{"id":219327,"date":"2020-03-02T08:38:20","date_gmt":"2020-03-02T14:38:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=219327"},"modified":"2020-02-29T21:56:51","modified_gmt":"2020-03-01T03:56:51","slug":"cnn-baby-abortion-fetus-born","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/cnn-baby-abortion-fetus-born\/","title":{"rendered":"Orwellian: CNN calls a baby who survives abortion ‘a fetus that was born’"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

In a stunning display of Orwellian newspeak, a CNN news story<\/a> recently described an abortion survivor as \u201ca fetus that was born,\u201d the Daily Caller reported<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The original phrasing CNN used to describe the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act said that it would \u201crequire abortion providers to work to \u2018preserve the life and health\u2019 of a fetus that was born following an attempted abortion as they would for a newborn baby.\u201d\u00a0According to standard medical terminology<\/a>, a fetus is a human being still inside the womb in the fetal stage of development, between nine and 36 weeks. A baby, once born, is no longer developing in the womb, and is considered an infant, however premature they may be.<\/p>\n

READ: CNN host suggests no one would want a baby with disabilities to be born<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Two days after the original story was published, CNN edited the wording to quote directly from the bill, and it now reads that the bill requires abortion providers to “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.”<\/p>\n

Despite the correction, pro-lifers on social media and elsewhere took immediate note. National Review’s Alexandria DeSanctis pointed out that, despite CNN\u2019s claims of accuracy in its updated story, the larger point about the humanity of the preborn still stands.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

One more thought on the @CNN<\/a> edit: Removing \u201cfetus that was born\u201d has nothing to do with \u201cmore precisely reflecting the language used in Sasse\u2019s bill.\u201d It\u2019s a matter of whether we\u2019re going to call all infants what they are or use word games to pretend some are inhuman.<\/p>\n

— Alexandra DeSanctis (@xan_desanctis) February 27, 2020<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n