On CBS News’ “Face The Nation” Harris Repeatedly Refuses to Say If Abortion Should Have a Limit

[Weatherman2020]

“What is it that you believe?” Brennan asked. “I mean, what week of pregnancy should abortion access be cut off?”

“We need to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded. “We’re not trying to do something new–”

“Let me be very clear. From day one, the president has been clear, I have been clear,” she continued. “We need to put back the protections that are in Roe v. Wade into law. Since the Supreme Court took it, Congress has the power and ability to pass legislation to put those protections back in law and Joe Biden will sign that bill. So, that is what we want.”

Brennan again pressed Harris on the matter, asking if there needed to be specific “terms of defining where that guarantee goes up to and where it does not, at which week of pregnancy.”

“We need to put back in place the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded. “We’re not trying to-, we’re not trying to do anything that did not exist before June of last year. We are saying–”

Brennan then noted that Republicans have pointed out that Democrat policies allow for abortions up until the moment of birth.

“Which is ridiculous–,” Harris claimed. “And it’s a mischaracterization of the point.”

“I am being precise,” Harris later added. “We need to put into law the protections of Roe v. Wade.”


She clearly stands by murdering babies as they’re born. She can dance and spin forever, but her position is clear. She wants dead babies. Democrats are either murdering children or sexually mutating them. That is beyond dispute.

BTW- where’s that pile of dead women I was promised when RvW was overturned?

Kamala Harris Repeatedly Refuses To Say Whether There Should Be Any Limits On Abortion | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

 

[Votto]

 

[marvin martian]

“What is it that you believe?” Brennan asked. “I mean, what week of pregnancy should abortion access be cut off?”

“We need to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded. “We’re not trying to do something new–”

“Let me be very clear. From day one, the president has been clear, I have been clear,” she continued. “We need to put back the protections that are in Roe v. Wade into law. Since the Supreme Court took it, Congress has the power and ability to pass legislation to put those protections back in law and Joe Biden will sign that bill. So, that is what we want.”

Brennan again pressed Harris on the matter, asking if there needed to be specific “terms of defining where that guarantee goes up to and where it does not, at which week of pregnancy.”

“We need to put back in place the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded. “We’re not trying to-, we’re not trying to do anything that did not exist before June of last year. We are saying–”

Brennan then noted that Republicans have pointed out that Democrat policies allow for abortions up until the moment of birth.

“Which is ridiculous–,” Harris claimed. “And it’s a mischaracterization of the point.”

“I am being precise,” Harris later added. “We need to put into law the protections of Roe v. Wade.”


She clearly stands by murdering babies as they’re born. She can dance and spin forever, but her position is clear. She wants dead babies. Democrats are either murdering children or sexually mutating them. That is beyond dispute.

BTW- where’s that pile of dead women I was promised when RvW was overturned?

Kamala Harris Repeatedly Refuses To Say Whether There Should Be Any Limits On Abortion | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

Abortion on demand, up until birth (and shortly after), is now the mainstream DemoKKKrat platform.

 

[john doe 101]

“What is it that you believe?” Brennan asked. “I mean, what week of pregnancy should abortion access be cut off?”

“We need to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded. “We’re not trying to do something new–”

“Let me be very clear. From day one, the president has been clear, I have been clear,” she continued. “We need to put back the protections that are in Roe v. Wade into law. Since the Supreme Court took it, Congress has the power and ability to pass legislation to put those protections back in law and Joe Biden will sign that bill. So, that is what we want.”

Brennan again pressed Harris on the matter, asking if there needed to be specific “terms of defining where that guarantee goes up to and where it does not, at which week of pregnancy.”

“We need to put back in place the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded. “We’re not trying to-, we’re not trying to do anything that did not exist before June of last year. We are saying–”

Brennan then noted that Republicans have pointed out that Democrat policies allow for abortions up until the moment of birth.

“Which is ridiculous–,” Harris claimed. “And it’s a mischaracterization of the point.”

“I am being precise,” Harris later added. “We need to put into law the protections of Roe v. Wade.”


She clearly stands by murdering babies as they’re born. She can dance and spin forever, but her position is clear. She wants dead babies. Democrats are either murdering children or sexually mutating them. That is beyond dispute.

BTW- where’s that pile of dead women I was promised when RvW was overturned?

Kamala Harris Repeatedly Refuses To Say Whether There Should Be Any Limits On Abortion | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

She said the exact opposite you idiot. There could be many reasons she didnt list off a specific week. But she specifically said your talking point that dems want the ability to kill babies that are being born is lol crazy talk. Which it is.

Just because she didnt state a specific week doesnt automatically mean she doesnt think there should be a cutoff you dumb, illogical animal.

 

[PeanutGallery]

She said the exact opposite you idiot. There could be many reasons she didnt list off a specific week. But she specifically said your talking point that dems want the ability to kill babies that are being born is lol crazy talk. Which it is.

Just because she didnt state a specific week doesnt automatically mean she doesnt think there should be a cutoff you dumb, illogical animal.

If that was the case, she would've stated when she thought a cutoff should be or that there should be a cutoff. She could've said the third trimester. She could've said a lot, but that was a straight dodge of the question. A pox on both parties, but you have to be grossly naive to NOT see that she didn't want to give an answer because that would've upset a bunch of feminists in her party.

 

[john doe 101]

If that was the case, she would've stated when she thought a cutoff should be or that there should be a cutoff. She could've said the third trimester. She could've said a lot, but that was a straight dodge of the question. A pox on both parties, but you have to be grossly naive to NOT see that she didn't want to give an answer because that would've upset a bunch of feminists in her party.

Like I said, there are multiple reasons she doesnt want to state an exact cutoff. The main one being she wants to leave it open for discussion.

 

[PeanutGallery]

Like I said, there are multiple reasons she doesnt want to state an exact cutoff. The main one being she wants to leave it open for discussion.

If you actually believe that, and I have some oceanfront property in Nebraska I want to sell you. Did she say that she didn't want to give a cutoff for it to be open to discussion?

 

[john doe 101]

If you actually believe that, and I have some oceanfront property in Nebraska I want to sell you. Did she say that she didn't want to give a cutoff for it to be open to discussion?

No but that doesnt mean it isnt a valid reason.

 

[pknopp]

“What is it that you believe?” Brennan asked. “I mean, what week of pregnancy should abortion access be cut off?”

“We need to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded.


Since RvW had restrictions she is specifically noting she supports restrictions.

I will then note once again we have a fake thread title.

 

[john doe 101]

“What is it that you believe?” Brennan asked. “I mean, what week of pregnancy should abortion access be cut off?”

“We need to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded.


Since RvW had restrictions she is specifically noting she supports restrictions.

I will then note once again we have a fake thread title.

Fake thread titles seem to be a thing on here for the far right lunatics.

 

[PeanutGallery]

“What is it that you believe?” Brennan asked. “I mean, what week of pregnancy should abortion access be cut off?”

“We need to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded.


Since RvW had restrictions she is specifically noting she supports restrictions.

I will then note once again we have a fake thread title.

Ok, according to RvW, what's the cutoff on getting an abortion? Since that was the question posted in the OP.

 

[john doe 101]

Ok, according to RvW, what's the cutoff on getting an abortion? Since that was the question posted in the OP.

Supreme Court has ruled that any time past the beginning of the 3rd trimester the state had a compelling reason to ban all abortions except for medical necessity.

 

[pknopp]

Ok, according to RvW, what's the cutoff on getting an abortion? Since that was the question posted in the OP.

Restrictions could be in place, and were put in place during the third trimester. Since RvW stated at "viability" the court would have rolled them back before the third trimester. That is what Roberts tried to do.

Since RvW has been overturned the restrictions have been also.

 

[Independentthinker]

“What is it that you believe?” Brennan asked. “I mean, what week of pregnancy should abortion access be cut off?”

“We need to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded. “We’re not trying to do something new–”

“Let me be very clear. From day one, the president has been clear, I have been clear,” she continued. “We need to put back the protections that are in Roe v. Wade into law. Since the Supreme Court took it, Congress has the power and ability to pass legislation to put those protections back in law and Joe Biden will sign that bill. So, that is what we want.”

Brennan again pressed Harris on the matter, asking if there needed to be specific “terms of defining where that guarantee goes up to and where it does not, at which week of pregnancy.”

“We need to put back in place the protections of Roe v. Wade,” Harris responded. “We’re not trying to-, we’re not trying to do anything that did not exist before June of last year. We are saying–”

Brennan then noted that Republicans have pointed out that Democrat policies allow for abortions up until the moment of birth.

“Which is ridiculous–,” Harris claimed. “And it’s a mischaracterization of the point.”

“I am being precise,” Harris later added. “We need to put into law the protections of Roe v. Wade.”


She clearly stands by murdering babies as they’re born. She can dance and spin forever, but her position is clear. She wants dead babies. Democrats are either murdering children or sexually mutating them. That is beyond dispute.

BTW- where’s that pile of dead women I was promised when RvW was overturned?

Kamala Harris Repeatedly Refuses To Say Whether There Should Be Any Limits On Abortion | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

We really need to hammer these people about at what week women no longer have the right to choose. If they refuse to answer the question then 9 months is the answer. Keep on asking and ask again, and again, and again.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Restrictions could be in place, and were put in place during the third trimester. Since RvW stated at "viability" the court would have rolled them back before the third trimester. That is what Roberts tried to do.

Since RvW has been overturned the restrictions have been also.

Democrats pushed for 9 months.

 

[Weatherman2020]

She said the exact opposite you idiot. There could be many reasons she didnt list off a specific week. But she specifically said your talking point that dems want the ability to kill babies that are being born is lol crazy talk. Which it is.

Just because she didnt state a specific week doesnt automatically mean she doesnt think there should be a cutoff you dumb, illogical animal.

She refused to say there should be ANY LIMITS.

Not everyone is a gullible sheeple like you.

 

[pknopp]

Democrats pushed for 9 months.

Some have argued for no restrictions but that is really irrelevant to what Harris said. All the same, the restrictions that were in place but no longer are, had to be passed by both parties.

 

[PeanutGallery]

Restrictions could be in place, and were put in place during the third trimester. Since RvW stated at "viability" the court would have rolled them back before the third trimester. That is what Roberts tried to do.

Since RvW has been overturned the restrictions have been also.

To balance women's rights to privacy and state governments' interests in protecting mothers' health and prenatal life, the Court created the trimester framework.[120][121] During the first trimester, when it was believed that the procedure was safer than childbirth, the Court ruled that a state government could place no restrictions on women's ability to choose to abort pregnancies other than imposing minimal medical safeguards, such as requiring abortions to be performed by licensed physicians.[7] From the second trimester on, the Court ruled that evidence of increasing risks to the mother's health gave states a compelling interest that allowed them to enact medical regulations on abortion procedures so long as they were reasonable and "narrowly tailored" to protecting mothers' health.[7] From the beginning of the third trimester on—the point at which a fetus became viable under the medical technology available in the early 1970s—the Court ruled that a state's interest in protecting prenatal life became so compelling that it could legally prohibit all abortions except where necessary to protect the mother's life or health.[7]

 

[Weatherman2020]

Supreme Court has ruled that any time past the beginning of the 3rd trimester the state had a compelling reason to ban all abortions except for medical necessity.

There’s compelling medical reasons to ban at 21 weeks. And that number will continue to go down as medical advances take place.

But Democrats are already on record for demanding abortions at 9 months and even after.

She’s one of those evil monsters obviously with her unwillingness to answer any limit.

 

[pknopp]

To balance women's rights to privacy and state governments' interests in protecting mothers' health and prenatal life, the Court created the trimester framework.[120][121] During the first trimester, when it was believed that the procedure was safer than childbirth, the Court ruled that a state government could place no restrictions on women's ability to choose to abort pregnancies other than imposing minimal medical safeguards, such as requiring abortions to be performed by licensed physicians.[7] From the second trimester on, the Court ruled that evidence of increasing risks to the mother's health gave states a compelling interest that allowed them to enact medical regulations on abortion procedures so long as they were reasonable and "narrowly tailored" to protecting mothers' health.[7] From the beginning of the third trimester on—the point at which a fetus became viable under the medical technology available in the early 1970s—the Court ruled that a state's interest in protecting prenatal life became so compelling that it could legally prohibit all abortions except where necessary to protect the mother's life or health.[7]

Not really accurate.