Pro-Abortion Extremists Love Kamala Harris, Here’s Why

Can you imagine a pro-abortionist stomping on poor old pro-abortion President Joe Biden? What’s a guy have to do to win their affections?

As of September 1, Biden has appointed and the Senate has confirmed 205 federal judges, outpacing even President Donald Trump. In his only opportunity to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court, he chose reliably pro-abortion Ketanji Brown Jackson. His administration is loaded with abortion zealots, starting with the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice, to name just two.

So why did USA Today columnist USA Sara Pequeño write that “In the June presidential debate, President Joe Biden’s answer on the abortion issue made me feel hopeless”? Because his answer “failed to capture the gravity of the situation.”

Luckily for Pequeño, the Democratic power brokers forced Biden out, making it possible for Vice President Kamala Harris to be the party’s presidential nominee. That, in turn, made it possible for her answer in the September debate to “make up for” Biden’s “incoherent’ response.

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! To help us fight Kamala Harris’ abortion agenda, please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

For Pequeño, Harris’s “answer is exactly what I was hoping to hear from the Democratic presidential nominee.”

“I pledge to you when Congress passes a bill to put back in place the protections of Roe v. Wade as president of the United States, I will proudly sign it into law“

There’s much more that made Pequeño giddy. Harris “talking about abortion in all the correct ways”–for the Abortion Establishment, one of Biden’s signature weaknesses.

Furthermore, Trump “continued to push the idea that abortions are occurring late in pregnancy – an idea that Harris pushed back on,” according to Pequeño. “To be clear, abortions at or after 21 weeks make up only 1% of all abortions in the United States.”

During the debate, Harris countered Trump, saying “Nowhere in America is a woman carrying a pregnancy to term and asking for an abortion That is not happening. It’s insulting to the women of America.”

There are two separate issues. First, Pequeño argues that Trump was wrong to continue “to push the idea that abortions are occurring late in pregnancy” only to admit in the next sentence that “abortions at or after 21 weeks make up only 1% of all abortions in the United States.”

One percent is in the neighborhood of 9,000 to 10,000 abortions per year performed on babies who have lips, with ears developed enough that she can hear you talk, vocal cords, sleep wake cycles, coordinated limb movements and bone marrow, movement that her/his mother can feel, and is pain capable—to name just a few qualities.

Second, Pequeño writes that “Trump even said that Minn. Governor Tim Walz, Harris’ running mate, supports ‘execution after birth.’ It is not legal to kill a child who has been born in any state, something that Davis [she means Harris] also pointed out during the debate.”

This blurs a key distinction pro-abortionist use to avoid admitting what they are doing. There are ways to kill a baby after they are born that does not require a deliberate act of violence. The child can be killed by medical neglect—passive euthanasia.

Following the Trump versus Harris debate, Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life immediately pointed out how wildly anti-life Walz is. MCCL Co-Executive Director Cathy Blaeser clarified:

“In 2023, Gov. Walz signed a bill (HF 1) creating a right to abortion for any reason and at any time during pregnancy. But he went even further: He also signed a bill (SF 2995) repealing a requirement to provide medically appropriate lifesaving care to born-alive infants. Under Walz’s legislation, viable babies could be set aside, with only comfort care, and allowed to die. Babies with disabilities, whose lives are often devalued, are especially at risk. Minnesota’s abortion policy is now as extreme as any in the world—and serves as an ominous sign of what a Harris-Walz administration would pursue in the White House.”

No, Harris and Walz are every bit as out of the mainstream on abortion as you can possible be. To point that out is—to coin a phrase—fact checking.

LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. This post originally appeared in at National Right to Life News Today —- an online column on pro-life issues.