January 1, What Liberal Governor Just Signed Into Law Will Make Your Blood Boil

Wyatt’s Take

• Massachusetts just joined the most extreme abortion states in the world — no limits, any reason, right up to birth
• Doctors who actually deliver high-risk babies say late-term abortion is never medically necessary — delivery saves lives, abortion ends them
• Politicians hide behind words like ‘healthcare’ while defending procedures that stop beating hearts at 24+ weeks

Massachusetts already let women get abortions up to 24 weeks — a point where over 10,000 babies are born alive and survive every year in America. But that wasn’t enough for Gov. Maura Healey.

This week, she signed a new law with no gestational limits at all. Surrounded by cheering young women, she made Massachusetts the tenth state to take this extreme position — one that puts us out of step even with most of the world.

Only 15 countries worldwide allow elective abortion past 15 weeks. Sixty-five percent of countries that permit abortion limit it to 12 weeks or less.

Pro-choice lawmakers are still furious about the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022. They’ve been working overtime to push back against pro-life laws, and this is their latest win.

Virginia is considering similar measures. This November, voters there will decide on a constitutional amendment that would guarantee third-trimester abortions for any reason a doctor thinks necessary to protect a woman’s “mental health.”

That language is vague enough to cover just about anything. Interpreted broadly, it means abortion for any reason, at any time.

Supporters claim these laws save women’s lives in emergencies. But they hide behind soft language like “expanded access to reproductive healthcare.”

The sanitized phrasing works because it disguises what abortion actually is. Mass. Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll said the law was about “compassion, support and the ability to receive care.”

She called it a path to “medically appropriate care close to home.”

Driscoll, Healey, and their allies say third-trimester abortions protect mothers in medical emergencies. But doctors who actually manage high-risk pregnancies disagree.

The American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs says late-term abortions are never necessary. In any real third-trimester emergency — severe preeclampsia, placental abruption, maternal sepsis — the answer is to deliver the baby, not abort it.

If the child doesn’t survive delivery, the group notes:

“The body of the unborn child is treated with respect, recognizing the humanity of the life which is lost.”

Pro-abortion groups point to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) for backup. But ACOG isn’t neutral.

The organization openly advocates to “increase access to abortion,” calls for repealing gestational limits, and says patients should get care “at any point during a pregnancy.” ACOG blurs miscarriage care, premature delivery, and induced abortion together under the same umbrella of “reproductive healthcare.”

This creates the false idea that restricting late-term abortion would leave mothers dying in emergency rooms. But you can’t respect an unborn child’s life through poison and dismemberment when delivery is an option.

Some women seeking third-trimester abortions aren’t in danger themselves. They’ve received a difficult fetal diagnosis — often tragic and heartbreaking.

I have deep sympathy for any mother told her child has a condition that will end his or her life shortly after birth. But a fatal diagnosis isn’t ethical grounds for ending that life.

These children can still be delivered, held, and cared for in whatever time they have. They can receive NICU or palliative hospice care.

The reasoning gets even shakier when “severe anomaly” includes non-fatal conditions. Spina bifida and Down syndrome aren’t terminal.

Many people born with them live long, full lives. Yet the vast majority of pregnancies with these diagnoses end in abortion.

That’s not a decision about survival. It’s a judgment about whose life is worth living — and it edges toward eugenics.

That position depends on refusing to call an unborn child what she is — a human being. Even as ultrasound images, audible heartbeats, and kicks from inside the womb make the fact impossible to deny.

So when politicians offer bland statements about how “medical decisions should be between a patient and their doctor,” it rings hollow. They’re ignoring the rights of the second patient — clearly alive by every vital sign.

Massachusetts framed its law as necessary for emergencies. But pro-choice groups don’t want any limits at all.

Reproductive Equity Now, a pro-abortion group, insists that “at no point in pregnancy” should lawmakers determine when abortion is permissible — emergency or not.

In other states with full-term abortion access, lawmakers have been honest about what these laws really do. When then-New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy was asked whether his state’s law protected abortion “at any point in a woman’s pregnancy: all nine months,” he answered:

“Correct.”

In debates, pro-abortion advocates focus on rape, incest, or medical emergency. What they won’t acknowledge are the situations where women get third-trimester abortions for other reasons.

They may say “these abortions are rare,” implying they’re not worth moral concern. Yet these same advocates center their case on rare situations of rape and incest, which occur in less than 1% of pregnancies.

Either rare situations matter, or they don’t. Abortion advocates don’t get to pick and choose.

One study found that women who got abortions after 20 weeks cited delayed recognition of pregnancy, indecision, financial trouble, difficulty finding a provider, and travel barriers. Others cited relationship status, mental health struggles, drug use, and domestic violence.

These circumstances are genuinely hard. But they’re not justification for ending the life of a healthy, viable baby.

No-limits abortion advocates don’t see unborn children as human beings. They see them as parts of a woman’s body and extensions of personal autonomy.

Erica Millar, a late-term abortion advocate, wrote that legal gestational limits force women to “terminate pregnancies they would otherwise keep” and “keep pregnancies they would have otherwise terminated.”

She says women are forced to end wanted pregnancies “before they are emotionally and psychologically prepared” to do so.

But a pregnancy isn’t a product to keep or return. It’s the biological reality of another human being’s existence — one that will live or die based on the choice of an emotionally fragile, vulnerable mother.

She’s often pushed toward abortion without understanding the full consequences. She’s told it will be easier not to see the child, that he will likely die at birth anyway, that abortion spares him pain.

Yet studies find it can benefit a mother’s long-term well-being to see and hold her stillborn child. One study found up to 99% of mothers who did so were satisfied with that decision.

It seems similar results could occur for women with children who might die soon after birth. Choosing abortion to avoid seeing your child’s body doesn’t make grieving any easier.

Lawmakers can dress up abortion in the language of “termination” and “healthcare.” But that doesn’t silence the suction pump or make the forceps invisible.

It doesn’t erase the existence of a person who never was before and never will be again. Too many politicians are more concerned with talking points than with the physical reality of what they’re defending.

The pro-abortion Society for Family Planning itself warns of what may occur during these procedures:

“Unanticipated expulsion of a fetus with cardiorespiratory activity.”

Abortion after 24 weeks is never necessary, and it is always barbaric. Healey scored a political win this week.

Virginia may hand the movement another one in November. But every time a legislature calls this “healthcare,” a beating heart gets a little easier to ignore.

And that is the real cost no press release will mention.

Why It Matters

This isn’t about healthcare. It’s about what kind of country we want to be — one that protects the most vulnerable, or one that looks the other way when it’s politically convenient. Working families in the heartland know the difference between saving a life and ending one. No amount of fancy language from coastal elites will change that truth.