Texas Republicans Reach New Low as They Demand Non-Viable Pregnancies Be Carried to Term


‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.’
– Jesus of Nazareth, The Parable of the Last Judgment, Matthew 25:31-46

Though New Testament scholar Geza Vermes calls this an “inauthentic” parable, dating from later in the first century of the Common Era, he points to its ancient origins in Jewish thought (Leviticus 19:2) and compares it to the metaphor of the shepherd dividing his “good” sheep from the “evil” goats.

The ancient Jewish thinking followed here is the idea that people should imitate God, Vermes says. Furthermore, the idea that “man’s behavior toward his fellow man” is a “moral yardstick by which good and evil actions are ultimately distinguished” is an “essential concept in the teachings of Jesus.”

So where does the amendment to H.B. 2510, espoused by Texas State Rep. Matt Schaefer (R-Tyler), “that would make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy after 20 weeks, even if a fetus “has a severe and irreversible abnormality,” effectively forcing families with wanted, but unsustainable pregnancies to carry to term at the behest of the state and against the advice of their doctors or their own wishes,” become something Jesus could get behind?

I ask this because Schaefer himself, in proposing the amendment, appealed to Scripture. As Andrea Grimes at RH Reality Check puts it, “Schaefer said, during debate over his amendment, that suffering is ‘part of the human condition, since sin entered the world.'”

Schaefer told Breibart News,

This is an issue that is not going to go away for those who believe in it. I came to Austin to do the right thing, to do things that matter. This is important. If we are not going to get the chance to have our bills heard in committee or get to a hearing, then we will use the procedural mechanisms that are available for us, including amendments. We have to value what God values.

Of course, Schaefer does not tell us exactly where in the Bible God wants non-viable fetuses carried to term. He ordered plenty of them torn out of their mothers’ wombs in the Old Testament, after all.

Grimes relates that,

Even some Republican lawmakers opposed Schaefer’s proposal, casting it as a cruel and unnecessary intrusion into the lives of grieving Texans.

“Why should the heavy, blunt hand of the government come into that most heartrending decision?” said Rep. J.D. Sheffield (R-Gatesville), a medical doctor.

Remember this amendment the next time a Republican tells you they are for limited government.

The “least of these” is certainly a newborn baby forced to suffer before an inevitable death, painful to both the child and to the parents. Schaefer can believe suffering is a consequence of sin if he likes – the First Amendment allows this – but the First Amendment does not allow the legislation of his religious belief.

On a deeper level, where Christians are concerned, Jesus does not order suffering. In fact, he is a champion of those who suffer, as his Sermon on the Mount demonstrates. It is difficult to believe a divine shepherd (Jesus’ role here) would think Schaefer’s proposal a good one. After all, Jesus said,

“Let the little children come to me, and do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of heaven belongs” (Matthew 19:14).

In other words, in dividing his flock, Jesus did not see sin in children. They were not to be punished, but like the poor, lifted up.

So why is Schaefer so eager to make children suffer? I get that he hates women – that’s a Republican condition – but children too? Little, newborn infants?

Yet the Republicans in state after state and across the nation, legislate again and again against women and children and against the poor and needy.

They are not the party of Jesus. They are not even remotely followers of the rabbi from Galilee, and it is an outrage that they use his name to justify their evil.

How mainline Protestants and Catholics tolerate this bastardization of their religion is beyond me.

Schaefer’s logic could ultimately be extended to all sorts of evil acts. The world is a fallen place anyway, he is saying. So why not legalize murder and rape (the GOP has shown it is already behind the latter, I think) and incest and other forms of violence?

After all, when someone brutalizes your family, or someone you love, Rep. Schaefer, just remember suffering is ‘part of the human condition, since sin entered the world.'”

Believe it or not, Grimes tells us, “Schaefer’s amendment passed, briefly” by a vote of 83-46. Which says pretty much all you need to know about Texas Republicans, who are certainly the lowest form of humanity.

Thankfully, that was “before state Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer (D-San Antonio) filed a legislative point of order that prompted the bill’s sponsor to pull down the entire piece of legislation for review.”

Of course, poor Schaefer is being persecuted for his beliefs because people had the audacity to disagree with him:

Melissa Conway of Texas Right to Life told Breitbart Texas, “We applaud Representative Matt Schaefer for taking a bold stand for all life. Yesterday, Rep. Schaefer clearly demonstrated that regardless of the political fallout from House leadership or the abortion crowd, he will fight to defend those who are voiceless and those who are the most vulnerable. Sadly, Representative Schaefer was persecuted—even by some of his colleagues who self-identify as Pro-Life.” Conway continued, “With majority passage, the most significant Pro-Life amendment championed by Rep. Schaefer would have corrected a tragic loophole in all the state’s Pro-Life laws that allow abortion when the unborn child is perceived as having a disability or an abnormality.” Conway concluded, “The ultimate outcome of the DSHS Sunset bill is yet to be determined. What we do know is that the majority of Texas legislators want to protect ALL unborn babies, even those who are ill and disabled, and simply perceived as less than perfect.”

Laughably, this interest in “protecting ALL unborn babies” doesn’t extend to them once they are born. Then the GOP loses all interest in them. Maybe it just wants to forward them all on to Jesus more expeditiously so he can pay for their care.

Let us hope next time around saner minds prevail, or that public outrage dooms the legislation to the nether regions of the nearest trash can.

Sources: Geza Vermes, The Authentic Gospel of Jesus, Penguin Books, 2003.

56 Replies to “Texas Republicans Reach New Low as They Demand Non-Viable Pregnancies Be Carried to Term”

  1. So they are all for birthing children who will probably not live to see a birthday, at a cost of a million a day, but they are against the ACA,so just who will pay this cost? The parents may be bankrupted. The hospitals in Texas will be forced to swallow the unpaid bills, or will the good Republicans all chip in? And what of a dead fetus? No doubt the Representative thinks, against all medical advice, that a woman should continue to carry a dead fetus to ‘term,’ endangering her own life in the process, because “evil exists.” Yes, sir, evil exists, and its name is Republicans. Satan has taken over the GOP, and inflicted them on the rest of us. Praise God, from whom all blessings flow. Wonder how he sees a severely handicapped fetus as a blessing…sounds like Santimonius Rick has been to Texas with Bella recently. By the way, just who is paying Bella Santorum’s massive medical bills since Daddy is unemployed? Let me guess: Rick and family are on the evil ACA.

  2. How Anti-Abortion Intensity Wins in Pro-Choice America

    For four decades, American public opinion on the issue of abortion has been largely unchanged. As the numbers from Gallup, the Pew Research Center and other polls show, roughly half of Americans have identified themselves as “pro-choice” even as consistent majorities support keeping abortion legal in all or many circumstances.
    Read More

  3. In the minds of these people, “sin”= female sex organs, and it entered the world as soon as Eve was made. Vulvas are especially squicky, as they can potentially give their owners pleasure. Gahd wouldn’t want this. Painful forced sex, difficult pregnancies,miserable childbirths, are ways to ensure they cause pain, and the fetus is treasured as a means to ensure they are a source of misery instead. And then, since, once it is born, its former receptacle may nonetheless love it, the ensuring of its misery, futurelessness, and (if possible) death, is the ideal way to wring repentance from her evil, vulva-having heart.

  4. The same crowd who screams that there is “Too Much Government Interference” in their lives, are all too eager to engage in the same with everyone else’s.

    I am forced to conclude that non-viable fetuses such as Anencephaly Feti, are the #1 source of Texan Republicans.

  5. Hospitals seldom swallow the bill ever. I worked in billing in a hospital and that was in the Pre-ACA days, when insurance companies could drop you from pre-existing conditions, or even for cause.

    People who came into the hospital and could not pay (too wealthy for Medicaid/too poor to carry HC Insurance) or they paid a deposit fee and after treatment getting them to pay the balance was not only time consuming but not cost effective either. After about a year of trying to collect the hospital(s) would figure what the % was that was unpaid debt, plus the cost of trying to collect said debt. This was used to raise the rates every year. Thus, we the insured paid for the uninsured.

  6. And when women start to die because of this will they change their minds? I don’t think so. They are men trying to force women back into being chattel and non human status. Do I think they will ever learn, no I don’t. The only time they might have a change of heart is when it happens to someone in their family, but then again all they might do is raise their hands, praise Jesus, and say it was Gods will. I wonder what makes men like that hate women so much.

  7. So where are the men’s responsibility in all this? Apparently we all get pregnant on our own. I say a sex boycott with all republican men until they take responsibility instead of degrading and attempt to submissify women you supposedly love.

    End this double standard.

  8. All women in any state who are FORCED to do this. Should put their congressman as the father of the child…

  9. The fear set in in the mid 60’s when more women were going to college and many men were going to factory work or war. Women started getting the big-boss jobs in greater numbers striking fear and competition towards their women superiors. There will always be these controlling men until we change the way our sons are raised to see women as equals.

  10. Would you also then agree that men should have the right to “choose” to pay child support if a woman “chooses” to have a baby he doesn’t want?

  11. The way they see it, men have no responsibility. Vulvas are these terrible horseshoe magnets that, unless their owners constantly keep them lead-shielded and locked away, suck in innocent penises from every street, house, bar, shop, and alley, and the men just get dragged helplessly along. It’s sort of the principle of strict liability on the part of whoever owns a dangerous instrumentality.

  12. First of all, “Republicans hate women” should be used in the encyclopedia as the definitive example of the dumbest most pure strawman argument in existence. Second,
    [Snipped as quatsch]
    I situation far more common than that discussed above.

  13. Because Judith Iscariot will never get that the next time she goes to the toilet, she’ll still see the same thing as the last time she went to the toilet.

  14. No Erica because the father of that unwanted child could’ve kept his pants zipped or he could opt to get a vasectomy if he never wants to have to pay child support. My ex got a vasectomy – he played a round of golf less than 24 hrs. later. It’s about as minimally invasive a surgery as there is. It’s time for boys to mature into men and accept responsibility for the consequences of their actions without whining about having to do so.

  15. Once again, social conservatives are demonstrating their unwillingness to do their homework before taking a stand on important policy positions affecting millions of Americans.
    Lord knows we don’t want to be informed about the fundamentals of human biology and medical procedures when creating legislation that would impact the health of so many women in America.

  16. FACT…..republican men hate women because they can no longer CONTROL them!
    They want to inflict as much emotional stress and pain on women to take their revenge out….

  17. they love the fetus, but hate the child. [see, baltimore]. unless its a black child, then hang em from the nearest tree.
    the gop love the blacks, they think everyone should own a few…

  18. Where’s the legislation mandating vasectomy? All abortions should also require the father to have a vasectomy! If the GOP wants to be in everyones bedroom then start addressing the male component. Of course, this will never happen. It is always the women who bears the responsibility of not only having the child but also raising the child. The male counterpart is excused, especially in all these GOP legislative bedroom issues.

  19. Numbers 21:5
    God: “Men, are you suspicious that your wife is pregnant with someone else’s kid? I can’t tell whose it is, because I’m a bronze age creation, but I’m ordering you to take her to the priest and have her drink bitter water. If it’s yours, she’ll keep it. If it’s some other man’s, she’ll abort the baby and become barren. You’ll never have any kids after that, which will punish both of you, because I’m illogical and unscientific. I can’t just order the fetus to die. We have to do a magic trick.”

  20. these conservative monsters want to force a woman to have a child BUT once that child is born, these conservatives could care less about that or the mother. the rightwing only cares about the fetus. THIS IS INSANITY!!! we must reign in these rightwing religious whackos NOW.

  21. Pro choice advocates in the Lone Star state are just like
    Colonel James Neill’s freedom fighters at the Alamo. This
    cause is far from being hopeless, but the odds are in
    favor of ignorance. Same red tide pollutes NC & SC as well. The only solution is a combination of organization
    and motivation against repug domlnation. Surrender is
    NOT an option!

  22. EXACTLY!!! you nailed it. these rightwing whackos who say they want to make govt smaller are full of sh*t. everything they speak of would make the govt more intrusive then ever before. it is pure hypocritical conservative madness!!!

  23. “I ask this because Schaefer himself, in proposing the amendment, appealed to Scripture. As Andrea Grimes at RH Reality Check puts it, “Schaefer said, during debate over his amendment, that suffering is ‘part of the human condition, since sin entered the world.’””

    Funny…I thought all sin left the world when Jesus died since he died “for the sins of the world” therefore taking away for the need TO suffer!

  24. Just when you think it could not get any worse in this state, something like this comes along. I’m utterly speechless that some bible thumping fool would propose this amendment. Thankfully my state rep, the aforementioned JD Sheffield, is more of a moderate and will not vote for it. What a disaster this state has become. I’m so embarrassed.

  25. They don’t love the fetus. They only want to exert their power and authority over women. Those pesky females are getting out of hand — gotta show ’em who’s boss. And we know that this idea is being enforced not just via politicians but especially by the pastors of their fundie churches.
    One of these days, all those females who vote GOP without thinking, or simply under the “advice” of their husbands, are going to pay for it dearly. The sad thing is, every other American woman will too.

  26. Too late for that, nice try though. The responsibility should have been exercised before the child was conceived. I mean birth control. It is not just a woman’s responsibility, but that of her sexual partner as well. No, once a child is here, wanted or not, a man, or a woman, depending on legal custody agreement, is obligated to share in the expense of raising that child.

  27. If your against abortion, then just don’t have one! How does this affect any man? The whole argument is moronic. Do these people think they’re getting a star in crown for being righteous? Chances are you wouldn’t know if your neighbor had an abortion, unless she told you. In the case of pregnancys that won’t end in a viable child, I think your cruelty tells everyone what you truly are! The term christian, doesn’t come to mind.

  28. Sigh…gotta love when some of these ignorant, over-confident SoCons start talking about morality and then write legislation that is the equivalent of spaghetti code.
    Kinda like when my dog tries to do quantum physics.

  29. They want to make it smaller than a man and bigger than a woman. I mean, assuming the man is white.

    Am I the only person here who noticed this guy looks like Timothy McVeigh dressed up as Matt Lauer?

  30. This is horrific. As a woman who had numerous miscarriages and a pregnancy that we lost the heartbeat, to make a woman carry a nonviable fetus to term would be complete torture. Emotionally and physically unhealthy. The only thing about nonviable pregnancies, they usually end up miscarrying or premature. I believe the people of Texas are drinking too much of the fracking water and losing their minds! Well at least their politicians!

  31. From South of Dakota, from an interested parent, brother, son.. a Christian with an uncommon perspective..
    DEATH WITH DIGNITY.. Texas is currently in a quandary over abortion, I would expand the argument to include inflicted intentional DEATH, whether from abortion, capital punishment or euthanasia, I would then suggest MY GOD considers all life and lives HIS, I offer this Constitutional compromise: a timely seated jury trial.
    Currently the Constitution demands jury trials for civil debt over $20.00 and in all criminal defenses. Abortion, Capital Punishment and Euthanasia are final acts, the responsibility belongs to more than a single person.. to a competent seated jury with jurisdiction that can enact respect, dignity and compassion, that can allow one to pass in the presence of family, friends and the concerned.
    I would suggest someone review this proposal, who knows to someone it may make sense. “JT” Thompson, National Naturalist List

  32. Prior to Roe v. Wade, such matters were, in most jurisdictions, decided by hospital committees, and if the life or physical integrity of the woman was jeopardized by the pregnancy, they ratified a termination. Supervision of these decisions was in the hands of the Board of Health, not a bunch of politicians. After the Sherri Finkbein case, many jurisdictions also authorized termination in the case of a damaged fetus; a dead one was always removed as sound practice. That was far less restrictive than what we see proposed here, and the decision was made by *doctors*.

  33. These people treat these “newborn babies” like a fine “Veal” steak. That’s what they want them for. In my opinion.

  34. Also for use in medical procedures, making of “cosmetics” and also in all of their very important “Demonic-Rituals”. I would say…

  35. Think your statement that the people in Texas have been drinking fracking water is really correct. Has to be all the people because they keep voting these politicians in.
    The few that don’t vote this way are over run by crazies.

  36. “Possibly” as one of their “prime” (TOP-SECRET) “ingredients” for their “Elite” (1%) Masters “famous” (personal) “Texas Chain Saw” brand of Texas-Chile and their many other “special-people” food and (personal) “pet” food product requirements. Am I really (actually) “Drifting” too far off coarse here???

  37. well the men making laws to force every pregnancy to birth should be more than delighted to pay child support. can’t have it both ways.

  38. In Michigan before Roe v Wade, the Governor had to sign off on a therapeutic medical abortion. And if he decided it was not necessary, he could refuse and allow the woman to die.
    There was a friend of the family who had to have this done and she could not understand why the governor, who was not her husband or doctor had that authority or right to make her medical treatment decisions over the doctors. I was about 12 when that happened to her.
    Can you just see all of these “I am not a doctor, scientist, or whatever,” know nothing politicians today having the power to decide if you are worthy of your life over a un-born, non-viable or dead fetus ? Scary. We do not need to go back to the days when medical science is doled out by politicians, not doctors, based upon whether the value of the life of a living person over the potential life of a defective fetus whose life, if it did survive birth, was not compatible with life itself ?

  39. Perhaps the poor man has misunderstood the Authorized Version of the Bible’s ‘Suffer the little children..’

  40. I think it’s too easy to say Republicans “hate women” and “hate unborn infants.” Extremists have a warped and exaggerated way of viewing the world but that doesn’t necessarily mean that hate is in their hearts. (In some cases it is, of course. But I think it’s wrong to generalize.) This man may be driven by his deep love for all creatures and see his policies and proposals as a way of demonstrating that love. If so it’s up to the rest of us to let him know he doesn’t get to show his love in that way.



    Sorry for the caps. I just get so damn angry.

  42. That’s a pretty sentiment Mary, but if you stripped all the flowery godish love from these bills and just look at what they purposing, what they’ve already done, you wouldn’t see love. You’d see hate, discrimination, hypocrisy and domination.

    You may want to believe it’s based on love but that doesn’t make it true. And I think you are doing everyone a disservice by packaging it so.

  43. I’ve come to the conclusion that all Republican/Conservatives were non-viable fetus who came to term and were born.

  44. No way.

    I.. Wow.

    The one and only reason for such an idea is a deepseated hatred for women. Forcing a woman to carry a dead fetus inside her, at considerable risk to her health and mental welbeing, for what?

    What possible motivation can these people have apart from misogyny?

    I am baffled.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.