Quantcast



Anti-Choice Group Backed By Rand Paul: “It Wants Jail Time For Women Who Have Abortions”

National Pro-Life Alliance, a group whose top legislative priority is backing Sen. Rand Paul’s fetal “personhood” bill and for whom Paul has sent numerous fundraising appeals, distributed an email to supporters yesterday lamenting the fact that women who have abortions can’t be prosecuted and face jail time.

In the email, the group’s president, Martin Fox, discusses the case of Amanda Kimbrough, an Alabama woman who had used meth during pregnancy and subsequently lost her son after he was born prematurely. Kimbrough became a test case for Alabama prosecutors attempting to extend the state’s “chemical endangerment” law to ensnare pregnant women. Her case eventually landed before the Alabama Supreme Court, which used the case to lay out a “personhood” framework clearly meant to jeopardize legal abortion. Kimbrough ultimately spent more than three years in prison.

In his email, which has the subject line “The Abortion Lobby’s ‘Get out of jail free’ card,” Fox praises the Alabama court’s decision in Kimbrough’s case, but says it “brings to light just how hypocritical the courts have been in dealing with the abortion issue.”

“Because of the perverted Roe v. Wade decision in 1973,” he writes, “it is considered a constitutional right for a woman to intentionally have an abortionist kill her unborn child at any time up until birth — either surgically or with the abortion drug RU-486. But if a woman recklessly uses drugs that kill her unborn child, even inadvertently, she’s arrested. Under this twisted logic, if a woman just asks an abortionist for the deadly RU-486 cocktail, as opposed to taking meth on her own, she’d have a get out of jail free card. Obviously, their so-called reasoning is absurd but until you and I ultimately succeed in our crusade to overturn Roe v. Wade, this is what the unborn will face.”

The version of his “Life at Conception Act” that Paul introduced this year stipulates that “Nothing in this bill shall be construed to require the prosecution of any woman for the death of her unborn child, a prohibition on in vitro fertilization, or a prohibition on use of birth control or another means of preventing fertilization.” Paul added this provision to the bill in recent years in an apparent attempt to push back against criticism of his “personhood” efforts. But Fox’s email shows that Paul’s “personhood” supporters fully expect that the end of Roe v. Wade would result in the prosecutions of pregnant women.

Paul’s most recent fundraising appeal for National Pro-Life Alliance came less than a week ago, on September 5. The group has also claimed that President Donald Trump, during his campaign, signed a pledge to back Paul’s “personhood” legislation.

Here’s Fox’s full email:

When the Supreme Court handed down its decision on Roe v. Wade, we all knew it was a disaster for children in the womb, and 44 years later there are over 61 million abortions to prove it.

But an Alabama Supreme Court case brings to light just how hypocritical the courts have been in dealing with the abortion issue.

Alabama (like most states) has statutes on their books that prohibit recklessly endangering a child’s life.

So it made perfect sense when Alabama state prosecutors charged meth addict Amanda Kimbrough, 32, for willingly placing her unborn child in danger by abusing methamphetamines during her pregnancy.

Tragically, the little boy, Tim Jr., was born 15 weeks prematurely and died just 19 minutes after his birth.

Then, in what is clearly a precedent setting decision, the Alabama Supreme Court held that the unborn child was a person — and that endangerment laws which protect children, must also protect unborn children.

Obviously Kimbrough did not use common sense, nor self-control, and was found guilty of carelessly destroying the little life in her womb.

So while I heartily applaud the Alabama courts for their clear-sightedness in affirming the personhood of the preborn, I can’t help but fume at the senseless hypocrisy that reigns from our highest Court.

Because of the perverted Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, it is considered a constitutional right for a woman to intentionally have an abortionist kill her unborn child at any time up until birth — either surgically or with the abortion drug RU-486.

But if a woman recklessly uses drugs that kill her unborn child, even inadvertently, she’s arrested.

Under this twisted logic, if a woman just asks an abortionist for the deadly RU-486 cocktail, as opposed to taking meth on her own, she’d have a get out of jail free card.

Obviously, their so-called reasoning is absurd but until you and I ultimately succeed in our crusade to overturn Roe v. Wade, this is what the unborn will face.

So it’s vital you and I keep up the fight.

For Life,

Martin Fox, President
National Pro-Life Alliance