Paramount+ has launched a preview for the new season of “Inside Amy Schumer,” featuring what the network calls an “elevator pitch for why Colorado is the premier destination for a last-minute trip, and why you should at least keep it on your radar (uh, just in case…).” Spoiler alert: Schumer thinks Colorado is a “premier destination” for a trip because there isn’t a single preborn child who is protected from abortion in Colorado — right up until birth. It is a fundamental right in the state for adults to kill preborn children for any reason at any time, and (depending on one’s reading of the law) possibly certain newborns as well. And Paramount+ and Schumer are now helping to push abortion tourism in the state.
“Colorado. Come for the fresh air, the perfect mountains majesty, a magical night under a magical sky. Whatever kind of experience you’re looking for you can find it here, in Colorado,” says Schumer. “But we’re more than just beautiful wilderness, we also have bustling town centers and access to all the services you may need.” This is the moment the video cuts to a “Women’s Health Clinic.”
“All as legal as a fresh hot cup of cocoa is refreshing,” says Schumer.
Abortion is not health care
No matter what Schumer erroneously believes about abortion, countless doctors have attested to the fact that induced abortion — the intentional killing of a preborn child — is not necessary to save a woman’s life even in instances in which the pregnancy must end. This is why the large majority of OB/GYNs in the nation don’t commit induced abortions and still manage to save pregnant women’s lives.
“Visiting here was on our bucket list of things to do before we die,” said one woman standing with a man in the fake ad, adding, “which, honestly, I might have if I hadn’t been able to visit Colorado.”
This is a manipulation. If a pregnant woman’s life is on the line, doctors are able to save her life using specific procedures designed to end the pregnancy, not kill the child. These procedures are not induced abortions because they do not intentionally kill her baby. Induced abortion procedures include the D&C procedure to suction a living baby into pieces, the use of the abortion pill to starve a living baby, a D&E to dismember a living baby, and a lethal injection to cause cardiac arrest in a living baby, all prior to delivery. The intent of all of these methods is to produce a dead baby.
Sometimes, preterm delivery or emergency C-section must be carried out in order to save a woman’s life, and sometimes her child might not be old enough to survive after delivery. But these procedures, as well as surgery for an ectopic pregnancy, are not induced abortions. The key point here is that induced abortion — which is what pro-life laws restrict — carries the intent to ensure the baby dies.
The American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs notes in its literature, “There is a night and day difference between induced abortion and separating a mother and her unborn child for the purposes of saving a mother’s life (preterm parturition). There are times when separating the mother and her unborn child is necessary to save the life of the mother, even if the unborn child is too premature to live. In those tragic cases, if possible the life of the baby will be attempted to be preserved, and if not possible, the body of the unborn child is treated with respect, recognizing the humanity of the life which is lost in the separation. In contrast, the purpose of an induced abortion is to produce a dead baby.”
If a woman’s life were truly at immediate risk, she would not be able to drive or fly to Colorado for a quick “visit” to have an abortion and then spend some time sightseeing. Plus, a late-term abortion takes two to three days to carry out. The idea that abortion is a quick, easy, clean, safe procedure is false and is the result of years of precise marketing from abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood. Abortion is painful, dangerous, and deadly and when successful, there’s a body to dispose of when it’s over.
Abortion tourism
Pro-abortion businesses have begun offering to pay for female employees to travel out of state for abortions including travel costs and lodging costs, demonstrating that it’s more cost-effective to pay for employee’s abortions than it is to pay for maternity care and leave, or to offer family-friendly resources such as on-site childcare.
Schumer makes a point to promote the idea of abortion tourism by including the notion that a woman’s trip to Colorado could be funded by her employer and increase tourism income for the state. The Schumer skit even makes the pro-life point that an employer who is willing to pay for abortion is not willing to pay for childcare.
“My employer actually paid for my trip to Colorado,” says an actress in the video. “They covered travel and time off. I mean, I did have to get HR involved in my personal life, which is obviously not ideal, and it didn’t cover childcare while I was out of town, but still, I’m grateful for access to Colorado.”
Schumer goes on to discuss why women should go to Colorado for abortions and spend their money there. “Colorado is more centrally located than you think,” she says, “especially if you’re coming from say Utah, Arizona, Wyoming, Nebraska, or Oklahoma. Actually, if you’re coming from Missouri or Nebraska, or even Iowa, don’t forget Illinois is another great option. But we prefer you’d come see us in Colorado!”
Yes, that’s because abortion tourism generates income for the state. Pro-abortion states like California and Colorado want women to travel there for abortions because it increases the state’s tourism income. Every woman who travels to those states for abortion will likely spend money — or her company’s money — on hotels, food, gas, and more. Each time she swipes her card, the state makes money through taxes.
So what Schumer may see as a spoof is, in reality, a potentially lucrative opportunity for pro-abortion states to make money off of desperate women.
Studies show that 64% of women who undergo an abortion felt pressured to do so. At the same time, 67% received no counseling before undergoing the abortion and 79% received no information about available alternatives. When her employer offers to pay for the abortion and related expenses but doesn’t offer pro-mother and pro-child incentives such as on-site childcare or paid maternity leave, that results in even more pressure to abort.
Medical tourism is seen as an economic boost to the United States and abortion tourism could offer an economic boost to pro-abortion states in similar ways. The major difference is that medical tourism profits while saving lives — while abortion tourism seeks to profit from the brutal deaths of innocent children.
“Like” Live Action News on Facebook for more pro-life news and commentary!
