CUOMO ACCOMPLISH THE TRAVESTY OF THE NEW ABORTION LAW

  2. TaynFiasGma says:
    January 31, 2019 at 3:30 pm

    Statistics lie, and liars USE statistics

  3. Ferde Rombola says:
    January 31, 2019 at 7:52 am

    Your supposed link to ‘See all comments’ does not link to all, or any comments.

Comments are closed.