Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 590 | Democrats Are Now Openly Pro-Infanticide

Episode Date: March 29, 2022

Today we're going over the proposed legislation in Maryland and Colorado that seeks to provide "equity for pregnant people" and seeks to protect "reproductive rights." We talk about how these terms are essentially Orwellian "new speak" meant to sound nice while covering up what really happens every single time a pregnancy is terminated: A baby dies. Even the term "pregnant people" is out of touch with reality, as the only people who can get pregnant are women. These nightmarish bills show the Left's willingness to put ideology over life itself, especially in the case of the Maryland bill, which would allow for termination to take place even AFTER the baby is born. --- Today's Sponsors: Dwell: A Bible app with a beautiful listening & reading experience for the Scriptures. Visit DwellApp.io/RELATABLE to get 10% off a yearly subscription, or 33% off for life! Good Ranchers: American meat delivered! Go to GoodRanchers.com/ALLIE & use promo code 'ALLIE' to save $30 off your order! Carly Jean Los Angeles: Never say you have nothing to wear again! Visit CarlyJeanLosAngeles.com & use promo code 'ALLIEB' to save 20% off your first order. Patriot Mobile: Support a company that loves America, loves you, & shared your values! Go to PatriotMobile.com/ALLIE or call 972-PATRIOT to learn more. --- Show Links: Full text of the Maryland Senate Bill 669: https://bit.ly/36smDcV CBNNews.com: "ACLJ Warns Proposed Maryland Senate Bill 'Could Legalize Infanticide Up to 28 Days After Birth' https://bit.ly/381r8eF Full text of the Colorado General Assembly House Bill 22-1279: https://bit.ly/3us0KCk --- Previous Episodes Mentioned: Ep 141: Abortion https://apple.co/3Ll8f4H Ep 289: Trump vs. Biden 2020: Abortion https://apple.co/3uCG2Q8 Ep 310: Do Democrats Decrease Abortions? https://apple.co/3DjDnyN Ep 497: Surprise: The 'Women's Health Protection Act' Doesn't Protect Health | Guest: Alexandra DeSanctis https://apple.co/3DhT0qm --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort.

We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Hey, guys, welcome to Relatable. This episode is brought to you by our friends at GoToRanchers. Go to Good Ranchers.com slash Alley for a discount. That's good ranchers.com slash alley.

Okay, today we are finally talking about the two pieces of legislation that you guys have asked me to cover for a while now. that is a Maryland bill and that is a Colorado bill, both pertain to abortion. These are Democrat bills that are pushing for abortion and in some cases, yes, even infanticide. That is absolutely accurate. The accusations that you've seen from pro-life organizations of perpetuating infanticide through these pieces of legislation is true. Unfortunately, it's not hyperbole. If you've listened to this podcast for any amount of time, you know how past, passionate I am about this subject, how much it just absolutely grieves me and how I think that if anyone with just a modicum of humanity inside of them with just a bit of softness in their

heart really thought about, really knew what abortion entails, what it actually is, that we are actually discussing the murder, the intentional killing of innocent, defenseless babies that you would never be able to vote again for a politician that does not. not stand for actively getting rid of abortion. There would be no justification that you could find in your mind or heart to vote for someone who advocates for abortion or who calls it the right to choose, who calls it reproductive justice, who says, well, the state just shouldn't be involved in these kinds of choices between a doctor and a woman. Bodily autonomy, all of these ridiculous euphemisms that people use to sanitize what abortion is, which is the murder

of children. And what's amazing is that there are professing Christians who do. There are actually professing Christians who say, well, let's just not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Let's just keep voting for these politicians who are actually for legalized infanticide. And let's try to comfort ourselves by saying, oh, well, we can be pro life in other ways. Being pro life actually means being open borders. Being pro life means, you know, doing things privately, but not not actually trying to legally ban or prohibit abortions. Well, no, that just tells me you don't actually believe in the right of a child to live. Because pro-life, the bare minimum of being pro-life is being anti-abortion.

That's the bare minimum qualification for being able to call yourself pro-life. And you're not truly pro-life. You're not truly anti-abortion unless you believe the bare minimum of that, which is that children should have a least. right to not be murdered. A legal right to not be murdered. If you believe that abortion should not be prohibited by law, then you do not believe that children inside the womb have a legal right to life. And so you have to wrestle with the question, when does someone have a legal right to life? And why? Why is the standard sometime after conception of someone's personhood and of someone's

right to life? You need to think about that. Unfortunately, the church has imbibed ridiculous propaganda that abortion if you ban it that women are just going to have coat hangar abortions in the alley and that's not really pro-life and ridiculous assertions that well actually abortions go down because of Democrat policies not because of Republican policies we have debunked that correlation causation fallacy on this podcast before I can link it I think we did that a couple years ago in the lead up to the election. There's just so little thoughtfulness on this subject when it comes to Christians. And not just on the subject, but on subjects in general,

I think Christians just find themselves just floating on the waves of whatever mainstream narrative is out there. And they allow the world to tell them what compassion and what love looks like when they serve the God who is love. And he says that life inside the womb matters. and that murder is murder and that abortion is murder. If we know anything about God, it's that he hates abortion. If we know anything at all about what love is, what compassion is, what justice is, what

defending the vulnerable is, then it is that abortion is wrong and that the Bible prohibits abortion, not just in what it says not to do, thou shalt not murder, but also in what it says is, what it says is good. And part of what we see in Psalm 139 is that life inside the womb is made in God's image and that it is an egregious sin, an egregious crime, I think it should be, to kill that life inside the womb. But when you have a different worldview, when you have the worldview of progressive secularism that says that our rights do not come from God, that our rights actually come from the government

because the government is the highest authority and therefore we get to say when a person has rights and when they don't, not based on any standard of what they've done, not any crime that they have committed. And even criminals have rights, but you do have some rights taken away from you when you commit a crime that puts you in jail. But the secular progressive worldview says that we get to give and take away rights. The government, the state gets to give and take away rights based on totally arbitrary reasons and arbitrary standards, like your age, your stage of development.

inside the womb. And don't you see how that logic leads to all kinds of atrocities against people outside of the womb? Because really, what is so special about the birth canal that it imparts rights to people? Why would a baby not have a right a few moments before exiting the birth canal, but does have rights a few minutes after? And actually, these pieces of legislation, especially the one in Maryland proves the logical conclusion to abortion logic that some people don't have rights. Some innocent people don't have rights based on what, based on, I don't know, location, size, stage of development, ability to defend itself. And what you see is that any logic that you apply to people inside the womb to say that

killing them is justified will eventually apply to people outside of the womb because why not? because, as I said, there's nothing magical about the birth canal that it would impart rights to people. And so we are starting to see the logical conclusion of abortion into out of the birth canal and into life outside of the womb. So let me tell you about this piece of Maryland legislation, Senate Bill 669, called the pregnant persons Freedom Act of 2022. And you know I have a comment about that too. Hey, this is Steve Deast. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself.

On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this Steve Day show right here on Blaze TV. or listen wherever you get podcasts.

I hope you'll join us. That 33% off means you save $50. So go to dwell app. com. I.O. slash relatable. That's dwell app. com. Okay. Let me tell you about the Senate bill 669.

Yes, the pregnant person's Freedom Act of 2022. Now, I actually appreciate the honesty here because we see in federal legislation when it comes to abortion that it's women's rights. It's protecting women's health care, which is so contradictory to the, democratic dogma of today, which not only women can give birth. Some men can give birth. Of course, what they mean by that is some women who identify as men can give birth. In fact, men cannot give

birth. And of course, we see in scriptures, we've talked about so many times, Genesis 1, there is no category of gender identity. There is no category of, while there is a feeling or thought that you have about who you are gender-wise that actually trumps your biology. We see two categories. They're biological categories. Male, female. That's it. And for those of you who say, well, there's intersex people. Yes, it's a very small percentage. That's a disorder. And just like there are some people born with one leg, and that doesn't negate the fact that

human beings are bipeds. So intersex people who are people made in the image of God, just like the rest of us, do not negate the rule of human existence, which is that we are created male and female. So, no, it is not possible for men to have babies, ever. Okay? It's just not possible. It's never going to be possible. They don't have a uterus.

They don't have eggs. is only possible for women to give birth. So the fact that this Maryland bill is titled the Pregnant Person's Freedom Act, it shouldn't surprise us what follows from that. Because they're already denying the creation order. So that means they're denying that people are made in the image of God. If you're denying that people are made in the image of God,

as Genesis 1-27 says, part of being made in the image of God is being made male and female, then of course you are also going to deny the value of life inside the womb. That's how it works. That's the logic. And Christians who are kidding themselves into thinking that they can believe that people are made in the image of God, also before legalized abortion, I'm sorry to say that I am here to wreck that contradictory thought

process that you have in your head. So let's read a little bit of this bill or read a little bit about this bill. So it's summarized as this, for the purpose of altering certain provisions of law relating to the termination of a pregnancy, also euphemistic language. You'll see that pro-abortion people can never actually say what an abortion is because when you are in the immoral position, when you have the wicked position, you actually have to use euphemisms in order to make your side palatable. You can't use the truth because the truth actually hurts your case. That's one of the most liberating and comforting parts about being anti-abortion is that all you have to do is tell the truth. All you have to tell the truth.

Truth is like a lion. You don't actually have to defend it. You just have to let it loose. And that's what we do with abortion. We say, this is what an abortion entails. Isn't that horrific? And the vast majority of people say yes. but unfortunately a large number of people don't actually know what an abortion is.

We've gone through what the abortion procedure entails in every stage of pregnancy many times. Again, we can link a past episode on that for you to listen to it. It's stomach churning. It's really difficult to listen to as it should be. But the truth is on our side. As pro-lifers, as anti-abortion advocates, the truth is not on their side, which is why they have to say terminate a pregnancy. Well, what are you actually terminating?

You're not terminating a pregnancy. You're terminating a person. So relating to the termination of pregnancy, investigations of or criminal penalties or civil liabilities for a pregnant person or a person assisting a pregnant person prohibiting a certain provision of law that requires the termination of a pregnancy by a licensed physician from being construed to apply to a certain pregnant person generally relating to the termination of pregnancy. Yada, yada, yada, yada, mumbo, jumbo, blah, blah. That's what happens when you exchange the truth of God for a lie and your mind becomes so depraved and so infected by sin that you become stupid. your mind, your brain becomes mushy oatmeal. You're not even allowed, you're not even able to say words that actually make sense. So the bill reiterates that the current state law, um, deprives all unborn people of rights. The bill says this, nothing in the section shall be construed to confer

personhood or any rights on the fetus. Any fetus. Any fetus. Okay. A pro-life advocates warned that under this bill, a baby who survived an abortion could just be left to die without care. But then the measure reportedly goes one step further into the perinatal territory. So this is why you are hearing people that, okay, this is not just allowing legal abortion up until birth, anyone, any of you women who have been pregnant. Like, you know what pregnancy is like. Like you who have had premature babies at 22, 23 weeks. I mean, that's a baby. that you give birth to. That's a wiggling, moving, feeling, breathing baby. My 11 and a half week appointment the first time I was pregnant, that's still the first trimester. I looked at the ultrasound

and I saw a baby with arms and legs and fingers and toes and a beating heart and lungs and a brain and teeth. I mean, it was a flipping little moving, wiggling baby. First trimester. Okay? And so you're talking about legalizing abortion through 40 weeks, don't tell me, oh, well, that never happens. If it never happens, then why are we working to legalize it? And by the way, it does happen. Even according to the Guttmacher Institute, which is a pro-abortion research organization, that happens about 10,000 times every year. And that is probably an underestimate because several states, most states don't actually have to report that kind of thing, or we can't even rely on that reporting, not most, but many. And so that's probably an undercount. There are very

many babies who are aborted after they are viable, after they could live outside of the womb every year. All right? So that's why they're pushing for this legislation because they want that. I guess they're bloodthirsty. I'm not sure. Writing for the National Review, Wesley J. Smith cautioned that such bills would lead to allowing lethal injections on newborns left to die. Here's part of what he says in that article. So he mentions how Ralph Northam, the then governor of Virginia on the on on on radio said that a mother and her doctor get to have a conversation about if a baby survives an abortion about what to do. So would you get to neglect the newborn and allow the baby to die or what gets to happen? I mean, that got almost no press in the mainstream media.

He said that a baby, born alive, laying there on the table, that the mother and doctor would get to decide whether or not to kill that. baby or to neglect the baby to death? When I gave a Senate testimony in 2019 about the horrors of abortion, I also read the testimonies of people who have worked in abortion clinics, who have worked in hospitals where abortions are performed, and how babies either born alive, some of them struggling to live, they died a few minutes after, were put in a janitor closet, left to die. And one woman talked about holding a 22 week old baby who was aborted because he had. Down syndrome. And this was the moment it changed for her. The baby was alive in her arms after this failed abortion and she just held this baby helplessly. Yes, if that's just one testimony,

I guarantee you this is happening multiple times a year. If not a lot, but it doesn't matter. Even if it were happening once, that would be horrific. So he goes on to say the bill would prevent investigations and legal, the bill in Maryland would prevent investigations and legal penalties for abortion at any point in the pregnancy and perinatal deaths caused by failure to act. So that is what Ralph Northam was talking about in Virginia. Now, what is a perinatal death? Well, you can look this up in your search engine. Paranatal death includes the month after birth.

So up to 28 days after birth. That is the technical medical definition of perinatal. So an abortionist or anyone involved in this abortion would not be held legally liable for any death that happens to a baby surviving an abortion during this perinatal period, 28 days after birth. So that means a wide variety of things. That could mean that legally the doctor and the parents just allow that child to die on their own so they can't, they don't have to intervene. They don't actually have to try to save that baby's life. Republicans have tried to push legislation even federally sane. I think it was been SAS a few years ago, tried to push federal

legislation saying that look, doctors have to try to save the life of the baby that survives the abortion. All Democrats were against it, including our vice president, by the way. You pro all life Christians who voted for them and who think that it's just nuanced to be on the side of the party that is literally pro infanticide. You crazy people, I'm going to get into a specific example of that in just one second. But we're talking about these Maryland Democrats who are allowing parinatal deaths of babies that are caused by failure to act, which extends from the 22nd week of gestation through to the first 28 days after birth. Here's what the bill says.

The section may not be construed to authorize any form of investigation or penalty for a person terminated in or attempting to terminate the person's own pregnancy or experiencing a miscarriage, paranatal death related to a failure to act or stillbirth. This means the article says that a baby who survived an abortion can be allowed to die without care and no investigation could be pursued nor legal penalty applied, but also effectively decriminalizes death by neglect for the first 28 days of life without regard to abortion. So I actually said that wrong earlier. So, oh my gosh. So this is not even just babies who survive abortion. We're talking about any babies. So any babies that die because they were neglected,

because they were abandoned, because they were starved, because the doctor or whomever failed to intervene to help take care of them. It decriminalizes any kind of death by neglect for the first 28 days of baby's life without regard to abortion. This is infanticide. This doesn't have to do with bodily autonomy. This is not in a woman's body anymore. This doesn't even have to do with abortion. This has to do with being able to kill a child. If no investigation can be conducted, what else? Can it be called? The article says, for example, a baby born with a disability could be allowed to die by refusing ordinary methods of care and medical treatment. Heck, for that matter, at any baby the mother does not want in the first 28 days after birth. To further ensure that such

deaths can take place without consequence, the bill would authorize those illegally investigated for causing babies to die by neglect to bring civil lawsuits. A person may bring, the bill says, a cause of action for damages if the person was subject to unlawful arrest or criminal investigation for a violation of section as a result of experiencing a miscarriage, stillbirth, or perinatal death. Wow. Wow. The pro-abortion left clearly is slavishing toward not only authorizing late-term abortions for any reason, but also post-birth deaths of unwanted born babies. Unbelievable. This is already happening in other parts of the world, by the way. And just a reminder, Maryland has safe haven laws. So you can bring your unwanted child to your unwanted baby, infant,

to a safe haven box. You put them in there. There's someone that's on the other side of the window that you put the baby through. They take the baby. They ensure that the baby gets a good home. So if you don't want the baby, there is no excuse to leave the baby to die. And plus, even if you're in a state that doesn't have a safe haven law, which I think every state should, there are agencies.

There are places that you can go. You can take the baby somewhere and someone will take care of your baby. And guess what? There are millions of parents. who are in line right now, who have struggled with infertility, who can't have children, or who just want to adopt children that would take your baby. And so for Democrats to pretend like they are the pro-all-life party, they're the holistically pro-life party, they're the party of compassion, they're the party of the least of these,

they're the party of the most vulnerable. They're not actually working to help desperate mothers or vulnerable families. They are actually just working to make it easier to kill a child. Again, I ask, how could any Christian vote for this party? I'm not trying to lionize or certainly not deify, I should say, any political party. I'm not saying that Republicans are perfect by any means. I rail against the failures of Republicans often. But there is nothing, hear me, nothing that the Republican Party stands for that is even,

even anywhere near the atrocity of abortion that Democrats unashamedly advocate for. They don't see it as a necessary evil. they don't see it as something that they privately are against, but they publicly have to make legal. No, they see it as something more and more to celebrate. I don't think all Democratic voters think that way. I think a lot of Democratic voters don't. But I think party leadership, I think the activist class of the Democratic Party, I think they are bloodthirsty.

And they will push the limits on this unless people, namely Democrats stand up and say, no, you're not going to vote for people to advocate for things like that. unless Democrats stand up and say that you are against this legislation too and that you won't vote for people that vote yes on it. This is something unfortunately infanticide is something that has been advocated for for a while in the bioethics community, if you can call it a community. Of course, secular godless academics have advocated for this kind of infanticide for a long time. People like Peter Singer, they don't actually think that you should be able to ascribe personhood to someone who doesn't have self-consciousness. doesn't have their own autonomy and their ability, I guess, to think for themselves. Again, it becomes so arbitrary.

And that's the problem. Like that, don't you see how that has been the foundation of every genocide that has ever existed, saying that a group is subhuman, that they don't actually have rights because of whatever reason? And because of abortion, we say it's because of location or size or age or politics, whatever it is. That's just as arbitrary as saying that you have to kill someone because of their religion. or because of what they look like.

And people who get mad when this is likened to the Holocaust or liken to slavery, I'm sorry, it's the same principle. It's the same quadrant of the library. You are deciding that one class of human beings is subhuman and that they can be legally slaughtered. Again, how can anyone who believes in a just loving God be okay with the legalization of that? It's really, it's truly insane and it's disheartening. And how can we, by the way, be okay with the Supreme Court Justice nominee who can't say that she knows when life begins?

And unfortunately, there are some Christians who seem to be okay with that. Okay, before we get into Katanji Brown Jackson and her just egregious failure to answer when a life begins, Let me tell you also about this Colorado bill. It is HB22 through 1 or dash 1-2-7-9. And it's called the Reproduct Health Health Equity Act. And so once again, we've got an act that is named by euphemisms because that's what abortion lovers have to do. Reproductive health is a euphemism for slaughtering a child. Equity is a euphemism for how do I even explain it?

we've explained it many times, basically finagling the rules so that every race has equal outcomes, even if that means treating people differently to try to get people to end up in the same place. I mean, it's a form of communism, giving preferential treatment to one group that you view as disadvantaged, that you say has been victimized or marginalized in some way, trying to get them a boost up while holding everyone else back and saying, oh, this is going to end up at the same place. It never actually works like that. You actually just end up committing partiality, which we know from scripture for Christians is a sin, which is a form of injustice, says the God who created justice. And that's all written about by Thomas Soul and the quest for cosmic justice.

And so I encourage you to read that whenever you see the word equity that is always a red flag, whatever policy is being proposed is not actually equitable. Equity is supposed to be the equal application of the law to everyone, regardless of your sex, regardless of your religion, regardless of your race. But equity in progressive speak, in newspeak, is not that. It is actually trying to change the rules of the game so everyone ends up in the same place. There was a policy that I just saw, gosh, which state was it coming from? That the school board decided that they were going to handle school discipline on students based on race and background. And so that means that white students might get punished more harshly than black or brown

students. Why again for the sake of equity? Because I'm sure they looked at the numbers and they said, oh, well, you know, black students seem to be getting in trouble, getting disciplined more on average than white students. And so that must be because of racism, although it's probably not because of racism. And so they're now going to treat this class of people with kid gloves, whereas they will continue to treat the white students more harshly. That's injustice. You're trying to create equal outcomes and you're trying to meet arbitrary quotas to say that you're being equitable, but actually you are by real definitions being unequitable. So again, whenever I see reproductive health equity act, I already know it's going to be absolute hogwash. Here is what the bill is. So it declares the

Every individual has a fundamental right to use or refuse contraception. I'm glad that you have a right to refuse contraception. Every pregnant individual. There we go. There's the Orwellian newspeak again. Every pregnant individual has a fundamental right to continue the pregnancy and give birth to or have an abortion. And a fertilized egg, embryo, or fetus does not have independent or derivative rights under the laws of the state. So once again, they're saying that this is not a real person.

Again, tell me what it is. Tell me what it is. if it's not a real person, a potential person, says who? That's a very philosophical and superstitious position. That's not a scientific position because we know scientifically that this is a human being. And if a human being is not a human being, or if a human being is not a person, when it becomes a human being, which is at conception, then when does it become a person? And when does it have rights?

And why? No one wants to answer that. The bill prohibits state and local public entities from depriving through prosecution, punishment, or rather means an individual of the individual's rights to act or refraining. from acting during the individual's own pregnancy based on whatever reason. So basically there can be no reason to stop a woman from getting an abortion. We'll include the links to the actual text of these bills in the description so you can read them for yourself. And so the bill codifies, this is according to the Denver Channel, that will codify full access to reproductive health care

in Colorado into statute. It applies to anyone who may become, anyone who may become pregnant, calls people's access to contraception a fundamental right and says state and local public entities are prohibited from interfering with a person's right to continue a pregnancy, give birth, or have an abortion. The Catholic News Agency, which is obviously coming from the pro-life perspective, says the bill explicitly denies any rights to unborn children. It says a fertilized egg embryo or fetus does not have independent rights. The bill is designed to outlaw government interference in, quote, reproductive health care. So it grants the right to abortion, which there is no right to abortion, not in the Constitution, not anywhere, for the full 40 weeks of pregnancy for any reason. The Colorado Catholic Conference is warned. Colorado is already a regional hub for abortion, and the bill would solidify that.

So there are already very few restrictions on abortion in Colorado, and this just pushes that to its limit. There's no gestational limit currently written to Colorado law, making Colorado one of just a few states where abortion is available until birth. In 2019, the last year the data from the CDC was available. More than 170 babies were aborted after 21 weeks gestation in Colorado. So that's a lot. I guarantee, again, that that is an undercount. After 21 weeks, that's viable, guys. I'm not saying that that life is worth more than the baby that's aborted at six weeks

because they're both made in the image of God. But when you think about just how grotesque, how abhorrent that is, a moving, kicking, feeling squirming baby. And we know the process that is required in killing that child, a needle of the same poisonous chemical combination that is used in lethal injections of criminals on death row was inserted into the woman's abdomen, into the uterus. If the doctor can get straight into the heart of the baby,

if the baby is not moving around too much, then directly into the baby's heart. it stops the baby's heart, it causes a cardiac arrest, a heart attack, and then the baby dies that way, and then the baby is removed using forcips through the birth canal. So that is what an abortion entails in the second trimester. The baby is actually reported to flinch from the needle, the pain of the needle, to move away from the needle. There is an instinctive drive to survive in all of us, including babies inside the womb. And this is happening hundreds of times in Colorado every year. And so the Democrats in that state are trying to solidify this and ensure that there is no prohibition whatsoever in a woman getting abortion through 40 weeks of pregnancy.

There was also no waiving period for an abortion in Colorado, no residency requirement. Although the state requires minor seeking abortions to inform one parent in writing 48 hours prior, parents cannot legally stop their child from getting the abortion. Wow, demonic. Since abortion is not currently restricting Colorado abortion discrimination based on category, such as sex, race, or disability can take place. So why is this bill such a concern if Colorado already allows abortion up to birth? It would ink into law, one of the most permissive abortion laws in the entire country, further lending legitimacy and legal protection to the state's late-term abortionists.

It would also solidify Colorado as a regional abortion hub. Because pro-choice Colorado lawmakers believe that federal abortion procedures could be threatened in the near future because of the possibility of overturning, Roe v. Wade this summer. And so that's why they're acting this way. That's why they're doing this. That's why they're trying to ensure that women are able

to abort their babies through all nine months of pregnancy. It's really, really evil. And Biden Supreme Court Justice, Katanji Brown Jackson, she was asked multiple times in her

Senate hearings last week when she believes that life begins. So let me play you one of those exchanges between Senator Kennedy and Judge Jackson. When does life begin,

in your opinion? Senator, I don't know. Ma'am? I don't know. You have a belief? I have personal, religious,

and otherwise beliefs that nothing to do with the law in terms of when life begins. Do you have a personal belief, though, about when life begins? I have a religious view. Religious belief? That I set aside when I am ruling on cases. Okay. When does equal protection of the laws attach to a human being?

Well, Senator, I believe that the Supreme Court, Actually, I actually don't know the answer to that question. I'm sorry. All right. So she wasn't able to answer that question. She doesn't know when life begins. She already told us when Senator Blackburn asked her, can you define what a woman is? And she said, no, I'm not a biologist, as if you need to be a biologist to understand what has been easily observable for all of human history.

But she's already told us, you know, she's not a biologist. And so I guess that means that she also can't tell us when, life begins, which of course is troubling. Both of these things are very easy to answer because their objective realities rooted in science. Now, you could say that, of course, these are political traps of questions. And they are. They are political traps. That's just what the other side does. So they know that Republican politicians, just like Democrat politicians and these kinds of hearings, they know that they're just trying to kind of get her to say controversial things or really just to see where she stands. I'm not saying that it's not a legitimate line of questioning because

it absolutely totally is, including Josh Holly's line of questioning about why she has issued such light sentences on child predators. It's totally legitimate, but they also know that this is just kind of a way to get people to see what she really stands for. So she doesn't know when life begins. She doesn't know what a woman is. She doesn't know why she has consistently issued these light sentences for child predators and people who consume and distribute child sex abuse material when Josh Hawley asked her that. And of course, Lindsay Graham asked her the same question. Like, why have you done this?

Why do you go against federal guidelines? And what prosecutors have recommended when it comes to sentencing for child predators. And she can't really answer that question. We talked about that last week on the podcast. We can link that episode. And so this is really troubling. We just talked about how awful abortion is. We just talked about, obviously,

the importance of being able to say what a woman is because that tells us, like, that tells us what you believe about who we are, where we come from, where our rights come from. Like, if you can't answer those two basic questions, like, if you can't tell us what a woman is, then how am I supposed to believe that you can tell us what a woman's right is? Like, what are women's rights if you can't even define what a woman is? and if you can't tell me when life begins, then when does a human being have rights? I need to know. Is it in pregnancy? Is it after birth? Is it a month after birth? Is it six months after birth? Is it 12 years old? I don't know. Like, I don't, shouldn't I want to know from a

Supreme Court justice when life begins so I can know when she thinks a human being has a right? I mean, someone who is supposed to be an expert in the Constitution, which outlines our rights in the Bill of Rights. like shouldn't she be able to say like when we get to actually cash in all those rights as human beings but she can't because she doesn't know when life begins and so she says she's not a biologist for these things and some people i saw saying well that's good that means that that means that she thinks that gender is rooted in biology and so that's actually a very conservative answer i saw people saying that no no no that's not what she's saying now she might i i she might actually think the gender is rooted in biology and that is wonderful if she does. But that is actually a tactic by

left-wing gender ideologues a lot. There was this exchange, this video exchange between a, this like LGBTQ activist and this feminist who is like anti-transgender movement and they were at the swim meet where Leah Thomas was swimming and they are going back and forth and this LGBTQ activist thought that he was trapping her in this question, he said, are you a biologist? To basically say, hey, if you're not a biologist, then you can't speak to this. It is not, he doesn't believe that gender is rooted in biology. These activists, these left wing ideologues, don't believe that gender is rooted in biology, but they continually use that question.

Are you a biologist or you don't know anything about biology? Just to try to say that the common person can't understand the complex, science of what it means to be a man or woman. So I highly doubt she is saying that she thinks that sex is immutable and rooted in biology. I think that she is saying what these gender ideologs do, that, well, we can't really know unless we have a degree, unless we have special insight, and she probably thinks it's some complex answer. Why do I think that? Because she's on the left. Like she's left wing. She wouldn't have been nominated if she weren't. She wouldn't be touted by all of these left-wing activist groups if she weren't.

And I'm hoping and praying that she is an impartial judge that exacts justice. But I'm concerned. I'm concerned about her answers when it comes to life and when it comes to the definition of a woman basic fundamental facts of human existence that I think a Supreme Court justice should know. And I am troubled by why she issues such light sentences on child predators. I think these are all completely legitimate concerns that we have. And then I was just, you know, surprised at a little.

little bit troubled by some of the reactions that I saw from Christians about this. And I'll get into that in just one second. All right. So I want to address a question that a lot of you have asked me or questions that a lot of you have asked me about Jackie Hill Perry's tweets and Instagram posts about about Katanji Brown Jackson. There were a couple tweets that I saw. Now, these are just screenshots that you have sent me because unfortunately, even though I have never had any kind of negative interaction with Jackie Ho Perry, and I like a lot of the things that she says, she blocked me on all social media. I'm guessing just because she doesn't like what I have to say, but I've never had any kind of exchange with her. One time I tweeted under one of her tweets asking

her to come on the show. Now I do disagree with her. When it comes to social and racial justice issues, absolutely 100%. I really disagree with her on politics. But I don't think I've ever even outlined those disagreements on this show. And I don't want to take away from a lot of the good stuff that I think that she says. I think that she's wrong on some things. I'm sure that she thinks that I'm wrong on some things. I think that she is really wrong when it comes to those subjects that I just listed. But like I said, I've never had any kind of disrespectful or negative interaction with her. and one day, I don't know, I think I saw that someone said that she tweeted something, and so I went to go look, and she blocked me on all social media.

Interesting. Make of that what she will. But she apparently was tweeting some things about Katanji Brown Jackson, and she posted some things on her Instagram story that you all sent to me. So she quote tweeted the exchange between Lindsey Graham and Katanji Brown Jackson, just saying, I can't. And Lindsay Graham was asking her about her record in issuing. light sentences to child predators and consumers and distributors of child sex abuse material.

I don't really know what Jackie Hill Perry meant by I can't. Strange, but I'm not going to read into that. And then she posted a picture of Katanji Brown Jackson's daughter, just looking at her mom and like smiling. You could tell it was a moment of admiration and just saying mood. And apparently some people were upset about that from Jackie Hill. Perry. I mean, those two posts and themselves, that to me, just to be fair, I don't think me that Jackie Hill Perry is like defending everything that Katanji Brown Jackson stands for or that she

loves her and agrees with her on everything. And so I'm not saying that Jackie Hillopary is saying that. However, I think that people's questions are fair, that like would she post this kind of seeming support for Amy Coney Barrett or for any kind of judicial nominee who was nominated by a Republican. I don't think so. I don't think so based on the kind of activism and activist rhetoric that she has put forward to before. Some of you were surprised in her Instagram story. She was saying that there were people messaging her kind of disappointed in her posting mood or whatever about Katanji Brown Jackson and her daughter. And by the way, it was a cute picture that was taken and posted. So whatever. That's the least of my concerns when it comes to Katanji

Brown Jackson. But she and then Jackie O'Perry did an Instagram story saying, you know, most of the people in my DMs are white evangelicals. 80% of you voted for Donald Trump, basically, so you don't have room, you don't have room to talk about any of this. And some of you in messaging me, you express a prize that Jackie Hill-Perry that she called out the race of the people that were messaging her. That's the least surprising thing that I've ever heard. If you actually pay attention to the things that Jackie Hill-Perry says, she talks about the problems with white evangelicals a lot and the problems that she thinks that she sees in white evangelicals supporting Donald Trump. She is always, she is consistently very quick to talk about race and to draw

lines along racial, to draw distinctions along racial lines. So that didn't surprise me at all. She sees hypocrisy apparently in white evangelical supporting Donald Trump, but criticizing someone like Katanji Brown Jackson because Donald Trump has done a lot of bad things in the past. And I understand that reasoning because Donald Trump has done a lot of things that Christians should not justify. We should not support.

He has said things that are anti-biblical that are not in alignment with our values. And I think that we should be very honest with that, absolutely. But the evangelicals I know, including me, the reason why I voted for Donald Trump twice is because of policy, because I abhor abortion, because I believe that human beings inside the womb have a dignity that should be afforded to them by legal rights. And I could never vote for a candidate. I could never vote for a politician who, who, thinks that aborting a child is a right. That's one reason. And then there are a lot of other reasons

when it comes to gender in women's rights, when it comes to smaller government, when it comes to economic policy that I think is better for every single demographic in every single class in society. I mean, that's why I'm a conservative, because I actually believe that conservative policies and that the policies that Trump supported, for the most part, I'm sure there are things that I disagree with, were better. And that would align more with his society that is reflective of biblical principles. I'm not talking about a theocracy. I am talking about recognizing the rights and the dignity of people while also trying to protect the sovereignty of your country and the safety of your citizens in a way that creates an

ordered society that benefits everyone based on the moral, that is found in scripture. So that is my reasoning. I can also say that I disagree with a lot of Donald Trump's personal views and the things that he has said and done. Absolutely. Where I find it difficult to say, well, I'm just going to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to Katanji Brown Jackson is because of her positions on, apparently on abortion and also on crime in general and specifically when it comes to the crime of distributing and possessing child sex abuse material. It's hard for me to see how I can praise any part of her when the decisions that she has made has perpetuated child rape. It has because when you are issuing

the lightest sentence is possible for this kind of egregious crime, what you are doing is incentivizing, committing that crime because the consequences just aren't hefty enough to disincentivize someone from committing that crime, either committing that crime again or someone else committing that crime for the first time. And of course, her refusal to accept or to define what a woman is, all of that goes back to the denial of Genesis 1. All of this really goes back to the denial of Genesis 1. You're denying that people are made in God's image. You're denying. that being made in God's image means that you are being made male and female. Again, I'm not looking for a theocratic nominee, but I am looking for someone who is, who recognizes the value of human beings

and can define what a human being is. And I have a hard time believing that if someone rejects that people are made in God's image and therefore have, have inherent value, that they will be able to recognize a human right. If you can't even define when human life begins, how can you recognize and define what a human right is? The denial of reality is always going to lead to the denial of rights. That's what we're going to see in Katanji Brown Jackson. And so I have a hard time.

Not when I'm looking at her personally, maybe she's a really nice lady. I'm sure that she is. I'm sure that she has a lot of good thoughts too. But I think the difference here is that. it seems like a lot of Christians who vote Democrat, they are mostly looking at personality and personal views where it seems like the Christians who vote Republican are mostly just looking at policy. And I can't find it within my heart or mind to support someone who apparently

advocates for the kinds of policies and decisions that are so deleterious and so destructive for the most vulnerable in our society. So that's why I disagree with just. Jackie Hill Perry's reasoning. And plus, I think that she is extremely derisive and derogatory and condescending when she talks about white evangelicals. But again, not a surprise to me. That's something that she has been doing for several years. I am not someone who is trying to say, oh, I'm warning you. Stay far away. I'm not saying that. I think you can make your own decisions. I think that you are wise and discerning and that you can listen to a lot of the wonderful, amazing things, dynamic things that she says. And even though she

blocked me. I still believe those things about her and I'm still thankful for her testimony and how the Lord is using her. Thankful. Praise God for all of that. So I'm just saying you can discern the things that she says that you believe are aligned with the Bible and the things that are not. And by the way, you should be doing that with me as well and you should be doing that with everyone. But I really disagree with her reasoning here. I disagree with how she articulated this and how she kind of doubled down on this. And that's all I'll say. I just wanted to I just wanted to clear that I just wanted to clear that. because a lot of people were asking that. All right, let me tell you about our last sponsor for the day.

And then I want to tell you this very interesting fact that kind of plays into what we're talking about with abortion and abortion legislation and just how I think that women and children are so mistreated in so many ways in this country, actually because of a lot of the movements and the ideologies that say that they're defending these groups. And so I just want to tell you about this interesting factoid that we'll have to expound upon in the future in just a second. All right, let me tell you this really interesting fact. that I shared with Alex Clark when we were talking about the dark side of the birthing industry.

Of course, one of the dark sides of maternal care and infant care in the United States has to do with abortion. But I was also looking into like, why do we have such bad outcomes when it comes to maternal mortality rates and infant mortality rates, at least in the developed world? We do not rank well. When it comes to that, and you would think America with some of the most expensive medical care and the most advanced medical technology in the world that we would have the lowest infant and maternal mortality rate. And yet we don't. And then you also hear a statistic very often that black women are about three times more likely to die during birth, during labor and delivery and after birth than white women. And that Hispanic and Asian women also the rate is

lower for those groups than it is for a black woman. And what we are continually told is that that is because of racism, that systemic racism in the health care system. And I'm not denying that racism could exist in these situations. I have heard enough anecdotes to know that it is anecdotes to know that it's certainly possible and that that happens. I believe people's stories when they say that they experience some form of racial discrimination in these scenarios. That's true. But as with most left-wing narratives, I think that it is worth taking a second look at, you know, what's going on here? Or is there more to the story? Is it just racism? Could other factors play into it? And of course, according to the CDC, there are a few things that they say play into any maternal

death, and that is high blood pressure, and that is heart problems. And that is more likely among African-American women, which is probably one of the reasons why they are more likely to die. and then also they have disproportionate poverty rates. And so that plays into it. I think poverty is a driver of a lot of the problems and the disparities that we see in this country much more than race today. But then one thing I found when I was just, I wasn't even really looking for this. But I read in an article in Deseret News that actually the number one cause of maternal mortality, and this is not in the CDC figures, but this is in addition to the CDC figures,

the number one cause of maternal mortality in the United States. It has nothing to do with medical malpractice or neglect or anything that happens inside a hospital. It's actually homicide. And the vast majority of homicides are committed by the domestic partners of these pregnant women. And then if you dig a little bit further, you see that the number one victim in this group of pregnant women or postpartum women, so a year after, they give birth is black women. So black women, a higher number of women in general, of pregnant women and postpartum women in general, are dying by homicide than are dying by any other cause of death for pregnant and postpartum women. But that is in particular true of black

women. It is the most likely reason for a black woman to die in pregnancy or postpartum is homicide, far more than their white, their Hispanic, or their Asian counterparts. And it's usually their domestic partner. So here's my question. Why aren't we talking about that? Well, I think we know the answer. Because the people who like to only peddle one part of the story, one statistic that they think can back up their claim.

Really, it's about goals for them. They want to take over, progressives always want to take over a particular institution and remake it into their own image. And if they can misuse or use the statistic and just conclude that the reason for that statistic is because of racism or because of discrimination, then they can use that as the justification to try to change the health care system in general to make it more, quote, equitable. And we've already talked about the problems with that. But if they really cared about women, and in particular black women, if they really cared about the maternal mortality rate among black women, then we would be talking about the number one killer of black pregnant women, which is homicide. We'd be talking about that a lot more, wouldn't we?

But we're not because, just like with Black Lives Matter, who only talk about one kind of death, the goal is not actually to save lives. The goal is not actually justice. The goal is revolution. The goal is to take over. The goal is progressivism, communism, institutional capture. It's not actually to help the victims and the most vulnerable. Again, if we were, we would be talking about the homicides, which is one of the most likely killers of black males, and we would be talking about the homicide, which is the most likely killer of pregnant and postpartum black women. Wow, that's a tough pill to swallow when you were told that every disparity that exists is only because of systemic racism. Every injustice that is endured by non-white people in the United States is because

of white people. Well, I mean, there's a million different stories that we could list that disprove that, but especially when it comes to caring for women, which I care about. I don't want these women to be dying in this way. Shouldn't we be talking about that? Like, why is that? Shouldn't we be digging a little bit further into that if we actually care about women and their babies? but I think we have, we've already noted today how the Democratic Party, and I'm sure the Republican Party in a lot of ways too, but the Democratic Party, the people who say that they are on the front lines for women, that they care about the most vulnerable, that they are actually the ones who are quickest to sacrifice children on the altar of their progressive policies and ignore the true threats to women if it doesn't advance their agenda. That's wicked. That's wicked. We'll have to talk more about all. of that on another episode and expound upon it. But I just wanted to share that with you because I thought it was interesting. All right. That's all we've got time for today. And I will see you back here tomorrow. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues

facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort, we ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular.

This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed,

you can watch this Steve Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us.