The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, or what many are calling the “20 week abortion ban,” was passed (237-186) in the U.S. House of Representatives on October 3rd.

The legislation is called the 20 week abortion ban because, if made into law, it would make abortion after 20 weeks almost completely illegal in every state in the U.S. on the basis that fetuses can potentially feel pain at 20 weeks gestation.

Well done, reps. This is a great development. Let’s hope that, when the time comes, the Senate GOP will similarly rise to the occasion. If they do, President Trump has signaled that he’ll sign the legislation into law.

Similar legislation did not have the support of President Obama in the past. That’s not surprising, considering Obama is so pro-choice that he, as a state senator, voted repeatedly against legislation geared toward protecting newborns who survived abortions.

Also unsurprising is the fact that people on the left are PISSED about the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act getting passed in the House. Let’s have a look at some of their grousing on Twitter.

The Women’s March (which is led in part by the faux champion of marginalized women and ignorer of Saudi women’s rights issues, Linda Sarsour) tweeted this:

House GOP just passed the 20-week abortion ban, #HR36. We join @prochoiceamerica in saying #NoAbortionBan.#SignOfResistance: alexislafond pic.twitter.com/EXu3YPzpX1

— Women's March (@womensmarch) October 3, 2017

Cool art, but capitalize on tragedy much?

NARAL tweeted this about the ban:

Despicable. House GOP just passed #HR36 by a vote of 237 to 186. This 20-week abortion ban would throw doctors in JAIL. #NoAbortionBan pic.twitter.com/HSQCGfmheG

— NARAL (@NARAL) October 3, 2017

Imagine a version of America where we threw murderers in jail. That’s a really good idea. We should do that. Oh wait.

Also, according to their site, NARAL says that if the legislation becomes law, “doctors will be criminalized just for providing reproductive healthcare.” Just so you know, this is what they mean by “reproductive healthcare.” [Warning: linked article is disturbing and graphic].

Here is a video NARAL cut in anticipation of the abortion ban vote:

In the video, they call conservatives extremists. But then they ask politicians to vote no on all abortion bans. Yikes.

Refinery29 posted this on Twitter:

The House is voting RIGHT NOW to ban abortion after 20 weeks. Time to call your reps ☎️ https://t.co/hwzFIZCJjf

— Refinery29 (@Refinery29) October 3, 2017

That image of a ripped apart female torso has got to be a sick joke, right?

And Planned Parenthood tweeted this:

The agenda of this bill is clear: to shame women & ban safe, legal abortion. Our lawmakers must reject junk science: https://t.co/VhcQeBEP6U pic.twitter.com/adpeXMvwwp

— Planned Parenthood (@PPact) October 3, 2017

A bunch of ridiculous non-truths here (except the bit about conservatives wanting to completely ban abortion).

At this point, readers might be wondering what PP means when they say “junk science.” That term is floating around quite a bit. Here’s what I’ve found:

Planned Parenthood- a corporation that uses the term “your future bab[ies]” when talking to pregnant women about their extant unborn children- believes that Republicans have no scientific evidence to prove that fetuses feel pain at 20 weeks, and therefore, it’s okay to abort them.

Here’s the rub: there actually is contention among scientists and medical professionals over whether fetuses feel pain at 20 weeks. Vox has an article complaining about the ban using the same rationale as Planned Parenthood. The LiveScience article Vox cites actually cites a clinical review from the JAMA Network that reads, “Evidence regarding the capacity for fetal pain is limited but indicates that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester.”

Essentially, the Live Science article claims that, while fetuses develop different parts of their neurological systems throughout gestation, the parts of their neurological systems responsible for their brains being able to perceive pain do not develop until later in the pregnancy. That is, people adhering to this argument believe fetuses can recoil and be startled by stimuli at 20 weeks (a well-documented phenomenon), but doubt whether fetuses can actually perceive pain.

There is, of course, reputable scholarship that complicates or contradicts such claims. For example, the peer-reviewed life science journal, Cell, has a study that explores neurological features of first-trimester fetuses that were previously unknown or not understood. The study establishes that “adult-like pattern[s] of skin innervation [are] established before the end of the first trimester.” The end of the first trimester is at the 12th week of pregnancy.

Additionally, an article on Medscape, a website for medical professionals that aggregates journal articles and medical news, provides a well-thought-out and comprehensively-sourced argument suggesting how fetuses might be able to feel pain as early as 20 weeks.

It’s worth noting that the Cell study as well as the Medscape article are much more recent (2017 and 2015, respectively) than the JAMA Network Clinical Review (2005) that Vox, LiveScience, and other abortion apologists use to back up their claims.

It’s really strange how dogmatic pro-choicers are on such a sensitive issue. You would think that, if the possibility of murdering babies was on the line, they’d pay closer attention to recent research on the subject and not turn to old, outdated articles.

So, overall, is it okay for some House and Senate Republicans to say that society is 100% certain that fetal pain exists at 20 weeks gestation when there is still some contention around the issue? No, probably not. We don’t want to hamper our cause with dishonesty, even if it is well-intentioned.

But, fortunately, this is not a situation where we need 100% certitude to make a decision. The fact that fetal pain at 20 weeks is probable, or even possible, should be enough for us to act. It’s like Planned Parenthood is willing to keep killing babies until we can prove with 100% certainty that they’re not causing the babies to feel pain. It’s almost like they’re saying, “Any uncertainty on this front is a reason to keep killing babies.”

It doesn’t make any sense.

When it comes to babies’ well-being, it’s better to be safe than sorry.