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

[john doe 101]

There’s compelling 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.

Quote me one person who said they want to allow abortions at birth outside of medical reasons.

 

[Weatherman2020]

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.

That’s a State issue and like in California, Democrats hold a supermajority and Republicans get zero say.

 

[pknopp]

There’s compelling 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.

She clearly answered a limit. Your inability to comprehend that even after it was explained to you, well, I'll leave it at that.

 

[Resnic]

How people can argue murdering an adult or murdering a 1 year is a crime, but aborting a fetus isn't I will never understand.

 

[rampart]

“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

why should ms harris, or any politician, tell your daughter what the time limit is? many of these life of the mother threatening situations arise late in the term don't they?

 

[pknopp]

why should ms harris, or any politician, tell your daughter what the time limit is? many of these life of the mother threatening situations arise late in the term don't they?

No. Not to where the fetus/baby must be killed.

 

[rampart]

How people can argue murdering an adult or murdering a 1 year is a crime, but aborting a fetus isn't I will never understand.

how people can argue that snowden, manning, and winner should be jailed while pence biden and trump walk free on the earth is a mystery as well.

these are differences of opinion. we should agree to disagree. but if you want to kill for the right to life there is not much more to say.

 

[Oldestyle]

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.

Come on, John...the main reason she doesn't want to state an exact cutoff is because polling shows the American people want something like most European nations have. They don't want late term abortions. The far left wing of the Democratic Party doesn't want ANY limitations and Harris knows she needs to appease them! So she dodges the questions.

 

[pknopp]

Come on, John...the main reason she doesn't want to state an exact cutoff is because polling shows the American people want something like most European nations have. They don't want late term abortions. The far left wing of the Democratic Party doesn't want ANY limitations and Harris knows she needs to appease them! So she dodges the questions.

That's what RvW gave us and she said she supports.

 

[Oldestyle]

That's what RvW gave us and she said she supports.

Then she should come out and say that she supports late term abortions. She won't though, PK because she knows polling says that most Americans don't! So they can tell the far left that all abortions are protected while pretending not to say that to the rest of the country. If you've got convictions...state them. Don't run from them.

 

[pknopp]

Then she should come out and say that she supports late term abortions.

Why? To please you? Lol

Why don't you just come out and say you support them?

She said she supports RvW. It's been explained to you.

She won't though, PK because she knows polling says that most Americans don't! So they can tell the far left that all abortions are protected while pretending not to say that to the rest of the country. If you've got convictions...state them. Don't run from them.

She said what she supports. Specifically.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

She didn't give a specific week that abortions should be cut off, because to do so is admitting we are talking about a human life, and not just a mass of tissue.

 

[pknopp]

She didn't give a specific week that abortions should be cut off, because to do so is admitting we are talking about a human life, and not just a mass of tissue.

RvW gave a specific time.

 

[Oldestyle]

Why? To please you? Lol

Why don't you just come out and say you support them?

She said she supports RvW. It's been explained to you.



She said what she supports. Specifically.

I'm a Republican, PK but I'm pro-choice. I don't understand why we need late term abortions, however. Most of the rest of the world (and people in the US!) agree with me. Why won't Harris come out and say when abortions wouldn't be allowed? Come on...you know as well as I do that it's political. They're caught between a rock and a hard place...their hardcore left that want no limits...and the majority of people who want limits on late term abortions.

 

[BackAgain]

Is Harris in favor of post-birth abortion? Maybe she is fine with euthanasia style late post-birth abortions for the handicapped?

 

[Oldestyle]

RvW gave a specific time.

It did and yet it didn't, PK. The wording of Roe v Wade said that women had a Constitutional right to an abortion in first two trimesters of a pregnancy but in the 3rd trimester abortions could only be performed to protect the life and health of the mother. The way that abortion clinics got around the 3rd trimester rule was by taking a very broad reading of what the "health" of the mother constituted. Their lawyers argued that to include the mental health of the mother. As an example of how that played out? Abortions in California went from 500 a year in the 3rd trimester to 500,000 in the 3rd trimester.

 

[pknopp]

I'm a Republican, PK but I'm pro-choice. I don't understand why we need late term abortions, however. Most of the rest of the world (and people in the US!) agree with me. Why won't Harris come out and say when abortions wouldn't be allowed?

obviously i am unable to overcome your ignorance or inability to comprehend what you read.

Come on...you know as well as I do that it's political. They're caught between a rock and a hard place...their hardcore left that want no limits...and the majority of people who want limits on late term abortions.

Saying she supports RvW is saying she supports limits but that somehow escapes you. I'd guess it's political but it could be a disability.

 

[pknopp]

It did and yet it didn't, PK. The wording of Roe v Wade said that women had a Constitutional right to an abortion in first two trimesters of a pregnancy but in the 3rd trimester abortions could only be performed to protect the life and health of the mother. The way that abortion clinics got around the 3rd trimester rule was by taking a very broad reading of what the "health" of the mother constituted. Their lawyers argued that to include the mental health of the mother. As an example of how that played out? Abortions in California went from 500 a year in the 3rd trimester to 500,000 in the 3rd trimester.

The law against late term abortions specifically excluded "health" and was upheld by the Supreme Court.

 

[Oldestyle]

The law against late term abortions specifically excluded "health" and was upheld by the Supreme Court.

Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973)

Doe v. Bolton

supreme.justia.com

I beg to differ...

 

[pknopp]

Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973)

Doe v. Bolton

supreme.justia.com

I beg to differ...

I care less. Doe v Bolton ruled that if there was a health exception it had to include things like mental health or in other words, anything

The late term ban, upheld because of RvW specifically excluded such an exemption.

US Supreme Court approves ban on “partial birth abortion”