NRL News

At Least the Democratic Presidential Candidates Are Honest

by | Sep 18, 2019

By Carol Tobias, President

Editor’s note. The following appears on page three of the September digital edition of National Right to Life News. We’re counting on you to spread the word about this 40-page issue and to share stories with pro-life family and friends.

Thanks to social media and out-of-the-mainstream media outlets, we hear more about what’s happening with candidates as they campaign across the country. But the irony is, no longer are Democrats trying to cover their genuinely radical anti-life positions. Quite frankly, whereas pro-abortion Democrats used to wrap their advocacy in (meaningless) qualifications, I’m amazed at how forthcoming this crop of presidential candidates is about their position on abortion.

Other than Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), who now says she would support some limits on third-trimester abortions, the other candidates support unlimited abortion on demand (for any reason) throughout pregnancy. Some have even voted against the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act which would offer protection to babies who survive an attempted abortion.

What have some the candidates said?

Former Congressman Beto O’Rourke, campaigning at a college in South Carolina, was asked, “Someone asked you specifically—specifically– about third-trimester abortions and you said, ‘That’s a decision left up to the mother’ so my question is this, I was born September 8, 1989, and I want to know if you think, on September 7, 1989, my life had no value.”

O’Rourke responded, “Of course I don’t think that and of course I’m glad that you’re here. But you referenced my answer in Ohio and it remains the same. This is a decision that neither you, nor I, nor the United States government should be making. That’s a decision for the woman to make.”

CNN recently held a seven-hour-long marathon town hall, giving each of the top ten candidates an opportunity to talk about climate change. Sen. Bernie Sanders (Independent-Vt.) was asked if he would discuss population control and would he make it a key feature of a plan to address “climate catastrophe.”

Sanders responded, “Well, Martha, the answer is yes. And the answer has everything to do with the fact that women in the United States of America, by the way, have a right to control their own bodies and make reproductive decisions.

“And the Mexico City agreement, which denies American aid to those organizations around the world that are — that allow women to have abortions or even get involved in birth control, to me is totally absurd. So I think, especially in poor countries around the world where women do not necessarily want to have large numbers of babies, and where they can have the opportunity through birth control to control the number of kids they have, it’s something I very, very strongly support.”

So, Beto O’Rourke can look a college student in the face and tell him that his mother had the right to kill him the day before he was born. Bernie Sanders can look into the camera and say, in the context of population control, that the lives of unborn babies of women in third-world countries may have to be sacrificed so the rest of the world can sleep peacefully at night. (Please note my heavy sarcasm here!)

Julian Castro, former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in the Obama administration, was more “inclusive,” as one reporter described it. “I believe in reproductive justice, and what that means is just because a woman — or, let’s not forget someone in the trans community, a trans female…” This is the same man who has called for an end to euthanizing dogs and cats in animal shelters.

Apparently, the life of a dog or cat is more valuable to him than a preborn human being.

Back in May, in a town hall meeting, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) offered a proposal that “would give the Department of Justice final say over abortion laws passed by states or localities that have enacted unconstitutional abortion restrictions in the past 25 years,” according to the Los Angeles Times. The idea is so preposterous, only the most hard-core pro-abortionists could applaud it with a straight face.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is calling on Congress to repeal the Hyde amendment so that federal dollars may be used to pay for hundreds of thousands of abortions, and to pass federal laws to preempt state legislation so that our state affiliates, working with legislators, are not able to pass legislation to protect unborn children.

Sens. Harris, Warren, and Sanders, along with senators and fellow presidential candidates Amy Klobuchar (D-Mn) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), have all co-sponsored the “Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance Act.” The bill would repeal the Hyde Amendment and would allow health plans funded by public programs to cover abortions. It would also prevent state and local governments from limiting insurance coverage of abortion by private health care plans.

In previous election cycles, pro-lifers often had to search very thoroughly in order to find out how rabidly pro-abortion some candidates were because they tried to hide their true position. We see that no more.

The candidates now are at least being honest. They proudly wear their fanatical anti-life positions on their sleeves and almost shout it from the rooftops.

We just need to make sure that America is listening.

Categories: Politics