Opinion

Democratic Candidates Showcase Their Abortion Extremism on Debate Stage

|
Posted: Jun 28, 2019 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
Democratic Candidates Showcase Their Abortion Extremism on Debate Stage

Source: AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee

Less than a week after the Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s “We Decide” forum, Democratic candidates who made it to the debate stage continued to showcase the abortion extremism of their party.

On Wednesday night’s debate, Governor Jay Inslee, of Washington, touted his record of requiring insurance companies to pay for abortion coverage. “It should not be an option in the United States of America for any insurance company to deny a woman coverage for the exercise of their right of choice,” he said. “And I am the only candidate here who has passed a law protecting a woman's right of reproductive health in health insurance, and I'm the only candidate who has passed a public option.”

The remarks which followed were Senator Amy Klobuchar seeking to respond to Inslee, with the reminder that “there are three women up here that have fought pretty hard for a woman's right to choose.” The line was met with cheers and applause. Whether it’s three women, seven men, ten candidates on the stage that night, all of the candidates support the party platform of abortions throughout all nine months of pregnancy, for any reason, paid for with your tax dollars. 

This is, after all, a primary debate, and so candidates were quick in their attempts to outdo each other. Former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Julián Castro, answered that his government healthcare option plan would cover abortion, even throwing in a line that “I don't believe only in reproductive freedom, I believe in reproductive justice.”

Castro went on to ramble that “And, you know, what that means is that just because a woman -- or let's also not forget someone in the trans community, a trans female, is poor, doesn't mean they shouldn't have the right to exercise that right to choose. And so I absolutely would cover the right to have an abortion.” He later went on to tweet that he misspoke, explaining he meant “trans men, transmasculine, and non-binary folks.”

Support for abortion is already contradictory with biology. Castro misunderstands biology further though. If someone is able to get pregnant, that person has a uterus, which means that person is a woman. Both abortion and gender are basic biologies. 

And to think that this was a debate where candidates were focused on science, only it was the science of climate change. 

The candidates also had assistance from the moderators when it came to answering for their support of late-term abortion, a view which is radically out of step with a majority of Americans.

Lester Holt asked Senator Elizabeth Warren “would you put any limits on abortion?” Here was her answer:

I would make certain that every woman has access to the full range of reproductive health care services, and that includes birth control, it includes abortion, it includes everything for a woman. And I want to add on that. It's not enough for us to expect the courts to protect us. Forty-seven years ago, Roe v. Wade was decided, and we've all looked to the courts all that time, as state after state has undermined Roe, has put in exceptions, has come right up to the edge of taking away protections...

You don’t see where Warren actually answered the question? No? I didn’t either. Holt didn’t seem to mind or care though, as he even let her get away with claiming “We now have an America where most people support Roe v. Wade. We need to make that a federal law,” even after her time was already expired. It’s worth mentioning such high support for Roe v. Wade likely stems from a misunderstanding of the decision, and what overturning it will involve.

On Thursday night, Senator Bernie Sanders initially did not answer the question asked about if Roe were overturned. “My plan is someone who believes for a start that a woman’s right to control her own body is a Constitutional right, that government and politicians should not infringe on. We will do everything we can to defend Roe v. Wade,” he began. While he doesn’t believe court packing is a good idea, he did speak of rotating judges, by sending them elsewhere. Sanders also doubled down on how his Medicare for All plan would include abortion coverage. 

What really took the cake was rabidly pro-abortion Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who you may recall compared pro-lifers to racists and anti-Semites. She forcefully inserted herself into the issue during the debate, portraying the “compromise” of the Hyde Amendment in the ugliest way: 

And I want to talk directly, directly to America’s women, and to the men who love them. Women’s reproductive rights are under assault by President Trump and the Republican Party. Thirty states are trying to overturn Roe v. Wade right now. And it is mind-boggling that we are debating this, on this stage, in 2019, among Democrats, on whether women should have access to reproductive rights. I think we have to stop playing defense and start playing offense. But let me tell you one thing about politics because it goes to the corruption of deal-making. When the doors are closed and the negotiations are made, there are conversations about women’s rights. And compromises are made on our backs. And that’s how we got to Hyde. That’s how the Hyde Amendment was created. A compromise, by both parties… 

Well, Senator Gillibrand, this pro-life woman here heard you and she’s not buying what you’re selling.

It’s not merely late-term abortion which is unpopular, including among Democrats and self-identified pro-choicers, but taxpayer-funded abortions, which seems to be the new litmus test for Democratic candidates. Marist poll results show Americans mostly want abortion “legal only under certain circumstances.” 

As was evidenced on the debate stage and in the campaign so far, the Democratic contenders are likely to continue attempting to outdo one another on their abortion extremism. When it comes to the 2020 general election, however, it will likely be to their folly.