All the moaning and groaning from the Abortion Industry Media Complext (AIMC) must have gotten through to the CNN and New York Times moderators for last night’s fourth debate among Democrats running to be their party’s nominee to square off in 2020 against pro-life President Donald Trump. There was a specific question about abortion (aka “reproductive rights”), in addition to a random comment made by Sen. Kamala Harris to a question about paying for proposed programs with hefty price tags.
What follows are the comments made on abortion by the candidates currently ahead, according to polling data, at the Otterbein University campus in Westerville, Ohio. (Sen. Bernie Sanders, pro-abortion to the core, did not get a chance to voice his support for abortion on demand.)
Bear in mind all twelve Democrats on stage Tuesday are radically pro-abortion, and that “codifying Roe” is code for eliminating any all protective legislation, including parental notice, informed consent, and bans on public funding of abortion.
Let’s begin with co-front runner Sen. Elizabeth Warren. In response to a popular “remedy” from Democrats, which as posed by moderator Erin Burnett was “Would you consider adding more justices to the Supreme Court to protect Roe v. Wade?”, Warren responded by combining fear—“But on Roe v. Wade, can we just pause for a minute here? I lived in an America where abortion was illegal, and rich women still got abortions, because they could travel, they could go to places where it was legal”—with a typical pro-abortion falsehood—” Three out of four Americans believe in the rule of Roe v. Wade.”
First, in other venues, Warren has made it abundantly clear she believes the Hyde Amendment should be terminated. The Hyde Amendment bans almost all federal funding of abortion, a position shared by a solid majority of Americans. Second, as we have demonstrated time after time, a majority of Americans oppose the reasons 90+% of all abortions are performed. They also oppose late-term abortions which Democrats and their media enablers try desperately not to talk about.
How about former Vice President Joe Biden who, by all accounts, had a very difficult night? In response to the same court-packing proposal, Biden bragged
when I defeated Robert Bork — and I say when I defeated Robert Bork, I made sure we guaranteed a woman’s right to choose for the better part of a generation. I would make sure that we move and insist that we pass, we codify Roe v. Wade. …
REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.
And so I would not pack the court. What I would do is make sure that the people that I recommended for the court, from Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Elena Kagan, who used to work for me, to others, that they, in fact, support the right of privacy, on which the entire notion of a woman’s right to choose is based. And that’s what I would do. No one would get on the court.
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, responding to what he would do as President when states pass pro-life legislation, said
And so the way as president of the United States I’m going to deal with this is, first of all, elevating it like we have with other national crises to a White House-level position. And I will create the Office of Reproductive Freedom and Reproductive Rights in the White House and make sure that we begin to fight back on a systematic attempt that’s gone on for decades to undermine Roe v. Wade.
I will fight to codify it, and I will also make sure that we fight as this country to repeal the Hyde amendment, so that we are leading the Planet Earth in defending the global assault we see on women right now.
As for Harris, she warmed up by telling Republican state legislatures that “People need to keep their hands off of women’s bodies and let women make the decisions about their own lives.”
What would she do as President to thwart pro-life state legislation? Something everyone (except Harris) acknowledges a president can’t do:
My plan is as — as follows. For any state that passes a law that violates the Constitution, and in particular Roe v. Wade, our Department of Justice will review that law to determine if it is compliant with Roe v. Wade and the Constitution, and if it is not, that law will not go into effect. That’s called pre-clearance.
A great night for the Abortion Industry, and a somber reminder to pro-lifers what we will face come November 3, 2020 from whomever is the Democrats’ nominee.
LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. This post originally appeared in at National Right to Life News Today —- an online column on pro-life issues.