When the gunman walked into the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs, Texas, he reportedly targeted children. His youngest victim was a baby who had yet to be born. Under Texas law, if the murderer had lived, he would have faced a murder charge for the killing of the unborn baby.
Quoting National Right to Life, “Under a [Texas] law signed June 20, 2003, and effective September 1, 2003, the protections of the entire criminal code extend to ‘an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth.’ The law does not apply to ‘conduct committed by the mother of the unborn child’ or to ‘a lawful medical procedure performed by a physican or other licensed health care provider with the requisite consent.'”
Even though the Texas feticide law doesn’t extend to mothers who legally abort their babies, pro-abortion advocates still despise the law.
An article published in 2014 at Rewire complained:
The rush to establish “personhood” and the enthusiasm for protecting fetuses above all else has perverted the stated purpose of fetal homicide laws. Once intended to protect fetuses and provide to pregnant women and their families a legal remedy for wrongful death, fetal homicide laws are being misused by overzealous prosecutors and judges to trample women’s rights in favor of the nebulous personhood rights of fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses. These nebulous personhood rights even include the right of a fetus to be free from any potential harm in utero. Accordingly, women who engage in stigmatized behavior—like drug or alcohol use—are finding themselves incarcerated and arrested, charged under fetal homicide laws that were specifically not intended to criminalize their behavior or punish them.
Pro-abortionists get it. They will fight tooth and nail to prevent our legal system from acknowledging the personhood of babies still living in their mother’s womb. They have to wage that war in the legal realm because the fight would be over before it even started if the battle took place in our neighborhoods.
The horror people continue to feel at the tragic loss of life in Texas this past Sunday is compounded because many of the victims were children. Furthermore, the fact that one of the children killed had yet to be born does not lessen the horror for most people. For many of us, the realization that a baby’s life was horrifically ended while the baby was still inside the safest of safe places — the mother’s womb — only heightens the horror. How much evil does it take to kill a baby, either inside or outside of the mother’s womb?
And that’s the dilemma — the probably insurmountable dilemma for pro-abortionists. Those of us who have yet to completely surrender our morals to the sexual revolution (our society’s Moloch) know from the depths of our being that a baby still inside the mother’s womb is life. Babies yet to be born are fully human.
Fully human does not mean fully self-determinative, nor does it mean fully cognizant. If pro-abortionists have their way, our society will soon begin disposing of humans that are defined as undesirable and lacking full personhood. The mentally handicapped, young babies, the elderly with dementia, and anyone else who fits their definition will be fair game for to be exterminated.
Thankfully, even as our federal government continues to sanction and fund the murder of babies, state governments are making sure that a line in the sand is continuing to be drawn and redrawn. Texas’s feticide law is doing just that. It keeps progressives from defining personhood in a manner that will be used to justify the mass murder of various groups of humans. The law also confronts us with the fact that babies inside their mother’s womb are fully human and deserving of the right to life.