The state of Aguascalientes in Mexico has become the first to establish March 25 as the “Day of the Unborn Girl and Boy,” a legislative initiative promoted by the National Action Party (PAN) and the citizen platform Actívate. The measure is framed as a strategic public policy instrument for prenatal care, maternal nutrition, and “shared paternal and family responsibility,” emphasizing “institutional recognition of the dignity of motherhood” and alignment with “constitutional mandates for the progressive protection of human rights and international best practices.” Legislators Arlette Muñoz and Jedsabel Sánchez spoke of empathy for women in difficult pregnancies, the irreplaceable value of every life, and the commitment to “those who have no voice,” presenting the law as non-judgmental support rather than imposition of a viewpoint. This article, published by EWTN News, presents the development as an unalloyed pro-life victory.
The Supernatural Omission: A Doctrine of Naturalism, Not Catholicism
The entire framework of the Aguascalientes legislation and the reporting on it is a quintessential expression of the naturalistic humanism condemned by the pre-conciliar Magisterium. It operates solely within the category of natural law as understood by modern secular states, utterly divorced from the supernatural order and the necessity of the Church for salvation. The language of “human rights,” “international best practices,” and “constitutional mandates” is the precise lexicon of the modernist errors cataloged by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors.
Error 56 of the Syllabus states: “Moral laws do not stand in need of the divine sanction, and it is not at all necessary that human laws should be made conformable to the laws of nature and receive their power of binding from God.” The Aguascalientes law, by grounding itself in “human rights” and “international best practices,” explicitly rejects the principle that civil law must be conformed to the divine and ecclesiastical law. It promotes a “right” to prenatal care that is severed from the higher, unrenounceable duty of parents to have their children baptized and raised in the one true Church for salvation. The silence on the sacrament of Baptism—the absolute necessity for the salvation of every infant soul—is the gravest accusation. A truly Catholic state would not merely promote “early initiation of prenatal care” but would legally ensure the immediate baptism of every newborn and establish severe penalties for any obstruction of the child’s incorporation into the Church. The legislators’ plea that women “need love, not judgment” is a direct echo of the conciliar church’s moral relativism, replacing the duty to admonish sinners with a sentimental, naturalistic “support” that leaves souls in peril of eternal damnation for lack of sanctifying grace.
The “Kingship of Christ” vs. The “Dignity of Motherhood”
Pope Pius XI, in his encyclical Quas Primas on the Feast of Christ the King, established the principle that the reign of Christ must extend to all aspects of human society, including civil legislation. He taught that Christ’s kingdom “encompasses all men” and that “states are happy not by one means, and man by another; for the state is nothing else than a harmonious association of men.” The state’s happiness, therefore, depends on its recognition of Christ’s legislative and judicial authority. Pius XI explicitly states that rulers must publicly honor Christ “if they wish to maintain their authority inviolate and contribute to the increase of their homeland’s happiness.”
The Aguascalientes law does the opposite. It enshrines a “dignity of motherhood” that is purely anthropological and biological, a creation of the modern secular state. It is an “affirmative action” for a natural good that, while good in itself, is presented as an end in itself, independent of its supernatural purpose: the generation of souls for the Church and the increase of the elect. The law’s focus on “preventive measures for the benefit of early childhood development” is a materialist, Pelagian concern for the child’s temporal welfare while being utterly indifferent to the child’s eternal destiny. This is the “cult of man” denounced by Pius XI in the same encyclical, where he laments that “when God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed.” The Mexican state, by legislating on the basis of “human rights” without reference to the “rights of God” and the sovereignty of Christ the King, participates in this foundational destruction.
The Heresy of “Human Rights” and the Rejection of God’s Law
The article’s core premise is that the state has a duty to protect “human rights,” a concept utterly alien to Catholic tradition before the modernist infiltration. The pre-conciliar Magisterium taught that rights flow from God and are correlative to duties under His law. The Syllabus of Errors, in Error 39, condemns the notion that “The State, as being the origin and source of all rights, is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits.” By invoking “constitutional mandates” and “international best practices,” the Aguascalientes legislators submit the natural law to the positive law of man-made constitutions and international bodies—precisely the error of Error 41: “The civil government, even when in the hands of an infidel sovereign, has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs.” Here, the “indirect negative power” is the state’s claim to define the parameters of “dignity” and “rights” for the unborn, a domain that belongs solely to God and His Church.
The legislators’ rhetoric about “those who have no voice” is particularly pernicious. In true Catholic doctrine, the unborn child has a voice in the order of grace only through the Church, which must speak for it and ensure its incorporation into the Body of Christ. The state’s role is purely negative: to prevent the external act of murder. The positive “promotion” of prenatal care as a “right” of the child is a statist, collectivist innovation that makes the state the arbiter of life’s value, a role that belongs to God alone. This is the slippery slope to the “right to healthcare” that becomes a justification for eugenic policies and state control over reproduction, as seen in the very nations that promote such “international best practices.”
The Conciliar Church’s Complicity in Naturalistic Pro-Lifeism
The fact that this story comes from EWTN News, a conciliar news outlet, is deeply symptomatic. The conciliar church, from John XXIII through Francis (“Leo XIV”), has systematically replaced the Catholic doctrine of the Social Kingship of Christ with a naturalistic, human rights-based “pro-life” movement. This movement, while opposing abortion, accepts the entire secular framework of religious liberty, ecumenism, and the separation of Church and State that Pius IX condemned in Errors 77-80. It operates within the “public square” of religious indifference, seeking consensus with atheists, Masons, and heretics on the single issue of biological life, while remaining silent on the necessity of the Catholic faith for salvation. This is the “abomination of desolation” standing in the holy place: a pseudo-Catholic institution using the language of life to promote a religion of man.
The PAN party, a mainstay of the conciliar political order in Mexico, is part of this system. Its members, like the legislators quoted, use the language of empathy and support, which is the language of Bergoglio’s “mercy” without truth. They do not call for the re-establishment of the Social Reign of Christ the King in the Mexican constitution, the nullification of all laws permitting abortion as crimes against the Divine Law, or the exclusive public worship of the Most Holy Trinity. Their victory is a victory for the neo-church’s strategy of engaging the world on the world’s terms, thereby confirming the world in its apostasy from God.
Conclusion: A Call to Repudiate the Naturalistic Fraud
The Aguascalientes “Day of the Unborn Child” is not a Catholic victory but a triumph of modernist naturalism. It promotes a “pro-life” stance that is fundamentally anti-supernatural, reducing the profound Catholic doctrine of the sanctity of life—rooted in the Incarnation, the Redemption, and the necessity of Baptism—to a matter of public health and human rights. The legislators and the conciliar media that celebrate it are guilty of a grave omission: they speak of the child’s temporal development but are silent on his eternal salvation. They invoke “dignity” but deny the dignity of being a child of God through Baptism. They call for “support” but reject the supreme act of charity: incorporating the soul into the Church.
True Catholic social teaching, as defined by Pius XI in Quas Primas and Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum, demands that the state recognize the true religion and protect the Church’s right to teach all nations. It demands laws that not only prohibit abortion but also ensure the Catholic education of all children and the public worship of Christ the King. The Aguascalientes law, by its very foundation in secular human rights, is an act of apostasy from the Social Kingship of Christ. It is a placebo that makes the conciliar church and its political allies appear “pro-life” while they continue to promote the abomination of the post-conciliar “Mass”, the heresy of religious liberty, and the scandal of false ecumenism—all of which are direct causes of the culture of death they pretend to oppose.
The faithful are called to reject this naturalistic fraud and to pray and work for the restoration of the Social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ over all nations, a reign that can only be achieved through the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation. The only true “Day of the Unborn Child” is the day of his Baptism, when he is reborn as a child of God and heir to heaven. All other celebrations that omit this supernatural reality are empty gestures that serve the modernism of the Antichurch.
Source:
In pro-life victory, Mexican state establishes ‘Day of the Unborn Child’ (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 24.03.2026