At the May 20 meeting of the Bakersfield City Council’s Legislative and Litigation Committee, City Attorney Ginny Gennaro was directed “to draft a resolution disfavoring abortion for the Committee’s consideration.” The resolution was proposed as a possible alternative to the Human Life Ordinance, which was the subject of the committee meeting.
With the committee scheduled to reconsider the Human Life Ordinance on September 23, Gennaro has drafted a resolution which does not disfavor abortion, but merely commends organizations which provide abortion alternatives. At a time when many members of the public are asking the City Council to take a pro-life stand, the resolution seems crafted instead to avoid taking any meaningful stand. In particular, the resolution dehumanizes children killed by abortion, by repeatedly referring euphemistically to “pregnancy terminating procedures.”
Even when the resolution touches lightly on post-abortion suffering (“…in some circumstances…”), no mention is made of the reason that women suffer post-abortion grief: the loss of a child.
Although the first statement of the resolution, referring to the rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, was taken from a proposed pro-life resolution which Tim Palmquist submitted to the committee in August, the next statement in the resolution reveals Gennaro’s agenda: keeping the City Council neutral. But if, according to Gennaro’s resolution, “the City of Bakersfield respects and honors all viewpoints, religions, and creeds,” should this prevent the city from boldly making declarations such as “In God We Trust”? Obviously not: Bakersfield has proudly led the “In God We Trust” movement! So shouldn’t the City Council be able to make a clear pro-life statement?
Some organizations which provide abortion alternatives may consider themselves to be honored if the City Council passes this resolution, but LifeSavers Ministries will consider it to be a dishonor if any resolution is passed which further contributes to the dehumanization of the unborn children who die by abortion. Calling such a resolution “pro-life” only furthers the mockery.
The text of Gennaro’s proposed resolution follows:
A RESOLUTION OF LOCAL SUPPORT FOR ALTERNATIVES TO ABORTION.
WHEREAS, this nation was founded by those who believed in human rights and the right to the pursuit of happiness, who thus created an instrument in the Declaration of Independence to ensure those rights; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield respects and honors all viewpoints, religions, and creeds; and
WHEREAS, individuals within the City of Bakersfield and throughout the country have undergone procedures terminating pregnancies; and
WHEREAS, Individuals who have undergone pregnancy terminating procedures have, in some circumstances, suffered psychologically and emotionally from the procedure; and
WHEREAS, there are many faith-based and social activist groups, as well as concerned citizens who counsel against terminating pregnancies; and
WHEREAS, the good work and dedication of the aforementioned groups have helped many individuals seek alternatives to abortion [on September 23, the committee added here the words “including but not limited to adoption”]; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield maintains that there are many positive and feasible alternatives to abortion.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, by the City Council of the City of Bakersfield that organizations that advocate and educate the public about the alternatives to abortion should be commended.