Want abortion up until birth? Kamala Harris is your candidate



Two years after the Supreme Court ended the federal right to abortion, the fight to protect the unborn rages on.

And there is no bigger threat to life than a Kamala Harris victory this Tuesday.

Even without a Harris victory, this election's state ballot initiatives could advance a similarly radical pro-abortion agenda across the country.

"If we have a Harris presidency, if the Democrats take control of Congress, we know that they're going to pass the [Women's Health Protection Act], which is going to ban states from having pro-life laws," Kelsey Pritchard of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America told Align in an interview Thursday.

More radical than Roe

While the repeal of Roe v. Wade returned decisions on abortion policy to state and local government, the WHPA would prevent states from imposing any restriction or limitation on abortion.

In writing the Roe ruling, the Supreme Court took care to acknowledge the moral issue inherent to abortion, explicitly defining it as a procedure ending "prenatal life." It forbade states to regulate abortion only up until the viability of the fetus, which generally occurs between 24 and 28 weeks.

Tellingly, the WHPA dispenses with any references to human life, employing the euphemisms "abortion services" and "essential health care." Rather than representing a "restoration" of Roe, it is far more radical.

"It's essentially going to allow abortion until birth in every state," Pritchard said.

While the WHPA has previously failed to garner the 61 votes needed to pass in the Senate, Harris has vowed to eliminate the filibuster, lowering the necessary number of votes to a simple majority of 51.

Abortion until birth

Even without a Harris victory, this election's state ballot initiatives could advance a similarly radical pro-abortion agenda across the country, said Pritchard.

New York, Florida, Nevada, and Maryland are among the states asking voters to enshrine abortion in their constitutions this Tuesday. Like the WHPA, these initiatives are open-ended enough that activists could use "lawfare" in order to force taxpayers to fund abortion up to birth.

As an example of this, look no farther than the abortion policy of Harris' running mate, Minnesota governor Tim Walz.

Thanks to Walz, said Pritchard, Minnesota has "no limits whatsoever" on abortion. "And that's as extreme as China."

"We are one of only eight countries that allow abortion in all nine months," she continued. "Almost all of Europe has a limit after the first trimester or 15 weeks. But we are out of step with the modern developed world."

Calculated deception

Such radical abortion policy is also out of step with most Americans, 73% of whom oppose abortion after 15 weeks.

Why the discrepancy?

In a memo, SBA Pro-Life America has likened these vaguely worded "reproductive rights" initiatives to "Trojan horses."

"Even when so many of the American people still aren't comfortable with abortion after a certain point, the way the abortion industry has been able to spin the issue has deceived people into going along with their agenda time and time again," Pritchard told Align.

Much of it comes down to who has deeper pockets. With the help of George Soros and other donors, noted Pritchard, the pro-abortion side outspends the pro-life side seven to one. So far, pro-life advocates have failed to win a single ballot measure fight.

Cause for optimism

Still, Pritchard sees cause for optimism this year.

"The good news is that we've got some measures that are in very red states this year, like South Dakota, Nebraska, Florida, and Missouri," said Pritchard.

"Particularly with GOP leaders like [Florida Governor] Ron DeSantis, who are standing strong and exposing what these ballot measures will actually do ... we think we have a real shot at winning some of these this year."

Whatever partial victories it seeks today, SBA Pro-Life America's overarching fight is against what it calls the abortion industry's "culture of death," which Pritchard noted "has a hold on all of our major institutions ... higher ed, the mainstream media, Hollywood, and many C-suites."

She singles out journalists in particular for abdicating their traditional role. "The media need to wake up and realize that their job is not to be the abortion industry's PR department."

Fighting the lie

Such powerful backing, continues Pritchard, has allowed "this lie that an unborn child isn't a child but is a clump of cells ... [that] they're not human until they're born" to take root in America.

"This lie has legitimized the taking of more than 60 million lives since Roe [was ratified in 1973]," she said.

While SBA Pro-Life America advocates "compassion" for women dealing with unexpected pregnancies — devoting much of its work to defending pro-life pregnancy centers from Democrat attacks — the group's consistent message is the nonnegotiable "humanity of the unborn child" and the moral wrongness of abortion in any circumstance.

"We will never relent on that point," said Pritchard. "The more [the American people] have to confront that, I think the more people we'll eventually win over."

In the meantime, Pritchard urges pro-life Americans to make their voices heard on Tuesday.

"Life is literally on the ballot and lives are on the line this election," said Pritchard. "We have to show up to vote, and we have to vote our values and vote for life."

The way she sees it, the stakes are higher than any immediate outcome. "Our future generations are really depending upon us."

Career abortionist admits most late-term abortions he performs involve healthy babies and mothers; unwittingly exposes savagery sought by House Democrats



A career abortionist recently provided the Atlantic with insights into both his butchery and his victims. While the horrific details provided by Warren Hern paint a bloody picture of what actually takes place behind closed doors in blue-state abortion clinics, they also serve to indict the House Democrats who now seek to see similarly ruthless and limitless abortion enshrined as a national right.

Warren Hern is the abortionist who literally wrote the book on the barbaric practice.

Hern, a founding member of the National Abortion Federation, is notorious for performing late-term abortions in Colorado on viable human beings at the bulletproof Boulder Abortion Clinic, which he founded in 1973. He has been the subject of numerous profiles and articles.

A 2010 Guardian piece cast him as a brave survivor of pro-life hostilities and criticism by the kind of people who reckoned him monstrous on account of his late-term execution of a child with dwarfism and many other such human beings.

Esquire once profiled the man, noting that pregnant women are "not moms until they have a baby." Up until the baby is born and not killed by an abortionist is the woman no longer a "patient" and the baby no longer on death row.

In the same piece, Hern noted he hated the word "abortionist," suggesting that it had become a "degrading and demeaning word that has the same negative connotations as the most despicable racial epithet."

Over the weekend, the Atlantic published a profile on Hern, 84, noting that the abortionist, nearing his fifth decade killing babies in Boulder, is "obstinate, utterly certain of his position, and intolerant of criticism even as he dishes it out."

While 14 states now ban most forms of abortion, Colorado enables Hern to legally abort babies at any stage in pregnancy.

Hern readily admitted that he doesn't just kill unhealthy babies — those the eugenicists of the 1930s and their ideological descendants might think unsuitable.

"Hern is reluctant to acknowledge any limit, any red line," reported Elaine Godfrey of the Atlantic. "He takes the woman's-choice argument to its logical conclusion, in much the same way that, at this moment, anti-abortion activists are pressing their case to its extreme. Hern considers his religious adversaries to be zealots, and many of them are. But he is, in his own way, no less an absolutist."

The geriatric abortionist "estimates that at least half, and sometimes more, of the women who come to the clinic" are carrying children who are healthy, who do not have "devastating medical diagnoses," and Hern will gladly charge around $6,000 to kill them.

In two instances, Hern indicated he killed babies simply on the basis of their gender.

According to the Atlantic, "The reason doesn’t really matter to Hern. Medical viability for a fetus — or its ability to survive outside the uterus — is generally considered to be somewhere from 24 to 28 weeks. Hern, though, believes that the viability of a fetus is determined not by gestational age but by a woman’s willingness to carry it."

Godfrey asked Hern, "So if a pregnant woman with no health issues comes to the clinic, say, at 30 weeks, what would you do?"

The abortionist responded, "Every pregnancy is a health issue! ... There’s a certifiable risk of death from being pregnant, period."

Hern admitted to having been, at least on one occasion, psychologically affected by what he was doing.

"In the 1970s, physicians did not induce fetal demise during abortion, and once or twice, during a procedure at 15 or 16 weeks, he used forceps to remove a fetus with a still-beating heart. ... But for a long while after, a vision of that fetus would wake Hern from sleep. He could see it in his mind, the inches-long body and its heart: beating, beating, beating," wrote Godfrey.

Unlike Edgar Allan Poe's unnamed narrator in "The Tell-Tale Heart," these bad dreams about the beating heart of one of his victims did not ultimately drive Hern to confess a murder to the police. However, the nightmare he has committed his life to shows the state of things Democrats seek for America.

House Democrats reintroduced the so-called "Women's Health Protection Act" in late March in hopes of enshrining limitless abortion as a national right.

The bill echoes Hern's absolutism, stating, "Reproductive justice requires every individual to have the right to make their own decisions about having children regardless of their circumstances and without interference and discrimination."

It similarly discounts the personhood of the children involved, claiming, "Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures in the United States."

If enacted, health care providers would be unencumbered by allegedly "harmful or unwarranted limitations or requirements" that "do not significantly advance reproductive health or the safety of abortion services, or make abortion services more difficult to access."

Since the House is Republican-dominated, it is unlikely that this legislation will pass, but it is clear that Democrats will continue to try.

After all, this is not the first time in recent years Democrats in Washington have sought to legalize limitless abortion across the nation.

Senate Democrats attempted to advance an earlier version of the same bill in May 2022 to codify Roe v. Wade, thereby enshrining limitless abortion as a national right. They came close, but ultimately failed in a 49-to-51 vote.

National Review reported at the time that the bill would "supersede any federal or state law in conflict with it, including long-standing conscience laws protecting health-care workers and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act."

It would scrap 24-hour waiting periods before abortions, requirements that abortion clinics distribute information about adoption to mothers, laws requiring parental consent, and some state laws prohibiting infanticide. Sex-selective abortions would also be allowed.

Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, who voted against the legislation, said, "It wipes 500 state laws off the books. It expands abortion."

In the event this law or one similar to it is ultimately passed, late-term abortions of the kind executed by Hern on all varieties of human beings will be permissible in all 50 states.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

‘Can Feel Excruciating Pain’: Sen. Lindsey Graham Defends 15-Week Abortion Limit

'The science tells us that the nerve endings are developed'

POLL: Most Democratic Voters Oppose The Abortion Policies Their Party Wants To Nationalize

Only 18.2% of Democrats in the survey supported legal abortion up to birth

'View' panel explodes as Whoopi Goldberg insists each woman should be able to decide when unborn children begin to have rights



Whoopi Goldberg, co-host of "The View," loudly insisted that each individual woman ought to be able to decide at which point unborn children have rights.

Her remarks came during a heated panel discussion about the Women's Health Protection Act, a bill that would have codified federal abortion rights established by Roe v. Wade, overriding state pro-life laws.

The bill, however, failed to clear the Senate during a Wednesday night vote.

What are the details?

Guest co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, one-time press secretary for former Vice President Mike Pence, addressed the act and said that a majority share of Americans supports limiting abortion.

Griffin's fellow co-host immediately appeared to bristle at her remarks, and Goldberg in particular immediately went on the offensive.

“This is an uncomfortable conversation we have to have, at what point does a baby in the womb have rights separate from its mother?” Griffin asked before an irate-looking Goldberg interrupted.

She thundered, “Listen, it doesn’t matter what you think — when you think it is. If I don't think that that's when it is —"

Griffin interrupted, “Is that in, is it the ninth month? Is it the third trimester?”

Through the crosstalk — in which co-host Joy Behar insisted that it's "none of your business" — Goldberg fired back, “Listen, I don’t have to tell you — it’s your decision. What you do with your body and how your family works, and for me, I don’t care what your religious beliefs are.”

Griffin pointed out that she wasn't addressing it from a religious standpoint, and instead, was speaking from the point of view of having an "important philosophical debate."

“When does the baby in the womb have rights?” she demanded, but Goldberg refused to bend and instead, went to break rather than have to defend her stance.

You can watch the fiery exchange in the video segment below.

SENATE BLOCKS BILL TO CODIFY ABORTION RIGHTS: After the Senate casted their votes Wednesday for the Women's Health Protection Act that would have codified Roe v. Wade, #TheView panel reacts to Democrat Joe Manchin and every Republican voting against it.https://abcn.ws/3w7VPZp\u00a0pic.twitter.com/JvhGVI6oYy
— The View (@The View) 1652369158

Manchin Joins Republicans To Doom Far-Left Abortion Bill

'It's hard to get 80% of Americans to agree on anything'

Joe Manchin says he would vote to codify Roe v. Wade, but opposes the bill Democrats want



Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) on Wednesday reaffirmed his opposition to a radical Democratic abortion bill that is going nowhere fast in the United States Senate.

Democrats have scheduled a vote on the Women's Health Protection Act later today, a bill that would codify the abortion rights established by Roe v. Wade and override state pro-life laws restricting abortion access or regulating abortions for health and safety. The bill needs 60 votes to overcome an expected filibuster by Republicans, though Democrats may struggle to find even 50 votes in favor.

Manchin, who claims to be a pro-life Democrat, told reporters he would not vote for the WHPA, arguing it was too broad.

“We’re going to be voting for a piece of legislation that I will not be voting for today,” Manchin said.

Manchin tells reporters he will vote against the Women\u2019s Health Protection Act this afternoonpic.twitter.com/sOvTIjxDwl
— Alan He (@Alan He) 1652283678

“But I would vote for a Roe v. Wade codification if it was today. I was hopeful for that, but I found out yesterday in caucus that that wasn’t going to be,” he added.

"To me, that would be the reasonable, rational thing to do. The bill we have today to vote on, Women's Health Protection Act ... make no mistake, it is not Roe v. Wade codification, it is an expansion. It wipes 500--500 state laws off the books. It expands abortion," he said.

Democrats have demanded federal action to protect abortion rights in the wake of a leaked draft Supreme Court majority opinion that indicates the court will soon overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has insisted on a show vote for the WHPA even though everyone in the Senate understands that it will not pass. He has said that Republicans need to be put on the record opposing abortion rights, calling this vote "one of the most consequential we will take in decades."

"All of us will have to answer for this vote for the rest of our time in public office," Schumer said in a floor speech Wednesday morning. "Before the day is over, every member of this body will make a choice [to] stand with women to protect their freedoms or stand with MAGA Republicans to take our country into a dark and repressive future."

A bipartisan bill that would more narrowly codify Roe while permitting states to regulate abortions for health and safety and enact conscience protections for Catholic hospitals has been introduced by Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. Although Manchin is likely to support that bill and it could even get support from 52 senators, Schumer has declined to give it a vote.

Manchin said the Senate should not overreach on an issue that is "extremely political" and could alienate voters.

"We should not be dividing this country further than we're already divided," he said. "And it's really the politics of Congress that's dividing the country. It's not the people. They're telling us what they want. And it's just disappointing that we're going to be voting on a piece of legislation which I will not vote for today. But I would vote for Roe v. Wade codification if it was today, I was hopeful for that. But I found out yesterday in caucus that wasn't going to be."

Dem Abortion Bill Would Nullify Parental Consent Laws In Every State

'The WHPA’s overly broad language far exceeds Roe'