‘Dangerous and ludicrous’: MSNBC goes all-in on Stacey Abrams’ denial of unborn baby’s heartbeat

MSNBC has decided to defend the patently absurd claim by Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams that there is “no such thing” as a fetal heartbeat six weeks into pregnancy.

(Video Credit: Fox News)

During an event at the Ray Charles Performing Arts Center in Atlanta, Abrams also asserted that a fetal heartbeat at six weeks is “a social construct that has more to do with the anticipation of future outcomes and little to do with what is actually present.”

After the clip of Abrams making her bizarre claim about a baby’s heartbeat went viral, MSNBC opinion columnist Dr. Esther Choo came to her defense contending that the fetal heartbeat is a part of a pro-life conspiracy to stigmatize abortion.

The doctor employed talking points being bandied around by the left to support Abrams’ theory, excoriating those who point out that the heartbeat is real, claiming they used a “kind of soft-on-the-facts-strong-on-the-emotional-overlay milieu” that nurtures “policies that are both dangerous and ludicrous.”

Unbelievably, Choo said that Abrams’ assertions are “difficult to assail,” and falsely insisted that “at six weeks of pregnancy, there is no heart. There is no sound.”

This is a bonafide emergency physician and professor at the Oregon Health & Science University, so it is hard to fathom how she can claim that the baby has no heart.

“Historically, the heart was seen as the repository of the soul, intellect, and emotion. Despite tremendous advances in our understanding of human anatomy and physiology, we retain an inclination to imbue even the whisper of a heart’s presence with outsize emotional significance,” Choo stated.

“But a human life is more than a heartbeat, and a ‘heartbeat’ is insufficient to produce a human, not least when it only reflects periodic electrical activity produced by a clump of precursor cells,” the so-called doctor claimed.

Choo also alleged that “the ‘heartbeat’ seems more concrete than a line on a test stick. But that meaning, as Abrams stated, is a social construct that has more to do with the anticipation of future outcomes and little to do with what is actually present in the uterus at that point.”

She wrote, “It merely reflects electrical activity produced by a tiny, amorphous clump of cells. Within the less than half-an-inch mass, there is not yet any structure recognizable as a heart, no pumping of blood, no circulatory system within which it could be pumped, and no developed end organs to pump it to.”

The doctor really stretched to revise anatomy and hammer home that a living being in the womb isn’t really what everyone knows it is.

“Heart tissue grown in a lab will also pulsate, as will cells dissolved down from a heart and no longer organized into the structure of the original organ,” the MSNBC medical pundit asserted. “And the ultrasound machine, in turn, translates such activity into a low audible whir that is a product of the machine itself, rather than amplification of any existing sound.”

“In using the ultrasound to detect heartbeats, pro-lifers use it to measure things it was not designed to measure — for example, the personhood of the embryo or the viability or nonviability of my personal autonomy,” Choo concluded.

Dr. Donna Harrison, who is the CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, an organization that boasts over 7,000 pro-life doctors, adamantly disagreed with Abrams.

Harrison told the Christian Post in a statement that Abrams’ claims are an example of “misinformation” that ignores evidence from “basic embryology.”

“In fact, at six weeks gestation, the embryonic heart rhythmically contracts to pump blood through its arteries, which flows to the placenta to exchange carbon dioxide for oxygen,” she commented. “To call this anything other than a beating heart is dishonest, and serves only to dehumanize preborn people. … Playing semantics with the definition of a heart does nothing to serve science or the public, but rather only advances a pro-abortion agenda.”

Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE

DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW

Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

BPR INSIDER COMMENTS

Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!

Latest Articles