Blevins votes to use taxpayer money to abort the weakest among us

Do you think this man should have been aborted?

Senate Bill 826 is pretty simple: Make Virginia law compatible with federal law when it comes to abortion.

As it stands, Virginia taxpayers are on the hook to fund abortions that terminate kids with Down’s Syndrome or other diseases – like being born without arms and legs. Kids known to Senator Donald McEachin (D) as “tragically incompatible with life.”

In 1982, the following code passed here. “§ 32.1-92.2. Funding of certain abortions where fetus is believed to have incapacitating physical deformity or mental deficiency; physician’s certificate.”

What the law explicitly says is,

“From the moneys appropriated to the Department from the general fund, the Board shall fund abortions for women who otherwise meet the financial eligibility criteria of the State Medical Assistance Plan in any case in which a physician who is trained and qualified to perform such tests certifies in writing, after appropriate tests have been performed, that he believes the fetus will be born with a gross and totally incapacitating physical deformity or with a gross and totally incapacitating mental deficiency.”

In other words, taxpayer money has been allocated to destroy the weakest among us, before they are even born, should a doctor say so.

This year’s SB 826, proposed by State Sen. Tom Garrett, would repeal the above section of code, making Virginia compatible with federal law when it comes to taxpayer funding of abortion; the way it’s been since 1976. In fact, at the federal level, the law remains endorsed by this current administration under Pres. Barack Obama.

Unfortunately, in Virginia, when it comes to “reproductive rights” or “women’s health”, we live in the land of hyperbole, where any bill that even strikes of being balanced, fair, or worthy of compromise, becomes a pitched battle of the partisans – especially when one side senses a fundraising opportunity.

“I’m not in the ‘being offended’ business,” said Garrett. “But I can hearken back in history where we did have certain leaders thinking that they could be arbiters of human life.”

Well, today we had a moment of opportunity and decision to send this Draconian bill of eugenics into to the scrap pile of history.

Inexplicably, in the Health and Education Committee, the bill was voted to “indefinitely pass by.” In political terms, this means the bill is dead. As dead as those “mentally deficient” babies who we taxpayers continue to fund to abort each year.

By a largely partisan vote of 8-7, the bill’s demise was sealed.

But that doesn’t seem right. Don’t Republicans hold sway in the committees because of the decision to make them the majority, 21-20, with the vote of LG Bolling?

Indeed that is true, and Republicans do have a majority in this committee, 8-7, which means one GOP senator voted with the Democrats instead.

Personally shocking to me, it was my senator, Sen. Harry Blevins (R-Chesapeake), who cast the deciding vote.

I’m absolutely dumbfounded.

I attempted to contact my senator, but he was unavailable.

I have known Sen. Blevins for years, and it is my sense is that there is more to this story. In fact it’s probably a long story, but without having the chance to speak with him yet, I’m concerned that today could be an indicator of the so-called “Grand Bargain” that was postulated last week.

For those that missed it, the Huffington Post reported that Majority Leader Tommy Norment would exchange to the Democrats one Republican vote to ensure that no new anti-abortion legislation would pass, like SB 826, and that the Dems would begin to lay low on the whole “war on women” issue and drop efforts to repeal abortion laws.

Norment called it “balderdash”, but today sure does appear to seem otherwise.

If my senator truly is part of such a deal, I can’t tell you how deeply disappointed and betrayed as a constituent I would become.

Regardless, if Blevins did not vote this way because of a “bargain”, one still has to wonder what principle Blevins was exercising with this vote?

Garrett explained to me that “no one is talking about denying access to abortion.” This bill was merely an effort to ensure that taxpayer money was not being used to fund something a great number of the population finds abhorrent.

And my Republican senator – a true leader in my community – voted to continue the practice. I’m totally shocked.

  • Susan G

    Cry me a river, J.R. I’m sure you’d be ready to pony up with you own personal dollars to support this severely disfigured and brain damaged fetus from birth with mililions of dollars in medical expenses, followed by hundreds of thousands of dollars in individual assistance in public schools, followed by untold costs through adulthood..Show me the money, you self- righteous pro-birther.

    • Give me a break, Susan. I am just saying that my money shouldn’t go to fund abortions – nor should any taxpayer funds. You want to pay to kill the beast, go for it. Use a private fund or whatever. Just don’t make me pay for eugenics because I have no stomach for it – especially since my doctor offered me the opportunity to abort my child because of a birth defect…yet, today, she’s an athlete and honor’s student.

      • Susan G

        So who pays, J.R. when that medicaid patient can’t pay for the abortion and carries the fetus to term? Who pays? We can’t afford you people who live in la-la land? There are real costs associated with your so-called “beliefs.” Who provides all the support this child will incur? Who? Who? Answer the question.
        Who? Where’s the money coming from? It’s not a small amount. It’s an enormous sum. Millions. Who pays? Who?

        • I already answered that question, Susan. If Planned Parenthood or any private foundation is willing to use private donations and funds to abort those lives that you feel are going to be so costly, so be it. Abortion is legal. Go for it. After all, PP made $240 million last year. Not like they’re hurting for cash.

          • Susan G

            But I want my tax dollars to provide abortions. I want my tax dollars to provide all reproductive services. I want my tax dollars to provide needles to users… I don’t want my tax dollars to buy hip replacements to cancer riddled ninety-year-olds. Why do you get to have your way on what medical services you want your tax dollar to go to, but I don’t?

          • Doesn’t “reproductive services” mean that we’re actually producing something? Regardless, I digress.

            Your comment confuses me because I don’t understand why you can’t you have your way. The law of the land is that you can have all the abortions you want, but they’re privately funded by a bunch of people who think abortion is a perfectly acceptable medical procedure. Why is that so unacceptable? Why do you have to force a person who doesn’t believe it’s acceptable to be obligated to the state to pay for such a procedure?

            And, quite frankly, I agree with you regarding the hip replacement. Why are we forcing the public to pay for that? That’s a great question.

          • Susan G

            Could it be that any discussion of limiting all available treatments for the terminally ill would result in the scream of “DEATH PANELS”?

          • That’s sick.

          • Susan G

            Could you be more specific?

    • Gotta love the “life unworthy of life” argument.

      • Susan G

        Not all homo sapiens come with wings and halos.

        • Nor should they. Nor we shouldn’t be so crass as to put value statements on which lives are worth living… and which are not.

          • Susan G

            Ted Bundy, no human value. Adolf Hitler, Osama Bin Laden, those six Indian rapists/murderers, the lunatic who murderered twenty-six innocent people in Newton. Shall I go on? Not all human beings are gifts from God, no matter what defeated Senate candidate Mourbock would have your kind believe.

          • Manny

            So you are equating those with physical deformities with murderous genocidal madmen?

            You stay classy Susan.

          • Life is a beautiful gift. Using your gift of life to destroy life is sick and evil. Human beings make choices. Some make horrible use of their life. Life is still beautiful – but those choices are ugly.

          • Susan G

            “Touchy feely, ooh, I’m so good, and you’re not ” response. Try to come to the table with something a lot more substantive.

  • Here’s a question. If you knew your unborn child was going to be gay, would you choose to have it aborted? If you decided to birth it, would you vote NOT for him/her to be a judge on a district court?

  • Pat

    I am glad that his family had the courage, faith and resources to care for him. Sadly, many of the poorest among us do not have the support that is needed, and persons with disabilities such as this become a financial burden, and consumes many of the state’s resources.

    • Susan G


    • So you do, or don’t care about the poor and disabled? So, you do or don’t want to give promised medical care to everyone……except the elderly and unborn? So, the Affordable Healthcare Act will or will not save us money?

  • After this, will Republican voters in his district allow his political career to continue?

  • So Blevins of Chesapeake breaks with Pro-Lifers, breaks with fiscal conservatism by using YOUR taxes to fund the killing of unborn babies, is soft on the 2nd amendment (ask the VCDL and not the NRA), and was board member and champion of the unconstitutional HRTA? What party is Blevins in again?

  • John Scott

    Is anyone really surprised? Blevins has, for a long time, made similar votes on life issues.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.