On Wednesday, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam claimed that babies born alive after bungled abortions could be left to die as “a discussion ensued” between the mother and the doctor. Fresh on the heels of the controversy, photos from Northam’s medical school yearbook page surfaced, picturing the governor and a friend posing, one in blackface, the other in a Ku Klux Klan hood.
With rare exceptions, Democrats lined up to condemn Northam and call for his resignation. Conservatives called their bluff. Why the outrage now? Why not when he was supporting the death of infants? Liberals tried to call their bluff. Why the outrage now? Why not when Brett Kavanaugh’s yearbook pages surfaced? Shouldn’t Northam’s indiscretions be seen as childish indecencies too?
A lot has been said on whether Northam and Kavanaugh’s yearbook pages should be treated similarly. But through this discussion, some decent points were made by liberals wishing only to shield their fellow Democrat from political downfall. The point was: if Northam’s later adult life proves he has changed from the man he was in medical school when the racist photo was taken, should he be allowed to continue his career in politics?
I agree: If Northam is a changed man, he should not be forced out of office. (Although what Virginia voters think of him at any future reelection time is another question.) We all have done, or will do, things we regret later. We repent and seek to rectify what harm we have done with previous actions and beliefs.
Some people are impulsive liars when young, and they change. Some people are alcoholics, yet they change. Some are radicals with violent tendencies which they have the good sense to rethink before harm is done. With the obvious exceptions of criminals such as rapists and murderers, I believe such people should be given a second chance and allowed to start again.
Is Northam a Changed Man?
Yet is Northam a changed man who deserves to be accepted back into society because he’s expressed sufficient remorse? The evidence certainly doesn’t point in that direction.
The same week the yearbook photos surfaced, Northam defended a Virginia bill sponsored by Del. Kathy Tran that would have allowed abortion up to the moment of birth, even if the mother is dilating (her body is in labor, opening a passageway for the baby to be born). Northam doubled down on his support for the bill, adding that even after a baby was delivered, the infant would be “resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and mother.”
His comments rightfully sparked outrage amongst pro-life Americans, as well as more moderate pro-choice liberals. Yet Northam refused to apologize, stating he had “no regrets” concerning his comments.
Northam’s blatant disregard for the intrinsic dignity of every human being, no matter their size or developmental level, sounds a lot like what would have been his blatant disregard for the intrinsic dignity of every human being no matter what race or ethnicity back in medical school. As long as Northam refuses to acknowledge the reprehensible abhorrence of his position on unborn life, and until he apologizes for that position and diligently works to remedy the damage he has done, any attempt of his to make the case that he is a changed man from his racist yearbook photo should not be taken seriously.
In fact, there are plenty of similarities between activists in favor of abortion and activists in favor of racial segregation. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, infamously said that “we [the abortion movement] want to exterminate the Negro population.” Sanger and her compatriots openly campaigned for the extermination of those which white supremacists deemed “unfit” races. Sanger called blacks, Jews, and other minorities, “weeds” and saw birth control and abortion as the main way to rid the earth of those who, “drain up the energies and the resources of this little earth.”
Sound familiar? Right now, rather than treating children as blessings, the precious gift of human life is greeted with contempt and derision. Sanger called them “weeds.” Pro-abortion radicals call them “choices.”
The fact that Northam would support a view with its roots in racial supremacy and contempt for human life and dignity proves that, while he may have changed his prejudices against blacks, he has not become a fundamentally better or nobler man. He has simply shifted his old abhorrent prejudices to a new target, and a socially acceptable one at that: unborn children.
This time, Ralph Northam won’t be manifesting his depraved prejudice through pictures and costumes. As governor of Virginia, Northam has the power to manifest his repulsive beliefs into law, with the power to put his signature on the death warrants of unborn children.
This article has been clarified regarding Virginia governors’ re-election possibilities.