Congressman Jerry Nadler and the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee organized a hearing on May 18 with the provocative title “Revoking Your Rights: The Ongoing Crisis in Abortion Care Access.” They and their abortion-advocate expert witnesses warned of a dystopian post-Roe v. Wade landscape. One witness even called it “the coming of the New Jane Crow” for women of color.
The most popular video clips on social media featured Republican questions to abortion doctors. This might explain why you couldn’t find any mention of this hearing on ABC, CBS, or NBC morning and evening news programs. The “PBS NewsHour” aired a long, fairly balanced report on the abortion debate in Pennsylvania, but nothing on the House committee.
These are not legitimate questions. It is outrageous that they would ask ….again what a female looks like. Rep. Dan Bishop of North Carolina asked abortion advocate Aimee Arrambide this, and she answered “I believe that everyone can identify for themselves.” Bishop followed up: “Do you believe then that men can become pregnant and have abortions?” She said “yes.”
Rep. Mike Johnson, Louisiana also interrogated Arrambide. He argued that it is not lawful and morally acceptable to take the life of child at ten, so “what is the principal distinction between the human being that is two years old, or nine months old, or an hour old, than one that is eight inches further up the birth canal in the uterus?”
Arrambide let the question hang in the air, like she couldn’t believe she had to answer this impertinent question. Then she stuck the feminist landing: “I trust people to determine what to do with their own bodies. Full stop.”
When asked, Whoopi Goldberg said the exact same thing. The View when life begins, and she angrily replied “It doesn’t matter when you think it is!” and “I don’t have to tell you!” The woman decides whether she’s carrying a human life. It’s not Science, it’s an unwavering “right to choose.”
When they choose an abortion in the middle of pregnancy, that’s an ugly, messy business. But you’re not allowed to say that. Rep. Chip Roy, Texas, asked Yashica John about the most recent abortion she performed on a pregnant woman. Alabama has a 20-week legal limit. Roy then asked “Have you had baby parts that you’ve had to discard or store in some capacity? Legs? Arms?”
Robinson objected, saying: “One thing that you all did throughout this hearing was you used inflamatory language as you discuss the care that I provide.” As Roy kept pressing, Robinson announced “I am a physician and a proud abortion provider. You can’t say anything that would make it hard for me to speak about the care that we provide.”
It’s “inflammatory” to describe an abortion as a dismembering activity. You’re supposed to hide it behind euphemistic lingo like “abortion care.”
Mother JonesThe article most likely reflected the usual liberal-journalist approach to these exchanges. The headline was “Imagine Dealing With This Many Condescending Anti-Abortion White Men and Not Losing Your S–t.” Abigail Weinberg denounced the “ignorant and offensive questions, not to mention disinformation, from a certain cohort of white male Republicans.”
Their questions were “just too absurd and hateful,” “preposterous,” “dripping condescension” and showing “immense disrespect.”
An abortion doctor showing disrespect to an unborn child is the worst example of extreme discourtesy. But Weinberg concluded with bravado: “It looks like women can’t expect certain men to start treating them as humans anytime soon.”