The state of the Union is divided, as we were reminded not only after but during the President’s speech of February 5. Republicans chanted “USA! USA!” several times in response to lines delivered to elicit the same; Democrats (upon whom the camera lovingly lingered) competed for the honor of “best sour expression/sneer by an elected official,” and the Emmy goes to Kamala Harris.
Most noticeable, also by design, were the color-coordinated white outfits worn by Democratic congresspersons, who sat stone-faced even during benign applause lines. They were briefly roused—and oh, was it the favorite moment of the entire CNN panel!—when Trump took credit for placing “the greatest number of women in the workplace,” whereupon the handmaidens leapt off their tails and applauded wildly. It was a “joke’s on you” moment, or at least that’s what the congresswomen intended by their puerile stunt, since Trump’s misogyny is supposedly to blame for their electoral victories. But then again, if that explanation is correct, they were celebrating the fact that they were elected only because they are women, and they proved it by wearing clothes that match. Solidarity, sister! Women are no different from men, except in every way.
What was truly disturbing, however, was the rationale behind the matching pantsuits and blouses. The memo went forth from the House Democratic Women’s Working Group the week before the State of the Union Address, urging white as an expression of solidarity with the Suffragettes. In concrete terms, this means exhibiting a commitment to “reproductive rights,” that misnomer which has nothing to do with the right of reproducing and everything to do with infanticide, an issue that came to the fore twice in the first weeks of 2019.
The first was the passage of New York’s Reproductive Health (sic) Act, which was signed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, after which he caused One World Trade Center to be illuminated with pink light, an act of celebration that doubled as a plea for divine fire and brimstone. The RHA is a move by state Democrats to protect abortion-on-demand in the (unlikely) event of the overturning of Roe v. Wade. It allows for abortion at any time before birth, provided a doctor will sign off on the barbarism as necessary to protect the “health” of the mother. The state does not define “health,” which leaves the exercise of this right of killing virtually unlimited.
The second instance Trump mentioned involved the disgraced self-described Michael Jackson impersonator, Gov. Ralph Northam (D) of Virginia, who in an interview struggled to answer the question of whether a proposed state law similar to New York’s would mean that a baby born alive during an abortion procedure would be allowed to die or even deliberately killed. He hemmed and hawed about making the child “comfortable,” then attempted to punt to the wishes of the mother in consultation with her physician. (He himself is a pediatrician.) That Northam was the subject of Two Minutes Hate for racially insensitive photos of himself from a college yearbook, published by a conservative website, and not tarred and feathered and immediately impeached for his hesitancy to declare forthrightly and immediately that infanticide is evil, period, speaks volumes about the degradation of the Old Dominion.
The President decried both instances in his remarks, eliciting applause from Republicans and unrighteous anger from Democrats. “[L]et us reaffirm a fundamental truth: all children—born and unborn—are made in the holy image of God.” Never before has such a clear, and clearly Christian statement regarding the truth of human existence, and the consequent evil of abortion, been made from that dais.
The mainstream media were loath to address the topic on camera, but the leading newspapers dutifully and predictably posted their “fact checks” immediately following the speech. Regarding the New York RHA, the New York Times declared, “It does not broadly allow abortions until shortly before birth, as Mr. Trump suggested.” That “fact check” is factually erroneous, which is to say a lie. Similarly, Trump’s denouncement of Dr. Gov. Northam for “stat[ing] he would execute a baby after birth” was called “False” by the “newspaper of record,” which cited Northam’s walk-back of his first statement as proving (somehow) that he’d never made it to begin with.
In this context, Trump called on Congress to pass legislation banning abortion for unborn children capable of experiencing pain. This will not happen, of course, under a Democratic House controlled by Nancy Pelosi clad in Suffragette white. But Republicans, controlling both houses of Congress and with a Republican President promising to sign it, failed to pass the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which died in the Senate last year, falling short of the 60 votes required for cloture. The same bill has died in the Senate in 2015 and 2013.
Despite gains in the economy and the President’s promise of an end to pointless wars, it is difficult to imagine that the state of the American Union is anything but dismal and degraded, when so many see the lives of the unborn as disposable and the bodies of viable infants worthy of mutilation, as long as they have not crossed the border between the womb and the open air.
To protect American citizens, a border wall has become a cultural and moral necessity. But we may not deserve one.