WATCH: Sasse Blister Dems About Born Alive Survivors Protection Act
Connect with us

News

WATCH: Sasse Blister Dems About Born Alive Survivors Protection Act

On Tuesday, Senator Ben Sasse (r-NE) blistered Democrats and particularly Illinois senator Dick Durbn for attempting to deflect from the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act by framing the debate on the Senate floor as a debate on anti-abortion legislation versus maternal health funding while leaving the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act out of it.

Sasse stated:

To your grand point about wishing we were debating, we’re in line. But I do want to say one more thing before I object, which is: you said you’re not questioning my sincerity; I appreciate that. You asked that I not be questioning your sincerity; I’m not, but I am questioning your logic because you summarized it as if there are two issues at play, and you said anti-abortion legislation and maternal health funding. There are three issues at play on the floor today: one of them is Lindsey Graham’s Pain Capable bill, which is a pro-life piece of legislation. One of them is Senator Durbin’s funding request about maternal delivery health.

Those things are true, but there is a third thing which yet again you obscured by saying the debate here is funding maternal health or having anti-abortion legislation. The piece of legislation we’re voting on today, the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, is not about abortion.

I am pro-life; I am going to support Lindsey Graham’s bill, but the bill we’re voting on doesn’t change anyone’s access to abortion, doesn’t have anything to do with Roe v. Wade; it is about babies that are already born.

CNN said this morning on TV, they made up this insane phrase. They said a “fetus that has been born.” What the heck is that? It’s another way of saying they don’t want to debate the actual debate we’re having on the floor today. The debate we’re having — we’re going to vote once on Lindsey Graham’s pro-life legislation — I’m going to support it — but we’re also going to vote on a piece of legislation that is about the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. These are about babies that are born that are outside their mother. And what’s actually happening is the senior senator from Illinois is wanting to obscure the debate because he wants to use euphemisms about “choice” so that you don’t have to admit to the American public that what’s actually happening on the floor today is probably that like last year, 44 Democrats are going to filibuster an anti-infanticide bill.

There’s nothing in the bill that’s about abortion. Nothing. It’s about infanticide. That’s the actual legislation. And you got 44 people over there who want to hide from it and talk in euphemisms about abortion because they don’t want to defend the indefensible because you can’t defend the indefensible.

We’re talking about killing babies that are born. That’s the actual legislation we’re voting on today in the Senate. That’s what the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act is. Is it okay in the eyes of the United States Senate for us to say, “Well, you can’t actively kill the little baby. You can’t take a pillow and put it over her face and smother her to death, but you can back away and kill her that way.”

That’s what Ralph Northam, the disgraced governor of Virginia, was talking about when he said, well, once the baby’s born if she survives an abortion and we wish that hadn’t happened, then we’ll figure out a way to keep her calm for a little while while the doctors debate what they want to do.

What he means is, kill the baby. That’s the legislation we’re voting on today. There are three buckets: Lindsey Graham’s Pain Capable Act; that’s a bill about abortion. There’s another bill that is about babies that have already been born. News flash, CNN: if you’re a baby and you’ve been born and you’re outside a mama, nobody calls that a fetus. You just want to call it a fetus because you don’t want to cover the actual story that’s being voted on in the Senate today. Then there’s a third piece of legislation, which is Senator Durbin’s counter-proposal today about maternal preventable deaths and investment in that category. I’m interested in that category as well, but you don’t actually want to talk about the legislation that’s on the floor, so you’re changing the subject. Therefore, I object.

Video below:

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CF