November 21, 2020

Pro-life advocates urge Catholics to call Gov. Baker to say ‘no’ to abortion expansion

REGIONAL
By Carolee McGrath

 

SPRINGFIELD – After Massachusetts lawmakers in both the House and Senate passed an amendment expanding abortion in the state as part of the $46-billion budget bill, pro-life advocates hang on to hope and vow to continue to change hearts and minds on the tragedy of abortion.

They also are encouraging people to call Gov. Charlie Baker (R) and urge him to veto the section of the budget which contains the abortion expansion legislation.

“He has said he opposed the ROE Act. Just last week, he said that the way policy has been tucked into the state budget is wrong. So, again, we are hopeful that he will adhere to his previous opinions and veto this legislation,” said Myrna Maloney Flynn, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life (MCFL). “If that happens, should the other side bring the issue back to the floor in an attempt to override that veto, we are hopeful that just a few extra state reps will join us in opposing the legislation the second time around. We only need four new votes.”

“We are close, and we think we can make the case to a handful of reps that this bill is bad for our women, our girls and our infants — and that it has nothing to do with ‘access’ or who’s on the Supreme Court,” she said.

Two companion bills, the so-called ROE Act, House Bill 3320 and Senate Bill 1209, were before the Joint Judiciary Committee for more than a year but were recently folded into the budget bill as House Amendment 759 and Senate Amendment 180.

After the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court, Massachusetts House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President Karen Spilka released a statement indicating they would bring abortion legislation to a vote before the end of the session.

The Massachusetts Catholic Conference, on behalf of Boston  Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley, Worcester Bishop Robert J. McManus, and Fall River Bishop Edgar M. da Cunha, released several statements regarding the legislation asking Catholics to call lawmakers and voice their opposition. But the amendment passed in the House 108 to 49 and in the Senate 33 to 7.

The following western Massachusetts lawmakers voted against the amendments to expand abortion: Rep. Todd Smola (R) First Hampden District; Rep. Brian Ashe (D) Second Hampden District;  Rep. Nicholas Boldyga (R) Third Hampden District; Rep. Michael Finn (D) Sixth Hampden District; Rep. Bud Williams (D) 11^th Hampden District; Rep. Angelo Puppolo (D) 12^th Hampden District; and Sen. John Velis (D) Second Hampden and Hampshire District

“Regardless of what happens with the revised ROE Act, we know that abortion will remain an unfortunate part of our society, both within and beyond Massachusetts, unless we work doggedly to inform our friends and neighbors about the humanity of the unborn and their right to life our Constitution guarantees,” said Maloney Flynn.

According to the Massachusetts Catholic Conference (MCC), the abortion expansion legislation allows abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy for certain circumstances, including a lethal fetal anomaly, and to “preserve a woman’s physical or mental health.” The law changed parental consent from 18 to 16 years old. And while lifesaving equipment is required in a room for abortions performed after 24-weeks, the Massachusetts bishops released a statement explaining, “the specific language in the amendment is nuanced enough that the physician would not be required to use the equipment. Specifically, it would ‘enable’ the physician performing the abortion to take appropriate steps, in keeping with good medical practice.”

Joy and Paul Dupell were told to abort their baby girl Hope due to a prenatal diagnosis of an encephalocele. Hope is now 11 months old.

“My husband and I were told there was no chance our baby would survive more than a few hours after birth, maybe a couple of days. The doctor told us there was zero chance without a doubt. They told us if she was born alive she would have such limited brain function that her basic ability to live would not exist without the intervention of life support and she would be a vegetable,” Joy Dupell said. “I was repeatedly pressured by doctors to terminate. I was scoffed at for asking about other babies who have survived with this condition and asking for a second opinion. My sanity was questioned for wanting to carry her to term so I could hold her in my arms and pour as much love into her for the short time we would have her.”

“I stood fast to my belief in life and because of that, in a couple of weeks we will be celebrating her first year of life outside of the womb,” she continued. “I wish our story was unique but since having Hope, I have connected with so many mothers who have similar stories. They were given no hope to raise their child, they felt bullied and alienated by their physicians for choosing life.

“Like me, these parents’ choices have given them a beautiful child to nurture and raise. With the passing of this bill, the life of children like theirs my daughter will be erased because a doctor decides the worth of that life,” she said.

“I met with several doctors who decided my Hope wasn’t worth the chance of her life being fulfilled even though carrying her to term had no risk to my health any more than a normal pregnancy. Now, the girl who wasn’t meant to eat, breathe, move or engage is sitting next to me chewing on her toes, babbling away and laughing while she watches her brother play,” Dupell added.

More information on the legislation can be found at macatholic.org or masscitizensforlife.org.