The woman said she felt her baby’s heart beating as her newborn girl slid out of the mother’s hands into Lake Pontchartrain, near New Orleans.
The Metairie, La., 20-year-old said she birthed the baby at home but didn’t want the child. Ciara Craig later turned herself in to police. She has been charged with first-degree murder.
This single woman had choices besides murder. Louisiana has a Safe Haven law, which allows people to leave babies up to 31 days old at an emergency room, a police station or the like.
Craig now faces the possibility of capital punishment and most certainly years behind bars.
Yet, a bone-chilling fact should send shivers down the spine. Had this woman aborted the baby just days before, she would face no criminal charges.
The only difference is which side of the womb the baby was on. In the womb, she would have been considered subject to the mother’s “choice” of the baby’s death, by abortion. After birth, the child is considered murdered.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade makes abortion available throughout pregnancy in every state. The opinion in Doe v. Bolton makes abortion available for virtually any reason. Both opinions were issued Jan. 22, 1973.
Did it occur to anyone else that this baby in Louisiana, callously dropped into a lake, by abortion would have been just as callously killed by someone supposedly from the “healing arts?”
Did it occur to anyone else that the pro-choice crowd would have hailed the mother for exercising what they consider her constitutional right to destroy her offspring?
Did it occur to anyone else that the choice of abortion would have been equally as devastating to this little girl, whose life would have been extinguished, only in an “acceptable” manner?
This case makes plain the fact that culpability under the law boils down to a very thin line. Before delivery, a baby’s death is perfectly legal. After delivery, it’s considered a crime.
Anyone who would murder her own child deserves the death penalty. The question is, why isn’t abortion considered as heinous an act of taking a human life as dropping your newborn into a lake to drown?
What does the new president think about this? Is Barack Obama troubled in his heart about the slim differences here from legally taking this child’s life had the woman gotten an abortion instead?
His prepared statements have claimed he favors reducing the number of abortions. But actions speak louder than words.
The day after the national March for Life, President Obama signed an executive order overturning the Mexico City Policy, first instituted by President Reagan. This action allows several hundred million dollars of taxpayer money to fund abortion organizations such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation. IPPF promotes abortion as a form of population control.
Obama cosponsored the Freedom of Choice Act, which embodies the radical abortionists’ wish list. It would invalidate the partial-birth abortion ban, as well as state and local laws such as those requiring parental consent.
In an unguarded moment on the campaign trail last year, Obama let slip what he really thinks. “I’ve got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
“Punished with a baby.” That’s what Ms. Craig in Louisiana sought to escape. Why, Mr. President, is it any worse for Ms. Craig to get out from being punished with a baby produced in a one-night stand in the way she “solved” her little “problem?”
Had it been one of his daughters, Obama apparently would have urged abortion. You know, to avoid “punishment.” I guess Obama’s “values and morals” skip those Bible verses about children being a blessing.
But does Obama have any concern about infanticide? His record as a state legislator says no. He personally led the effort in a committee he chaired against the Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. This bill would have protected children born despite an abortionist’s best efforts to kill them, entitling them to the rights of a “person.”
Obama killed this prolife legislation in 2001, 2002 and 2003. He also fought state legislation outlawing the partial-birth abortion procedure (which liberal U.S. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan called “just too close to infanticide”) and requiring parental notification.
Thus, the chilling fact remains that what was done in Louisiana is far too close to the most extreme abortion position, indeed, verging on infanticide. And it illustrates that the slippery slope between sanctioning abortion and infanticide is really slipperier than we think.
More troubling still, even than a young woman’s murdering her own newborn baby, is politicians who muddy the waters on what is permissible in matters of life and death. They employ smooth words when prepared, but readily embrace extremist policies that snuff the lives of the unborn and even of the just-born. Such politicians poison the culture.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter