Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 94 | Dems Demand Abortion

Episode Date: April 3, 2019

Leftists continue to prove their rabid love for abortion as Georgia passes the "heartbeat bill." Copyright Blaze Media All Rights Reserved.

Hello, relatable. Happy Wednesday. I hope that everyone is having a great week. I got a lot of messages about Monday's podcast about biblical suffering, how a lot of you felt like it came at the right time. And I just appreciate you letting me know that and telling me some of your stories. It was kind of just a spontaneous decision to make a podcast on that subject. But I did feel like, okay, this is an evergreen topic that no matter what is going to reach someone. So I'm glad that it was effective to you guys, and I'm glad that you felt like it came at the right time for some of you. If you haven't listened yet, you should definitely go back to Monday. It is a podcast on biblical suffering and affliction, which, like I said, whether you are in a good season or a bad season,

is extremely applicable. Chances are you know someone who is going through something if you're not right now, and so it can offer encouragement to them. It's not anything that I said, but just pointing to what God's word says about it. And thankfully, because God is a God of compassion, he has a lot to say about it. Speaking of compassion, and we are going to talk about abortion today. Now, I know that we talk about abortion a lot on this podcast, but that's because it comes up in the news so much. I'm also extremely passionate about this topic

because it just amazes me day after day, week after week, how incredibly this message of abortion is evil is obscured particularly by people on the left, sometimes by people on the right, who claim to be pro-choice based on an erroneous argument for their version of limited government. But this idea that abortion is a right of a woman to choose, that it's about autonomy, that it's about liberty,

that it's about equality, that it's about freedom, has been so effectively propagated by Planned Parenthood and all of their cronies in the Democratic Party that we have really lost sight of science, of basic logic, of basic morality. And it's really important for me to kind of unveithes, unveil the truth about abortion and the truth about the hypocrisy of people who are proponents of it. Now, of course, I am not the only one who does this. There are so many people in this realm who do an amazing job of advocating for life and tearing down the pro-choice arguments,

which honestly is not very difficult to do because, as I've said before, they are all strawmen. Every single pro-choice argument is a straw man, and we might get to a little bit of that. but there are so many good people that stand up for life. I just happen to be one of them. And I happen to be a very passionate one of them because it's hard for me not to see how this is such an integral, biblical, and cultural subject. So the reason why we are talking about it today is because the Georgia State Legislature passed what they are calling a heartbeat bill. It's actually the Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act. I think that's a perfect name for it. that acronym is Life, the Life Act. This is House Bill 481, which bans all abortions once a heartbeat is detected. Any of you who know about gestation, even if you have been pregnant or not, the heartbeat

is detected as early as six weeks. Sometimes it's even a little bit earlier than that. I got my first ultrasound, for those of you who don't know, I'm pregnant, I am pregnant. I got my first ultrasound at seven and a half weeks. And in that seven and a half weeks, You see the little beating heart. It just kind of looks like a jelly bean, but you see the little beating heart that early, and it had already been there for a week and a half at least. And so this says that, quote,

physicians performing abortions to determine the existence of a detectable human heartbeat before performing an abortion to provide for the reporting of certain information by physicians. So that's what this bill requires. The bill also states that by definition, the full value of a child begins at the point when a detectable human heartbeat exists. Now, I disagree with that.

I fundamentally disagree with that. I think actually that's a very unscientific statement. And we'll see that the bill talks about medical information and scientific information. That's a very unscientific explanation for when the value of life, when the value of life is put on a child. I don't really see any other logical point to give value to a human life other than conception. At conception, that child has a separate DNA, separate from its mother. It is a separate organism from its mother. And so in order, let's just be safe.

Let's say that the value of life starts when scientifically life begins. Why logically would it start at any other point? Honestly, the heartbeat is a very arbitrary point to say this is when the value of life is put on a child. However, constitutionally right now, of course, I don't think it's a good constitutional argument, but via Roe v. Wade, we are, a state is not allowed to completely ban abortion. And so this is really the earliest that you can ban it when you detect a heartbeat. We'll see if this actually holds up in court. This is going to be challenging court, no question. Now, I think that it's great. I just happen to think that that one particular line, that the full value

of a child begins at the point when a detectable human heartbeat exists. I find that completely erroneous based on what? Who's said? So we'll move past that. That's my one critique. Of course, I do support this legislation, but let's not talk about pseudo philosophical value of life begins at this arbitrary point stuff in order to make the point that we need to save as many unborn lives as possible. Part of section two of the bill states this. Modern medical science not available decades ago demonstrates that unborn children are a class of living distinct persons. And more expansive state recognition of unborn children as persons did not exist when Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Roe v. Wade established abortion-related precedence.

Now, okay, I have another, I actually have another problem with the language of this bill, because it says living distinct persons. I would have wanted some clarification in the bill, and maybe it's there, I just didn't read it, because there is a distinction, at least that some people make between a person and a human being. A human being is seen as more of a scientific term. A person is seen as more of a philosophical term. Of course, I believe that a human being is a person at the point of conception because they're a human being at conception with that separate DNA. And so they're a person at conception as well, because what other definition do we have of person besides human being? We shouldn't have one because all others would, be arbitrary. So it doesn't really make that much sense to me to say the unborn children are a class of living distinct persons, but then say that the value of a child begins at the point at which a detectable human heartbeat exists. And so already I do have a little bit of problem with the language here. I do think it's unscientific and I don't think it matches the philosophical arguments

that people have for abortion. Like I said, I am for the consequences of this bill. I think it could have done a better and more explicit job and explaining what it is actually standing for. So section two goes on to say the state of Georgia applying reason, judgment to the full body of modern medical science recognizes the benefits of providing full legal recognition to an unborn child above the minimum requirements of federal law. Article 1, Section 1, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Constitution of the state of Georgia affirmed that, quote, no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property except by due process of law, and that, quote, protection to person and property is the paramount duty of government and shall be impartial and incomplete. No person shall be denied

the equal protection of the laws, which of course I agree with. Now, in this particular bill, they are saying a person is an unborn child with a heartbeat. I've already explained my contentions with that, but that's probably what they have to do in order to get this bill to be seen as constitutional in light of Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Roe v. Wade. As I've already said, a child's heartbeat can be detected as early as six weeks. This is also the time where cells and the baby's body start forming other vital organs, such as the brain, such as the spinal cord, seven weeks into pregnancy, nostrils can actually be visible, and the baby's face and brain are now growing.

My second ultrasound that I had was at 11.5 weeks, and I was absolutely. stunned to see how human-like, although we knew that she was a human, obviously, how human-like she looked. I mean, the first time you see your child, they do kind of look like that jelly bean with a beating heart inside. The second time you see your child, only 11 and a half weeks, they look, how they are going to look when they're born just really small. I mean, they have a lot of development to do, but they've got arms and legs and fingers and toes. They're moving around. They're flipping. You see their little brain. You see their heart. You see their ribs. You see their rib cage, you see their spinal cordings, you see all of that at just 11 and a half weeks.

And in fact, if you get an ultrasound a little bit earlier than that, 11 weeks, 10 and a half weeks, 10 weeks you're going to see about the same thing. Now, the limbs will still kind of look like nubs, but they're already forming. At 11 and a half weeks, I burst into tears seeing my daughter on the on the ultrasound screen because of how human she was and how human she looked. I mean, this is a baby. There is no denying that whatsoever. There is no scientific argument that you can think of that would say that that's not a human being. What makes it not a human being? It really is just whether or not the child is wanted. Well, that's not a scientific argument. That is a selfish argument. That is an emotional argument. That's not even really a

philosophical argument, but it's certainly not a scientific argument coming from the party who says that they care so much about science. George's governor joins Mississippi and Kentucky's, who signed fetal heartbeat measures into law in recent weeks. Other states, including Florida, Missouri, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas are also expected to approve similar measures this year. This is what happens when you have a left that goes so crazy about abortion. And I don't want to jump the gun because we're going to get into that. Just a reminder of the measures that the left has taken to ensure the legality of abortion

up and through birth, through birth. We're talking partial birth abortions and even letting a child die after they have. been unsuccessfully aborted, partially birth aborted. This is what happens. This is the reaction. You have people, you have states wanting to restrict abortion as much as possible, which I am, I am glad for. And I have said, I wrote an article in town hall that New York's law to legalize abortion to and through birth was the best thing that happened for the pro-life movement. Because you had people who were pro-choice saying, okay, yeah, I'm for autonomy. I'm for equal rights. I'm not for killing a moving, writhing child.

Like, I just can't make myself say that that's okay. And of course, yes, there's some cognitive dissonance there because it's always a child. But even the thought of a fully formed nine-month child coming out of the womb and having their brain sucked out of them, which is what partial birth abortion literally is, a lot of people just couldn't stomach that. And so I've said, it's almost a good thing. Not really. It's an evil thing, but God is able to use this evil thing for good because the reaction from pro-lifers and even some moderate pro-choicers are, whoa, whoa, whoa, I can't get behind that.

So that's why you see states like Mississippi, Kentucky, Georgia, Florida, Missouri, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas preparing to make these restrictions as soon as possible. Georgia's governor, Brian Kemp, I'm doing this podcast on Tuesday. He is expected to sign this bill as the legislative session in today. Once signed, the law will become effective January 1st, 2020. So in reaction, though, to Kentucky's law, like I said, they passed a similar one. On March 15th, Judge David J. Hale of the Western District of Kentucky ruled the law was potentially unconstitutional. So he halted the enforcement for at least 14 days to prevent irreparable harm.

That's a quote. until he could hold hearing. It's funny how little these people seem to care about the irreparable harm that has done to pre-born children. Similar reaction occurred on the eve of the Georgia vote when about 50 Hollywood actors are favorite policy experts. Hollywood actors, including Alyssa Milano, the genius Alyssa Milano, Amy Schumer, Ben Stiller, they wrote an open letter. Y'all know how much I love open letters. Open letters have to be the most. dramatic development of 2019 politics. Open letters. Open letters to my teacher in fourth grade who taught me about bigotry. My open letter to all of you people out there who don't believe that the gender wage gap is real. Open letter. Open letters bother me. Just write an article. They're just so

dramatic. They're so dramatic and they're so emotional. But what do we expect from Hollywood? they're a bunch of actors. So they wrote this dramatic open letter threatening to pull business out of the state, which has been a hub for filming movies and television shows like The Walking Dead, something I never watch, but a lot of you probably do. That was filmed there. Here's a section of this open letter. It reads as follows, this dangerous and deeply flawed bill. No citation for that. Just set it. This dangerous and deeply flawed bill mimics many others, which have all already been deemed unconstitutional. Wrong. Wrong. So we got that one sentence out of the way, wrong. They have not been deemed unconstitutional, actually. They have been called potentially

unconstitutional by liberal judges. They have not been deemed unconstitutional. So you're wrong. As men who identify as small government conservatives, we remind you that government is never bigger than when it is inside of a woman's body or in her doctor's office. Okay. So these, these, okay, so these are the same people who believe in Medicare for all that you and I should not have the choice of private health insurance, even if we want it. We should not be able to choose our doctors. We shouldn't have any choice in our health care whatsoever. That is, in essence, putting government inside of our doctor's office and consequently inside of our bodies because it restricts the kind of care that we can get, these same people who advocate for

Medicare for All and these democratic platforms that expand the power of the government, especially through something like the Green New Deal are telling us that they care about limited government when it comes to preventing people from killing unborn children from tearing them apart limb by limb with forcips. All of the sudden they care about limited government when it comes to that.

It is not a limited government thing here. We're not talking about government overreach. We're asking the government to follow its basic constitutional responsibilities which is to preserve our ability to pursue life, liberty, and property. That has nothing to do with government overreach. That has everything to do. Even the most libertarian of us,

even the person who believes in the smallest, lightest form of government out there can still be pro-life by saying, okay, if there's any basic responsibility that the government has, it's to protect and preserve innocent life. I mean, that's not a big government argument. That's just a basic human decency, small government. We're talking bare minimum responsibility for the government argument. Okay, so they've already been wrong like five times and I've only read a sentence

and a half. So, as men who identify as small government conservatives, we remind you that government is never bigger than when it is inside a woman's body or in her doctor's office. This bill would remove the possibility of a woman receiving reproductive health again, again, no one's talking about health care here. Can someone scientifically medically explain to me how abortion is health care? Can you explain that to me? How is killing another human being going to save the life of one human being?

Can you explain that? All of these people who say, oh, yes, well, third trimester abortion, it only really occurs when the life of the mother is at stake. No, if you're in your third trimester right now, and I'm a little over 27 weeks, And I just got into my third trimester. So Saturday was the first day of the third trimester. I'm 27 and a half weeks now. My child, if I go to the end of this week, then and I delivered early at the end of this week, my child has a 95% chance of surviving. 95% chance. If I had gone into labor at the end of last week, I think she had like an 85% chance of surviving. That's a really good chance of surviving. And so if something happened to me, where it was no longer safe for me to be pregnant, they're not going to kill my child. They're going to take my child outside of my body

because she almost has a 100% chance of surviving. So anyone tells you, if anyone tells you, that in the third trimester, you have to kill, even in the second trimester, up until I would say like 22 weeks. I mean, that's going to be really hard for the child to survive if they are delivered that early, but it's happened. if anyone tells you that it is necessary to kill the child, especially at this point,

in order to save the life of the mother, it's complete hogwash. It's a total and complete lie. My child right now almost has a 100% chance of surviving. If something happened to me and I could no longer be pregnant, they would deliver her. They would take her out probably by C-section. And she would survive and she would have a life. so it is never an argument that you need to abort the child in order to save the mother. No, no.

So we're not talking about reproductive health care. Tell me what other kind of health care requires you to kill someone else that is not your body. I don't know. I don't know. So let's keep going. This bill would remove the possibility of a woman receiving reproductive health care before before most even know they are pregnant. okay, well, that's not really a problem.

First of all, if you're a woman, you should be keeping track of your period. And so if you're late, you should probably take a pregnancy test. I mean, that's just, I don't even, honestly, I don't really even understand how that happens. Like, I took a pregnancy test as soon as I thought that I was pregnant. Like immediately, I, whatever, I just don't really understand. Okay. But for most even know that they are pregnant and force many women to undergo. unregulated hidden procedures at great risk to their own health. Now, this is a myth. What they're

trying to say is that this is going to force women into back alley abortions and to use coat hangers. Well, that's not true. We know that the evidence, so-called evidence that was given for Roe v. Wade was largely inflated. Their argument was that, you know, if we don't allow abortions, the women are going to die in back alleys, whatever. Same argument that they're making here. Well, that has been completely debunked. That wasn't happening on a large scale. sure that happened every now and then because people are going to go to whatever means they want to go to in order to carry out whatever will they have. But it is just not true that this is always the result of us restricting abortion. And even if it were, look, I'm on the same page as

this. I want to make abortion unthinkable. That is why I give to pro-life pregnancy centers that are offering all kinds of services to women. They are offering free prenatal care, something that really planned parenthood does not do. They are giving parenting classes. They're even helping with immigration services, making sure that people who are illegal immigrants can start the citizenship process. They are making sure that women who are abused, that they are given housing, that they are given security, that they are given the resources they need to be able to protect

them in their child. They help them through the adoption process. Now, I can't speak for every single pro-life center in the country. I'm not sure if that's true for every single center, but the center that I give to in my area, they do. They offer real options. Planned Parenthood does not offer real options. They offer you one option.

That's why the word or the phrase pro-choice is a complete misnomer. Let's keep going with this open letter. Before most even know that they are pregnant and force many women to undergo unregulated hidden procedures at greater risk to their health, blah, blah, blah. That's not true. We can't imagine, they say, Ben Stiller says. We can't imagine being elected officials who had to say, say to their constitutions. I think that's supposed to be constituents. I enacted a law that was so

evil. It chased billions of dollars out of our state's economy. Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? Evil. It's evil. You want to talk about evil? Like, have you ever seen an abortion? Do you know what it is? So in the first trimester, you take a pill that poisons the child. At much risk to the mother, by the way, the woman passes what looks like a blob of tissue but was actually her unborn child. And she's in pain for about 24 to 48 hours. In the second trimester, it's too big to do that. The unborn child is too big to do that. And so you have to dry up the amniotic fluid that is keeping the child alive. And then the abortion doctor sucks the child out. But before they can suck the child out with this tiny little tube, you can look this up. By the way, it doesn't even have to be

on any kind of pro-life, pro-life site. An abortion center will tell you what a D&C or a D&AX abortion is. if you look online. They might sanitize the language, but they'll tell you what it is. You have to tear that child apart limb from limb with forceps because they don't fit into this little tube. And so after you do that, you suck the remaining fluid and you suck the remaining fetal matter, they would say, or tissue, they would say, into this little vacuum. That's what happens in a second trimester abortion. Now, a third trimester abortion is very complicated because you've got a fully formed child that's ready to be born in there. And so what you have to do is that you have to induce labor and you have to partially deliver the child and then you make an incision in the back

of the child's skull and crushing the skull and you suck the brain matter, the cerebral matter, out of the skull with a vacuum type tube thing, almost the same looking type thing that you would do in a second trimester abortion. Now, you can think that I'm exaggerating. That's fine. You can go online and you can say, what is the second trimester abortion? What is a third trimester abortion. I'll tell you the same thing. Please, fact check me. Tell me if this is a hyperbole. Tell me if I'm just being too graphic and I'm exaggerating these things for you. No, that's what abortion is. And Ben Stiller wants to tell me that it's evil to prevent that. He wants to tell me that it's, that it's so evil to make sure that vulnerable, helpless children are protected from having their schools crushed

by a doctor? You want to tell me that's evil? Really? Okay. There's just one second. When did? Okay. We're using moral language.

Evil. Good and evil, right? I'm sorry. When did Hollywood become arbiters of morality? When did they care about right and wrong, good and bad, good and evil? When did they get the authority to tell us what is evil and what is not? You want to watch one film coming out of Hollywood and say, yeah, those are the the people I look to for guidance in my moral life, those people have it together. The divorce rate

is awesome in Hollywood. They're doing great things. They seem super fulfilled. They've got it right. Please, Alyssa Milano, Ben Stiller, tell me more about this good and evil dichotomy that you guys have suddenly discovered. I'm so interested. You have a lot of authority when it comes to right and wrong. Your lives look awesome. Great. I mean, with all this Harvey Weinstein and grossness that is constantly coming out from Hollywood. Not just recently, by the way, it's always been this way, this really gross, sexualized, incestuous place. We're supposed to listen to them on right and wrong, on morality, using almost religious language like evil, really been stiller? You want me to listen to you on that? I'm good. I'm good, actually.

So they go on to say, it's not the most effective campaign slogan, but rest assured, we'll make it yours, should it come to pass. Are you threatening them now? So you want to kill babies and you're threatening politicians. Ooh, Alyssa Milano, you're so scary. Speaking of sweet actress, Alyssa Milano, who you know was a big driver behind getting Kavanaugh making sure that he was not confirmed. She was a guest, of course, in those hearings.

And she had her little clipboard saying, like, I believe survivors or something like I mean, she's just, she's a caricature of a human being. So she was one of the authors of the letter. She stated in a tweet on Monday. I mean, I just love, again, I love, I love when celebrities that have never shown any form of human decency whatsoever tweet theological and moral things, it just, it cracks me up. She says, I love God. I believe in God, but I don't believe my personal beliefs of which we can't confirm should override scientific facts and what we can confirm. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you

heavenly things? John 312. Okay, let's back up sweet little Alyssa because it sounds like you don't know anything about theology or science and you are trying to tweet both together. So, first of all, you love God and you believe in God, but you don't believe that your personal beliefs. Like let's say that 12 more times and see if we can even comprehend what she's saying logically. we don't believe she doesn't believe that her personal beliefs of which we can't confirm why are you a christian why do you believe these things you can't confirm them you don't believe that the bible is self-affirming if you don't believe that you can confirm anything that you believe that it's all just total blind faith and you haven't used any reason or study whatsoever to come

to the conclusions that you have um why are you a christian honestly like i've said many times on this podcast, get a new hobby. Like, if you don't really believe that what you're saying is true, and if you don't believe that it is worth, your belief system is worth affecting how you believe politically, then why do you believe those things? That doesn't make any sense. The people who say that they need to separate their faith from what they think about politics or culture, you don't really understand faith. If faith is the hub of the wheel, if faith is the core of your being, then of course it's going to affect how you see everything. And it's going to affect what legislation you think should be passed. That is not advocating for a theocracy that is operating from a Christian

worldview. And quite frankly, it is impossible to operate from a Christian worldview and completely separate your Christianity, your Christian faith from what kind of government you want there to be and what kind of laws you want to be passed. I mean, it doesn't make any sense. And then she talks about that faith overriding scientific facts. Okay, what scientific facts are you talking about in relation to abortion. Please. Like, I would love to know. We've already gone through the scientific facts. Like, if you want to learn one thing about embryology or one thing about gestation, I would love for you to do that. And then we can have a conversation about science. What science are you talking about when it comes to abortion? You want to talk about again what abortion is? You want to talk again about when a heartbeat

begins? Like, have you ever been pregnant, Alyssa Milano? Have you ever heard a heartbeat inside the womb? It's really easy to detect. Like, you want to talk about science? Let's, talk about science. I am not concerned at all on whether or not science is going to affirm the existence of God. That battle has already been won. John 312, she says, if I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? I'm not even sure what she means by that. This is Jesus talking to Nicodemus who came to him in the dark of the night. Nicodemus, of course, was a very learning scholar. He was a senator. He was a man of authority in Jerusalem. him, he comes to Jesus and he asks him all these questions. Jesus answers him in verse three,

truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he could not see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus is all confused because he is confused by his own worldly knowledge on the spiritual truth that Jesus is teaching. Scientific truths are always going to affirm the existence of God. They're always going to affirm what the Bible says. It's always going to affirm the existence of a creator. You can look at Matthew 25, 40 through 45. to look at that. I mean, I don't understand, I'm not really understand what she thinks about Psalm 139, that there is value of the child inside the mother's will, that we are fearfully and wonderfully made, that God knit us together while we were inside her mother's bodies. I mean, what does she think about that?

I mean, these celebrities are terrible at theology. That pick and shoes, these random verses that think support, that someone honestly tweeted them or they saw on Pinterest or Instagram thinking, oh, well, this supports what I'm saying. They have no idea about context. Do you honestly think Alyssa Milano studies the Bible. I'm sorry. I'm just being real. Based on the other things that she's saying, based on the fruit in her life. Like, do you honestly think that she is studying in the Bible? I don't think so. Because if this, if you think that this verse supports abortion, girl, girl, I'm not sure. I don't know. I would love to have a conversation with Alyssa Milano, though. I really would. And I pray for her. I pray that the Holy Spirit softens her hearted opens up her mind to

any sort of biblical wisdom whatsoever, of which she is horrifically lacking. Now, we already know that Democrats, at least the Democratic candidates, they are extremely passionate about abortion. Now, I'm not trying to use hyperbole here. They are extremely passionate about abortion, and they want abortion to be legal to and through birth. Pete Buttigieg, I think I said his name correctly. I watched him on a CNN town hall a couple weeks ago and I actually thought that He was very articulate, very compelling, and very charismatic, and he said that his last name was pronounced Buttigieg. And so I'm going to try my best to continue to get that correct. So he has kind of been seen as this like middle of the road guy. He is a Midwestern mayor,

and he is 37 years old. He is from South Bend, Indiana. He was elected to mayor in 2011. He was only 29 years old. He was reelected in 2015. he got 80% of the vote. He also served as lieutenant in the U.S. Navy Reserve. He took an unpaid a seven-month leave during his mayoral term to go to Afghanistan. In 2017, Buttigieg ran for the Democratic National Committee chair, which earned him more of a national standing

than what he had in years past. He is Harvard grad. He was recognized by President Obama as one of the four Democrats who represented the future of the Democratic Party. And so I think a lot of people, even conservatives, the fact that he is a veteran. He is from a pretty conservative state, and so they see him as someone who's going to be in the middle of the road. However, he was asked about the subject of abortion on MSNBC's morning, Joe. He was asked about the decisions in both New York and

Virginia, and here's what he said. Do you support the late-term abortion legislation that was passed in the New York State Legislature as well as in Virginia? I don't think we need more restrictions right now. And, you know, what I've learned in Indiana, being at a place where, you know, a lot of my friends, a lot of my supporters even come from a different place than I do, being pro-choice, I just believe that when a woman is in that situation, and when we're talking about some of those situations covered by that law, extremely difficult, painful, often medically serious situations where life or health of the mother is at stake. the involvement of a male government official like me is not helping. So I always think the argument is so interesting that men are not supposed to really be a part of the decisions surrounding abortion when it was, there were nine justices who decided Roe v. Wade. So if men aren't allowed to have a say in abortion, do we think that Roe v. Wade should be overturned on those grounds?

And it doesn't make any sense. You don't make this argument for anything else. You don't say that straight people aren't allowed to have any say whatsoever in the LGBT agenda. I mean, you don't say that for other things. You don't say that, oh, well, adults shouldn't have any say over what affects kids. So why can't men have any say on what happens in an abortion? Well, the argument is, of course, because it's a woman's body. But, hey, it takes two to tango. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

The life that was created and will always be created, by the way, by one man and one woman, that men shouldn't have a say in it whatsoever. It doesn't make any sense. So he is just as extreme on abortion as anyone else. Even though people would like to see him as middle of the road, you're not going to find a Democratic candidate running for 2020 that does not believe in full-term abortion. You're just not going to.

Beto O'Rourke, he has also kind of been seen in some ways as a moderate. He told voters in New Hampshire recently that he would, quote, trust women when it came to abortion access. in regulations. He was also asked his position on the Born Alive Bill. If he had been there, what would he have done? He said that he would have listened to the women that I wanted to represent in the state of Texas. I would have looked at the facts, he said, and understood the truth. And I would have voted with those women to make their own decisions about their own bodies. Okay, even from that language right there, make their own decisions about their own bodies.

We know what he would have done. We know that he would have said, yes. I believe that abortion should be completely and totally fine and legalized to and through birth, and he would have voted against the Born Alive Survivors Protection Act. And so that's better work. Every single Democratic candidate that we have running right now is for full-term abortion. That is against the will of the American people. The vast majority of the American people believe that abortion should be restricted to the first trimester. only 12% actually believe that we should legalize, this is according to Gallup, 12% believe that we should legalize abortion in the third trimester. The vast majority of Americans believe in restrictions on abortion, and yet you have a Democratic party that is so far to the left of the rest of the country, but in my opinion, they will probably drag people in that direction. I want to talk about this movie unplanned. I know a lot of you guys have probably seen it. I saw it in February, and,

It was extremely compelling. There's been a lot of controversy surrounding it. It's kind of crazy because they, it's rated R. The MPA decided to give it an R rating due to the violence because you do actually see what happens in an abortion, which is extremely hard to watch. But Unplanned says that they feel like this is kind of trying to steer away Christians or might steer away young people who need to see the consequences of abortion. The story is about Abby Johnson.

She had two abortions in her life. She worked for Planned Parenthood. She was a huge supporter of abortion. She actually became pro-choice in college. She was such a staunch supporter that even her mother and her husband could not convince her to think any differently about this. She excelled in the ranks of Planned Parenthood. She became the director of a clinic where she worked. But one day she was called to assist with an abortion.

And then what she witnessed totally changed her perspective and changed her life on this. And so this movie is about that story. It brings a really eye-opening look inside the abortion industry from a woman who was once a passionate advocate of abortion in Planned Parenthood. So you can go to, if you want to find out more about this or where it's playing in your area, you can go to unplannedfilm.com. It's playing right now. It came out March 29th. It already, I think the first weekend, it was $6.1 million, which really surprised a lot of people. I mean, this is not a mainstream necessarily movie.

I mean, this is still a movie that doesn't have all the budget and all the name recognition that, you know, your mainstream Hollywood movie did. And yet it earns $6.1 million. Partly because of the controversy that's been surrounding it, you're not going to leave this theater the same as when you went in. I can guarantee you that I was very affected by this movie for a few days, someone who already knew about gestation, who already knew the reality of abortion, seeing it. I think it's really important for pro-life people to go see it.

obviously if you can get pro-choice friends to go see it, I would encourage you to do that as well. So go to unplannedfilm.com and you can find out more information about that. It really comes at a time unplanned when we are discussing not just the morality of abortion, which we've been discussing for decades now, but we are seeing this radical moral shift in a lot of ways, but particularly when it comes to human dignity. You have an entire side of the political aisle who refuses to acknowledge science, who refuses to acknowledge morality, who refuses to acknowledge any reality whatsoever, and continues to sanitize the worst atrocity of our time and in our country as choice and as liberation and as equal rights.

That's what's so scary about abortion. Yes, we have other evils that go on here. We have mass murder. We have individual murder. We have sex trafficking. This, of course, is not a perfect country and lots of bad things and horrible things happen on a daily basis. I mean, we've got child abuse, we've got rape, we've got all the evil that you can think of that happens here and elsewhere throughout the world. The difference, though, in abortion is that it's just as evil as any of those things. Abortion is just as evil as rape. Abortion is just as evil as murder outside of the womb.

It's just as evil as child abuse. It's just as evil as sex trafficking. Abortion is just as evil, if not more evil than some of those things. And yet it is the only thing that I can think of that is sanitized in such language so as not to allude to the fact of what it really is, which is the murder of a vulnerable and helpless and unsuspecting child who literally flinches from the pain of the abortion needle, who literally starves to death inside the womb because the amniotic fluid has been taken out, who literally has to writhe in pain as its limbs are being torn apart from its body, who has to, who thinks that they are about

to be born and to meet their mother for the first time. And instead, they feel an incision on the back of their head. And before they know it, their brain is sucked out. And of course, as Governor Northam of Virginia said, if a child survives an abortion, what the doctor would do is you would take the child out, you would place the child on some kind of bed or whatever it was next to the mother. And the mother and the doctor would decide what to do with this writhing child who was supposed to die in an abortion, but somehow fought through and survived. We're told that we're just, supposed to say, well, yeah, that's still a woman's choice outside the body. Umbilical cord is snipped.

But the Virginia bill that almost passed in the New York bill that passed would say, well, it's still the woman's choice. It's the woman's choice in that case. So now you've got all of their so-called scientific, her body, her choice, arguments completely thrown out the window because you're talking about a child that yes, has always been separate from the mother, but now is actually not even attached to her by an umbilical. court and you've got all of the Democrats who are running for president saying, yeah, that's, that's fine. That's totally fine. And like I said, this is probably the best thing that could ever

happen for the pro-life movement. Because the blinders are off. The veil has been, has been pushed back. And we see the reality of the evil of abortion, which it is evil from the time of conception to the time of birth. But we're seeing what the end goal is and has always been. The deliberate, ending of children. People will tell you that's hyperbole. People will tell you that's fake news. People will tell you that you're using emotionalism and that you're just trying to manipulate women into keeping their child. What motive do I have to have people keep their child? I mean, I don't have any motivation behind that. It doesn't really affect me. The only reason that I believe that children should be kept safe in and outside of the womb is for the sake of

compassion for the sake of morality, for the sake of basic human decency, and because I think when we denigrate human dignity, all of our other rights are at stake. They're up for grabs. Without life, neither liberty nor happiness exists. That's why life and the Declaration of Independence comes first. If you do not protect the dignity of the individual, then what right do you have to say that we are entitled to anything else? I mean, that's the first and the foremost and most fundamental right that's out there is the right to life. So once we tell the government that they can determine who is dignified, who has human dignity and who doesn't, based on some arbitrary standard of when personhood starts, an arbitrary standard of who is valuable and who is not based on individual

wantedness, once we tell the government they have the authority to do that, what's stopping the government from having the authority to tell us that we don't have other rights? If they have the authority to tell us that we don't have the right to human life based on some standard that they've set based on unscientific means, why can't they take away every other right too? It doesn't make sense from a conservative perspective, not from a constitutional perspective. And like I've said, not from a moral or logical or a biblical perspective either. So just think about that. When you hear people saying that in order to be compassionate, you have to vote Democrats, that social justice is exclusive to the left. And in order to be compassionate, you have to be a leftist

social justice, because that certainly doesn't include the right to life for kids inside the womb. And so just consider that. And consider that when you're watching all of these debates and people like Pete Buttigieg sound really compassionate and really logical and really clear thinking. Just think about the fact that they think it's completely fine for a woman to decide to kill her child as he or she is being born. Just something. to consider. Okay, that's the update on late-term abortion and just on abortion in general. I hope that you go see unplanned. It's a very compelling picture of the reality of the abortion industry, and it's extremely eye-opening, and it's good for all of us to see, even if it is painful to watch.

Okay, I'll be back here on Friday. I am talking to Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty. Really amazing conversation. He's an awesome guy, and you're going to learn a lot. I'm excited for you to hear it. and I'll see you then.