This is worth a watch, because it’s a very clarifying six minutes and change from a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday. The Democrats, who are in the process of trying to pass a bill through the Senate which would essentially create federally-guaranteed abortion on demand regardless of state or local laws on the subject, and they called in a host of witnesses to push that bill.
Sen. John Kennedy went after this in the most direct way possible, which was to take it to its logical end – namely, that what the Democrats’ position on abortion really amounts to is that you can kill a perfectly healthy, viable unborn baby at any time before he or she descends the birth canal. Make whatever statements of outrage you want about Republican efforts particularly in red states to limit or eliminate abortion, but unfettered slaughter of perfectly human, if perhaps inconvenient, babies is the Democrat position on the issue.
And this clip shows not only that it’s true but that the pro-abortion folks lack the courage to put it out there so people will understand it.
From Kennedy’s press release attached to the clip comes more detail…
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today questioned hearing witnesses about whether they support making it legal to abort, with unfettered discretion, an unborn child up to the moment of birth.
Two witnesses invited by Democrats repeatedly refused to tell Kennedy whether they would support such a law. Both witnesses invited by Republicans on the committee said they would not support that law.
After giving majority witnesses Michele Goodwin, a professor at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, and Nisha Verma, M.D. several opportunities to answer whether they support “making it legal to abort an unborn baby for any reason—any reason—up to the moment before birth,” Kennedy noted the significance of their refusal.
“I want you to all understand where I’m coming from. This is a tough issue. And it’s a tough issue because there’s some tough questions we’ve got to answer. And when you won’t answer the questions, when you’re invited by my Democratic friends—the majority—and you won’t answer the most fundamental question: We’ve got a bill in front of us that will basically say, ‘A woman has the unfettered right to abort, at any time, for any reason, up to the moment of birth.’ And that’s a gut-check issue. And, I would expect you, as experts, to answer that truthfully, how you’d do it,” he said.
When presented with the same question, the two witnesses invited by Republicans responded candidly.
Monique Wubbenhorst, M.D. said, “No.”
Ingrid Skop, M.D. replied, “I do not support unfettered abortion, and I would like to point out that, if a woman did have a life-threatening condition in pregnancy past approximately 22 weeks, that baby can be delivered alive by induction or C-section, and we can try to save that baby. The intent of abortion is a dead baby, and that is not necessary in that situation.”
Here’s the video…
It’s really pretty stark to see the difference between people who know they’re telling the truth and people who know they’re lying. Yes, there are practiced bald-faced liars who will spew falsehoods with conviction. But most of the time, particularly when put on the spot, the folks who know what they’re saying is true will speak with clarity and the ones who don’t have the truth on their side will obfuscate.
And Goodwin and Verma, the two pro-abortion activist witnesses, clearly obfuscate.
Skop really exploded the issue and made it very clear what the way forward is – which is that past a certain point of viability there is no reason why abortion should be legal at all. If the baby can be born through induction or C-section, and we know there are so many families lined up to adopt babies across the country so the issue isn’t bringing unwanted kids into the world who are sentenced to horrible lives (not that this is a good argument in any event; in fact, it’s monstrously evil), then abortion in such cases is a moral horror.
But this is the Democrats’ position.
Goodwin tries to bring up the Constitution and argues that birth is what confers citizenship, as though that matters from the standpoint of right and wrong. And it’s unresponsive to Kennedy’s question anyway; if she was honest she’d just say that yes, she’s for aborting a nine-month-old healthy fetus, and yes, she’s willing to impose the legal fiction on the issue that a viable unborn baby isn’t a human being so as to justify her position.
The legacy corporate media takes great pains when covering this issue to do the same obfuscation that Goodwin and Verma do. Somehow it’s “extreme” to deny a woman’s “right” to an abortion in some or all circumstances when most Americans, and even most Democrats in lots of surveys, clearly believe there ought to be limits.
Which is why you won’t likely see this clip on any corporate media platforms. They wouldn’t want anyone to be persuaded as to where the truth is on abortion, after all.