The Tragedy of Ralph Northam and His Abortion Comments by Peter Moon

I am a staunch pro-lifer. If you have read “My Conservative Journey” or previous posts of mine, you’d already know this. I am against abortion in all cases, no matter the circumstances. I believe a baby should be brought to term if possible. Afterwards, if you don’t want it, go ahead and give it to an orphanage. In America, there will always be a couple looking to adopt. Just because you don’t want a baby with autism or blindness, that’s fine; give it to someone who does.


I said this to let you know my personal felling on abortion. Now, we’ll transition to the meat of this post.


The weekend of February 4th came and went like almost every other one did in Michigan. We had just gone through a polar vortex the likes of which hasn’t been seen in a long time. Temperatures dropped into the negative zone, and people died due to prolonged exposure of these freezing conditions. My school district called off 4 out of the 5 days in the school week, and other districts had to push back their midterms yet another week. It was a pretty crazy week. In Virginia, a different story was brewing. In that week, a bill was proposed in the Virginia legislature which seemed like your average abortion bill- “give women the right to choose” and all that. This bill seemed like it would entail the same fate all others like it had had in the past-Virginia’s General Assembly, controlled by Republicans, would kill the bill before it was fresh out of the gate. Nothing seemed to be abnormal or controversial with it.


The main problem (and saving grace) with bills in government is that nobody reads the bills being passed through. And why would they? Who wants to sit down and study a 500+ page “report” or budget bill when you could just be handed a 5-page “quick-time” report on that report? This is where the explosion first came. On Friday, a Virginia state legislature person went on a media station, and discussed the bill. This was the first mistake. Unlike previous bills proposed in other states, this wasn’t a “gradual recession” of laws-it was a complete and utter obliteration of them. So, that was problem one.


Then, there arose a confusion on this bill. Did it roll back all abortion laws? Did it stop mandates? What the heck was it doing? In order to clear up any confusion, Virginia’s Democratic governor, Ralph Northam went on a media station, and explained the situation. In this interview, Northam described how the bill would change the birthing process. This is where the second mistake appeared.


In this situation after the bill’s passing, Northam said a lot of things that need to critically examined. I took these statements from https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/virginia-governor-defends-letting-infants-die/ , so go there if you need to read more about the interview.

“This is why decisions such as this should be made by providers, physicians, and the mothers and fathers that are involved. When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of obviously the mother, with the consent of the physician — more than one physician, by the way — and it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s non-viable.”

We’ll start with Northam’s first couple of statements. First off, third trimester abortions occur in the third part of a pregnancy. I’m not an expert on the situation, but I’ll just guess that this is the time where the baby looks most like, well, the baby. That’s problem #1.


Next, the problem with Northam’s “Mothers” statement. In the Left’s mind, the “Mother has the choice” to abort her child. However, we need to remember that a baby is created by two individuals: a Mother and a Father. If the mother had no partner/lover/spouse there in her delivery room, then the statements said would be understandable. However, we need to remember that pregnancies aren’t exclusive to teens and single-parents. Married couples, as well as romantic couples have kids. Why isn’t the consent of the father needed? If he isn’t a deadbeat, then we can assume he’s been there with the woman since day one, right? Doesn’t he get the chance to promote his opinion? Another thing with this “the woman only” idea: if the Left loves the women in pregnancies so much, then why does a physician need to be there as well? Shouldn’t the mother be the only one who can decide?


Next, problem #3. Northam says “non vital” babies, as well as “babies with deformities”. What kind of deformities? Besides, why should that baby be killed off? I’m legally blind. I have a vision impairment. Further down the line, I’ll probably go completely blind. My life will either be horrible, or unseeable (haha) for the rest of my existence. Why wasn’t I aborted? Should I have been aborted? What gives the right to literally kill a child with issues? And no, don’t use the “baby Hitler” example: name me 10 people with deformities who’ve caused mass harm to society. Why are we targeting them?

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. 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.”

This statement has been played at least 100 times on right-wing media in the past days. If you’re a little late on the importance of this statement, I’ll fill you in.


Oftentimes in pro-abortion arguments, the people pushing pro-choice legislation will argue that the reason abortion is morally okay is because it is “termination of something that isn’t a life”. One place where pro-life and pro-choice pushers agree is: When a baby is born, that solidifies the baby’s existence as a human life.


Read over Northam’s words again. He specifically states: “The baby will be delivered.” If you’re a pro-choice person, re-read that statement. Say it aloud until you understand that Northam just said in a matter of words: “A baby has now become a human life; thus, all actions beyond this point are affecting a human life.”


This is where the real controversy exploded. As I said before, Pro-Choice people have almost always accepted the statement that, “Once a baby is born, they are then considered a human being; thus, they have all the rights applied to them as an adult or child.” Northam, however, said that the baby could be born. Then, the physician and mother would go into another room, and “a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
Northam could be saying three possible things in his statement. Either A, the baby would be kept by the mother. B, the baby could be given up for adoption. Or C, the baby could be terminated. Again, Northam never said something alluding to murder. However, he never clarified that he didn’t mean “murder” as a possible option in that “discussion”.
Now, to be fair, a representative did try to walk back these statements:

“No woman seeks a third trimester abortion except in the case of tragic or difficult circumstances, such as a nonviable pregnancy or in the event of severe fetal abnormalities, and the governor’s comments were limited to actions physicians would take in the event that a woman in those circumstances went into labor,”

There’s an issue with this: Northam never explicitly said “this would not include baby murder”! And no, that’s not a straw man, either; in this case, the baby is now a “real” baby. Also, the statement with the “third trimester” thing isn’t a strong statement. There are cases where the mother of that child will choose abortion in the third trimester, even if the baby is healthy and “viable”. Then, there was the “actions during labor” statement. Let’s just clear this up right now: No, Northam was not “just referring to the actions….”. Re-read his statement above. It was clear he was talking about actions after labor. Please, re-read his statement. I don’t think he was talking about “during labor”. Let’s lay it out: A woman doesn’t go into another room, make her (out of her body) baby comfortable, then “continue in labor”. It’s not possible! So, this is a boldfaced, misleading statement. On to the rest of her statement.

“Attempts to extrapolate these comments otherwise is in bad faith and underscores exactly why the governor believes physicians and women, not legislators, should make these difficult and deeply personal medical decisions.”

No, it doesn’t. Listen, progressive women; Republicans don’t want their hands anywhere near your private parts when it comes to legislating abortion. We do, however want to protect the life of that baby you’re going to (or are planning to) abort. Again, go ahead and read Northam’s statements yourself and tell me whether it’s clear or not what he’s saying. In fact, go ahead and find the interview yourself. Watch it and analyze what he’s saying. Then, please see if I am correct in my assertions or not.

Follow @realPeterMoon on twitter. He is a Maroon Elite Member, our youngest writer, and also writes for the Political Curriculum.

Leave a Reply

Sign up for The UC Newsletter

%d bloggers like this: