It’s ‘Their Body’: House Committee Witness Refuses to Oppose ‘Day of Birth’ Abortions
A video of an exchange between U.S. Rep. Mike Johnson and an abortion rights advocate has gone viral after she declined to answer if she opposes late-term abortion, including an abortion in the final minutes of a woman’s term.
The exchange took place during a House Judiciary Committee meeting Wednesday when Johnson (R-La.) posed a series of questions to Aimee Arrambide, the executive director of Avow Texas, a Texas-based group that supports “unrestricted abortion access,” according to its website.
Truly incredible clip
pic.twitter.com/hjTgdoxX6G— Greg Price (@greg_price11) May 18, 2022
The video had been viewed more than 500,000 times on Twitter as of Thursday.
“You testified that you are ‘unapologetic in seeking unrestricted abortion access,'” Johnson said. “So I’m wondering: At what point is it not okay to abort a child? What age of gestation?”
“I trust all people to determine what they can and can’t do with their bodies,” Arrambide answered. “Full stop. I also believe that human rights, including access to medical care that they need within their communities, is something that should be afforded to everyone.”
Johnson then asked if Arrambide opposes abortions on the day of the scheduled delivery.
“In other words, the child is half-delivered, and then the woman says, ‘My right. I want to take that one out.’ Do you support that?”
“I trust people to make decisions about their body,” Arrambide responded.
“So abortion should be allowed, then, by your definition, for any reason, for any purpose, at any stage, right?” Johnson asked.
“I trust people to make decisions about their body,” she said. “And then, when relevant, I think that they need to consult their medical practitioners.”
Johnson kept pressing.
“[But] what is the principal distinction between the human being that is two years old, or nine months old, or one week old, or an hour old than one that is eight inches further up the birth canal in the uterus? What’s the difference? Why is it okay in the latter case and not the former cases?”
“I trust people to determine what to do with their own body,” Arrambide answered. “Full stop.”
Johnson closed by asserting that abortion is not only a legal issue but a moral one, too.
“It’s about reality. It’s about science, the advancement of medical technology,” he said. “You’re talking about unborn children, and your ‘full stop’ is that you will support the termination of that child at any time, and that is frightening. And that is why this decision [Roe v. Wade] should be returned to the popular will of the people, and hopefully they’ll protect the sanctity of every single human life and live up to the standards of our Declaration of Independence.”
Related:
Supreme Court Has Votes to Overturn Roe in Draft Opinion: ‘Pray They Stay Strong,’ Pro-Lifers Urge
10 Christian Leaders React to Potential Overturning of Roe v. Wade
Photo courtesy: ©Getty Images/Pool
Michael Foust has covered the intersection of faith and news for 20 years. His stories have appeared in Baptist Press, Christianity Today, The Christian Post, the Leaf-Chronicle, the Toronto Star and the Knoxville News-Sentinel.
Comments are closed.