Since the overturn of Roe, no news outlet seems to hate babies more than the left-wing Jezebel. The writers at Jezebel have been moaning and gnashing their teeth that babies cannot be murdered in the womb. So now Jezebel is going after legislation that helps babies and mothers. Jezebel contributor, Kylie Cheung, is upset that new legislation will consider fetuses people in the Unborn Child Support Act.
Chueng, infamous for giving the worst takes on abortion, like hating adoption, is upset at the potential pro-life legislation. Congressional Republicans plan to amend the Social Security Act “to ensure that child support for unborn children is collected and distributed under the child support enforcement program.” The bill seeks to help mothers support their children and “would help ensure women have opportunities to receive child-support payments from the earlier days of their pregnancy.” A bill that is a social program and helps support women, there’s no way that the lefties can hate it! Think again.
Cheung identifies the bill as something that dehumanizes not only women but “pregnant people” as well. The phrase “pregnant people” tells you everything you need to know about this article. The biggest sin that this bill commits is categorizing fetuses as people. According to Cheung, the result of this bill that helps women and babies is a dystopian nightmare. “When laws are interpreted as conferring personhood upon embryos and fetuses, pregnant people who miscarry, need emergency abortion care to not die, seek certain medications, or even lose a pregnancy after being physically attacked, they become possible murder suspects,” she writes. “IVF—which requires routine disposal of unused embryos—becomes a crime, a pregnant person traveling across state lines without their partner’s consent becomes kidnapping, substance use or certain behaviors before a child is even born become “child abuse.” Cheung not only laments that babies being saved from being sacrificed to Moloch but promotes inconsistent myths about abortion, such as the miscarriage argument.
Cheung brings Dana Sussman from the National Advocates For Pregnant Women to support her outlandish claim. “If their rights are secondary to the fetus or at odds with the fetus, that lends to an environment in which violence — whether it’s state violence like imprisonment or interpersonal violence — can be committed against pregnant people with far less accountability,” Sussman states. So, according to Cheung and Sussman, a law that discourages women from slaughtering their babies will lead to more violence against women and babies. Where’s the logic in that?!
You’ve got to hate babies for a take like this.