The bill would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless the procedure was necessary to save the woman's life. It would make no exception for cases of rape or incest. ...

 "In the history of the world, the true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I agree with them," Rounds said in the statement.

Chet Brokaw article

I dare say I'm not the only one who posted about this today here in blogland. My main bitch involves this idea of protecting the unborn child from suffering and death.  Sounds fine, sounds good, right? But unless I'm totally misunderstanding the nature of genetics a baby born of incest will suffer unimaginable pain and suffering.  Not only is there the possibility of serious, lifelong, debiliatating physical abnormalities as well as mental problems there is the awful fact that they will suffer excruciating emotional pain if they learn their parentage.  Of course, I imagine the information will be kept from the child, much in the matter that adoptions records are sealed. But those records are kept open in some states and, last I checked, there was no legislation on the table pertaining to children of incest and their rights to know their parentage. So, what's the plan for those situations?  And regarding physical or mental and emotional problems, is the medical field prepared to handle children of incest? I just don't get the logic in these anti-abortion arguments. In order to protect a baby from suffering a painful death Rounds and the rest of the pro-life folks want to force this being to suffer for a full lifetime? Seems to me that mercy and cruelty aren't always so clearly recognized.