DNC to Rand Paul: Yes, It’s OK to Kill a 7-Pound Baby in the Uterus

I was listening to Erick Erickson the other day, and he was saying how happy he was with Rand Paul for not falling for the media’s stupid questions.

A reporter had asked Rand Paul about his views on abortion and whether he thought there should be any exceptions. The reporter referenced Paul’s statements on abortion earlier that day that were brought to light by the DNC:

“Should there be any exemptions or not?” asked NH1 reporter Paul Steinhauser, citing the DNC attack.

“What’s the DNC say?” asked Paul. That landed like a joke—the room holding the press conference also contained some Paul supporters waiting for photos—but he was serious.

“Here’s the deal—we always seen to have the debate waaaaay over here on what are the exact details of exemptions, or when it starts,” said Paul, waving his hands to the left. “Why don’t we ask the DNC: Is it okay to kill a seven-pound baby in the uterus? You go back and you ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz if she’s OK with killing a seven-pound baby that is not born yet. Ask her when life begins, and you ask Debbie when it’s okay to protect life. When you get an answer from Debbie, get back to me.”

Fast forward to about 8 minutes for the exchange:

Well, Debbie Wasserman Schultz has responded. According to her and the rest of the DNC, it’s perfectly fine to murder a 7-pound baby in the uterus. Here’s her answer, straight from the horse’s mouth:

“Here’s an answer. I support letting women and their doctors make this decision without government getting involved. Period. End of story. Now your turn, Senator Paul. We know you want to allow government officials like yourself to make this decision for women — but do you stand by your opposition to any exceptions, even when it comes to rape, incest, or life of the mother?  Or do we just have different definitions of ‘personal liberty’?  And I’d appreciate it if you could respond without ’shushing’ me.”

So, if the mother and her doctor decide that it’s okay to kill the small child, they should be able to do so, even though the mother might even be in labor.

If the DNC is okay with that, then they shouldn’t really have any issue with someone like Kermit Gosnell, who would perform post-birth abortions.

Wasserman Schultz thinks that murdering a baby is okay as long as a doctor and a mother have agreed that it’s okay. If it’s morally acceptable to murder a baby minutes before birth would have naturally occurred, then how about a minute after birth? How about a year after birth? Five years? Seriously, “what difference, at this point, does it make?”

If she’s going to be consistent, she’s going to have to be accepting of people like Andrea Yates, who drowned her five kids in the bathtub. Perhaps the only technicality missing from that case was the approval of a doctor. If she had convinced a doctor that her kids needed to be euthanized, because they were driving her mad, then it would have been okay.

She still needs to answer when life begins. If life begins at conception, then abortion at any stage is murder.