Next Week | Ben Shapiro | Season 2 Premiere

Planned Parenthood, Abortion Satire, and Cecil Richards’ Retirement

Hey, honey, I'm Cecil Richards. Anyway, you may be familiar with my work, like how to get away with murder, the real-life version, live-action garbage pill kids, and of course, chemically burning children from the inside out.

That's right, I'm the president of Planned Parenthood. So I've basically become the queen of telling kids to get off my lawn, because my lawn, my choice. But now, I have decided to retire. That's right.

After 10 plus years, I want to spend my time doing more relaxing things than abortion. I might get into sales. I have some experience selling body parts, so I might see if I can do that full-time. I've also had the idea of making a code of 101 fetuses.

I got the idea from 101 Dalmatians and always wanted to try it. I'm going on a cruise. It should be peaceful. It's taking me on the lake of all the blood I helped spill. I want to travel abroad, visit countries that are doing genocides.

Maybe I can even help make that happen. That's right, I hear Ireland might murder their children. So that's exciting. I've always wanted to work at a diner and cook the eggs with saline. What? What? Let's see what else.

Ah, have secret meetings with Nazis, pretend to play with my fourth child I didn't have, and convince babysitters to quit their job mid-babysitting. Fun things like that. Anyway, I gotta go meet up with my knitting group.

We're making the pussy hats today.

Season 2 Premiere and News Roundup

Yes, yes, yes. Welcome back everybody. This is the first episode of season two of Next Week with Jeff Durbin. Yes. Thank you guys so very much for tuning in. I encourage you guys to hit the like and share button.

Get everybody in on this because today we have Ben Shapiro from the Daily Wire. So, let's talk guys. Lots been happening in the news over our short break, so here's the first thing. Mega churches are, of course, constantly trying new popular things to attract the young people, right?

Joel Osteen's church is getting new communion wafers that look like Tide Pods. During our time off, eating Tide Pods, believe it or not, actually became a thing. Now I personally am hoping that the people addicted to this dangerous new trend can get clean.

China has a new stealth fighter jet that is ready for combat duty, and the U .S. Naval Institute says that the aircraft could be a serious threat to U .S. aircraft, except for one important thing. It was made in China.

Last weekend, the Midwest was hit with its biggest snowstorm of the season, or as Minnesotans refer to it, perfect start to spring. This one's interesting. There is now a new dating app for people with STDs.

It's called, very original, Herpes Dating. Download the Herp. Now, you don't even have to download the app. You just contract it. But wait, wait, there's something to talk about here. I actually thought there was already a dating app for people with STDs.

Isn't that called Tinder? Now, New York Times CEO said that print will be dead in 10 years. They're going to change their name to The Artist Formerly Known as Print. Hashtag dad joke. That's the one for tonight, guys.

Now last Thursday was the start of the Winter Olympics. Their slogan is, oh wait, that was this year? Now the Winter Olympics revealed that they use 90 fake snow, but that of course was reported by fake news, so I don't know what to believe anymore.

A Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump impersonator went to the Winter Olympics and immediately got kicked out of the opening ceremony. It seems here that the Olympic Committee could do what Hillary couldn't, get rid of Trump.

And lastly, happy birthday communism. This year marks the 100 year anniversary of the invention of communism, which is really exciting. Unless you wanted cake. Or anything else nice. Welcome back guys again to Next Week with Jeff Durbin.

Ben Shapiro from The Daily Wire is on today's episode. Stay right there. Share the episode. We'll be right back. Internet, I'm Jeff Durbin. This is Next Week and it is time, of course, for that blend of the week.

This blend of the week is called Bitcoin Cappuccino. So good it's worth one whole Bitcoin. It's not so much anymore, right Marcus? And it's also called Stefan, the barista trying to get a Bitcoin. Alright guys, let's do this.

You ready? Now, everybody, as you know, tomorrow is Valentine's Day. No one's very excited about that. It's alright, neither am I guys. And since it's in the middle of the week, you may not have time to think about something romantic for your spouse.

So of course, as is the usual, you're either left with the option of buying cards and candies at Walmart or taking your wife to Walmart so she can pick out the cards and candies herself. And that's of course why we wanted to give you another option.

We wanted to come up with our own candy hearts. And these don't just say anything on them. These actually have romantic biblical messages. Not very excited, are you? Now and don't worry, we didn't use, of course, the cliche 1 Corinthians chapter 13 about love because we actually want you to give your spouse something that's never been used on a candy heart before.

Trust us. The only problem is we had a bit of a hard time finding non-cliche ones that were still romantic. So the first one is from one of the most romantic books in the Bible, Song of Solomon. Now Song of Solomon 2 5 says, strengthen me with raisins, refresh me with apples, for I am faint with love.

That's good, right? I like it. Now you can also get the candy heart with the American translation which says, I love you, but also, when is dinner ready? Now this next one is from Song of Solomon chapter 4 verse 10.

It says, how much better is your love than wine? And for some Christians, we have a follow up candy heart that says, we haven't had alcohol since before Jesus, so that answer is a lot. Here's looking at you, Steven Anderson.

Now if you're a Christian in the Bible belt, we have a third candy heart that says, I hope nobody from my church is at this restaurant because I just read the word alcohol pretty loud. But I don't drink, I promise.

This is a virgin margarita. Now King Solomon is known for writing romantic verses in that book, but what about using his other books? Here's a candy heart inspired by Ecclesiastes. It says, there's a time to love and a time to hate.

Please don't hate me. Now this next one's based off of Ecclesiastes 4 9. It says, two are better than one because they have a good return for their labor. It's not done. Flip that candy heart over. It says, Rhonda, I'm sorry I wasn't there when you were in labor with our son.

That's actually an apology heart. And those are good to have sometimes. Now the last one is from Proverbs 31 to that very special lady. It says, she has no fear of winter for her household, for everyone has warm clothes.

Yeah, that's good. Let's flip that one over too. It says, for heaven's sake, can you please stop turning on the heater? All right, guys. Welcome back, of course, again to season two, episode one. Now of course, as you know, this is our first episode back after a very short break.

And that's good news for people who love sanity, logic, family, capitalism, guns, Jesus, homeschool, and Minecraft. Now it's bad news for people who love this. We are calling the police, ma 'am.

I'm calling the police right now. What you are is a racist mother f***er as well. How dare you f***ing do this kind of s***?

I'm reading. I'm the feminist who is pushing your daughter down the slippery slope of slothhood by giving her a high five when she says she keeps her own supply of condoms.

That's right. Now guys, it's obvious, not a lot has changed since we last saw each other. Abortion is still legal, President Trump is still running the country, liberals are still severely depressed, taxation is still theft, fake news is still a thing, and secular late night talk shows have officially run out of meaningful things to talk about.

You know, every day here, we use jokes to try to bring awareness to the awful state of American politics. We try to provide depth, insight, and clarity on complex and important issues. But then sometimes, something like this happens.

That means it's time for our new segment, Let's Get Petty. I think we might have to see that again. Yeah, so you can see.

This is why Darth Vader had the good sense to wear a helmet. I'm so sorry.

That video should come with a warning saying these sort of images would be disturbing for younger viewers. We also learned with the release of a formally confidential document that the federal government is as corrupt as ever, and the FBI has the ethical standards of Tony Soprano, Al Capone, John Gotti, and any one of Joe Pesci's characters in any of his gangster films.

In fact, if you put all those people together, you get a picture like this. Speaking of gangsters and hitmen, Cecil Richards announced that she'll be resigning from her many years as their Fuhrer of Planned Parenthood.

That's worthy of applause, for sure. Now she now joins next week's top five most horrible things list. Hate it. Starting at the top of the list, of course, is Cecil Richards. Hate it. With Hitler, of course, at number two.

Hate it. The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, at number three. Hate it. And the president of Planned Parenthood after Margaret, Alan Frank Guttmacher, who started the whole attitude toward the freedom of women's reproductive system at number four.

Hate it. And of course, at the bottom of the list is Burger King. Hate it. This has been the top five most horrible things list right here on Next Week, guys. Now, speaking of abortion, do any of you guys remember this from presidential candidate Donald Trump?

But I want to ask you specifically, do you want the court, including the justices that you will name, to overturn Roe v. Wade, which includes, in fact states, a woman's right to abortion?

Well, if that would happen, because I am pro-life and I will be appointing pro-life judges, I would think that that will go back to the individual states.

But I'm asking you specifically, would you like to...

If they overturned it, it'll go back to the states.

But what I'm asking you, sir, is, do you want to see the court overturn? You just said you want to see the court protect the Second Amendment. Do you want to see the court overturn Roe v. Wade?

Well, if we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that's really what's going to be... That will happen. And that'll happen automatically, in my opinion, because I am putting pro-life justices on the court.

I will say this, it will go back to the states and the states will then make a determination.

Now like many of you, we all had high and prayerful hopes about President Trump's promises to work to end abortion, no question. And like many of you, we were very encouraged to hear Trump's coherent thinking when it comes to the necessary conversation of criminalizing abortion.

This is what he said.

Do you believe in punishment for abortion, yes or no, as a principle? The answer is that there has to be some form of punishment. For the woman? Yeah.

There has to be some form. Now finally, right, finally, we have a person who understands what apparently the entire pro-life movement hasn't understood for over 40 years. If abortion is murder and ought to be considered a criminal act, then we have to work toward consistent legislation that does not treat the perpetrators of this act as victims, but as criminals.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm very excited about the potential before us. We are grateful that our current president stood for the life of the unborn and spoke at the recent March for Life. That's excellent.

That's wonderful. And we're of course excited about the conversation shift in the culture in which many are talking about the issue of the unborn in more consistent terms.

She believes that that organization which engages in the systematic murder of children in the womb in order to maximize the value of their body parts for sale on the open market is an acceptable position.

My position is that murder is murder and you shouldn't do it. Thank you.

The idea that you get to murder a kid, okay, no one has a right to choose that picture. Go back to the other one. No one has a right to choose this. No one. No one has a right to choose this. You don't have a right to choose this.

Okay? That's a baby. You don't get to kill it just because it's convenient to you. You don't have a right to say, it's my decision where and when and how to have the baby. That's an individual human being and if that baby were outside the womb and you stuck a knife through its chest, you'd be charged with first degree murder.

Now look, I think we should all find it very distressing that someone like Milo Yiannopoulos maintains a more consistent and biblical approach to defining abortion than many leaders in the largest pro-life organizations on the planet.

For a flamboyantly proud homosexual man who brags about the amount of men he has had sexual encounters with, abortion is murder. Yet the approach taken by the people being paid millions of dollars to end abortion is expressed like this.

So do you think that women who have abortions are murderers?

I don't think that's the proper thing to do. The person that's actually doing the killing is the abortionist. But a lot of these women are scared.

God commands us not to murder.

They know they're going to hell. Len, Len, you're so angry because you know what we're telling you is true. Because God has made this law upon your heart, man. They're confused.

What's your name? They don't know what they're doing. Somebody decides to murder you. Their choice. So we want to maintain the right to murder children. Yes, that's correct. That is correct. Yes.

The right to murder children. Yes, abortion is an act of homicide. One person killing another person. We're always going to say it is that. It's murder. But we have to look at what's going on in society.

What's going on? What they're being told? How they're being lied to? And how do we reach them the best way?

Now, it isn't wrong for those of us who want to see abortion ended to raise an eyebrow and to look a little squinty-eyed when we see a presidential candidate who doesn't believe he needs to ask God for forgiveness, and certainly nobody on Twitter either, recognizing that if abortion is the unjust taking of a human life, then it needs to be seen as a criminal act for those involved with it.

And yet, we see the president of one of the most highly funded pro-life organizations on the planet saying this.

The pro-life movement has a lot of women who are active in it who have had abortions. And they very much argue that the mother who got the abortion is also a victim. So the pro-life movement, for the almost 50 years that it's been in existence, have never called for punishing the woman who gets the abortion.

Now, it's important that you don't misunderstand our position on this. We should all, all of us be grateful for every single life that has been preserved by the work of many in the pro-life movement.

Now, my favorite philosopher of all time, Cornelius Van Til, has a well-known saying, God can strike a straight blow with a crooked stick. However, I don't believe that we should be looking around for crooked sticks to hit people with.

If we look, if we look on the baseball field and see a kid losing a game for everyone because he is trying to hit the ball with a pool noodle and the false confidence his two mommies gave him, at a certain point, it isn't sweet or cute to just let him be.

He is trying after all, but you see, he's losing the game for a reason. You can't play like that and expect to win. And we shouldn't be upset with the person who walks on that field and pats him on the head and hands the kid a bat.

He's trying to help him. If the emperor has no clothes, those of us who don't want to see him like that should have the right to hand him a robe without fear of reprisal. Now, we are living in a curious time in history.

Very curious. In the past, Christians understood that God has ordained government to be the institution that would execute the demand of justice for victims in this life. We want mercy, forgiveness, and eternal life from God for all of the criminals in God's universe.

However, as can be seen from the Old and New Testament, God has a concern for victims in this life, and he desires that the civil realm be the institution that makes sure that even thieves that he has forgiven pay back their victims.

Now, many of you are aware of the recent case of Larry Nassar. Larry Nassar was an Olympic doctor who engaged in hundreds of acts of molestation and sexual assault. Recently, his victims had the opportunity to give victim impact statements.

It lasted for days and days. Family after family and victim after victim faced him in a court of law, and they were allowed to express their pain publicly to his face. Now, we all recognize in this instance that though Larry Nassar needs forgiveness from God, and we certainly all hope for that, the victims here and now have a right to justice in this life.

The demand for justice is so unavoidable that one of the fathers even did this.

I would ask you to, as part of this sentencing, to grant me five minutes in a locked room with this demon. Would you do that? That is not how our... Yes or no?

No, sir, I can't do that. Would you give me one minute? You know that I can't do that. That's not how our legal system... I can't do that. Now, one of the most powerful moments in this case was when Rachel Denhollander delivered the final victim speech to Larry.

In our early hearings, you brought your Bible into the courtroom, and you have spoken of praying for forgiveness, and so it is on that basis that I appeal to you. If you have read the Bible you carry, you know that the definition of sacrificial love portrayed is of God himself loving so sacrificially that he gave up everything to pay a penalty for the sin he did not commit.

By his grace, I too choose to love this way. You spoke of praying for forgiveness, but Larry, if you have read the Bible you carry, you know forgiveness does not come from doing good things, as if good deeds can erase what you have done.

It comes from repentance, which requires facing and acknowledging the truth about what you have done in all of its utter depravity and horror, without mitigation, without excuse, without acting as if good deeds can erase what you have seen in this courtroom today.

The Bible you carry says it is better for a millstone to be thrown around your neck and you thrown into a lake than for you to make even one child stumble. And you have damaged hundreds. The Bible you speak carries a final judgment where all of God's wrath and its eternal terror is poured out on men like you.

Should you ever reach the point of truly facing what you have done, the guilt will be crushing. And that is what makes the gospel of Christ so sweet.

Beautiful. You see, a truly biblical worldview, a consistent worldview recognizes both essential things. The gospel and justice. Now, our modern evangelism has led us to believe that it's more loving to just let everything be.

We have bought into the fiction that God wants us to love the criminal at the expense of the victim. You see, the Bible teaches that the victim has rights. Now, we, we have raised the banner that the victim has no rights and we're asking victims to carry it even if it crushes them.

No, Rachel Den Hollander has it right. She gets to hope for Larry Nassar's forgiveness and peace with God and she gets to hope that the judge takes away his life. Harmony. That's what she wants as a victim.

And that, my friends, is what God wants too. If we continue to fight against abortion, not defining it as what it is, the unjust taking of a human life with malice of forethought, that's murder for all of you keeping score.

And if we continue to call the people who participate in this act victims, and if we continue to ignore the need to fight for legislation that actually criminalizes the act, then we show the deepest level of hatred for the victims.

Over 60 million for those of you guys keeping score. And we commit ourselves to the disciplining hand of God that should rightly come upon a nation that victimizes the most vulnerable among us and refuses to acknowledge that it is actually so.

Ben Shapiro, Leftism, and Objective Reality

We'll be right back, guys. We got Ben Shapiro from The Daily Wire. Stay with us, guys. Like and share the episode. We'll be right back. Alright, guys, welcome back to season 2, episode 1 of Next Week with Jeff Durbin.

We are so very excited about this gift that we have for this at-first episode. We're going to have one of our favorite people on. You know him. He really doesn't need much of an introduction for our audience.

His name is Ben Shapiro. He is the editor-in-chief of The Daily Wire. He is known for saying one of my favorite things, and that is the facts don't care about your feelings. Check out this clip. Clip number one, Marcus.

Give it a roll.

You're not being polite to the pronouns. Disrespect. Okay, forget about the disrespect. Facts don't care about your feelings.

You cut that out now or you'll go home in an ambulance.

That seems mildly inappropriate for a political discussion. Alright, Ben, welcome to Next Week.

Thanks for coming on today. Thanks for having me. I appreciate it. Absolutely. So just by way of introduction, tell everybody about The Daily Wire and what you do with them.

Sure. Well, Daily Wire is a site that we launched in about September 2015, and we have about 100 million pages a month. We are a major media website that covers all the news of the day with a commentary aspect to it as well.

I'm editor-in-chief, so that means that it tends to reflect my editorial preferences, obviously. And then I also do a widely listened to podcast that is broadcast not only through Daily Wire where you can subscribe, but also YouTube, Facebook, SoundCloud, iTunes, all of the usual places that you can get podcasts.

Excellent. Now, I noticed, I was actually looking up your bio, and I noticed that when you were 17 years old you started to write a book, and that book was something to do with colleges indoctrinating children, correct?

Yeah, so I had a syndicated column when I was 17, and then my first book came out when I was 20. That was about my experience at UCLA and leftist bias on college campuses across the country. Obviously not much has changed in the 14 years since that came out, so it's only gotten worse, unfortunately.

Well, you are the man that is feared by social justice warriors everywhere. Your clips run across social media and just some devastating, devastating things. I want to just talk for a moment about that worldview problem, talking about the colleges, academia, indoctrinating our youth.

We see this just broad spectrum really across the country of really an antithetical worldview from what really this nation began with, and you address that obviously in your book. Can you talk just about that in terms of colleges, universities, the indoctrination of our youth, and just really the problem of what we see before us in terms of this large movement of Marxism, socialism, social justice warriors?

Just talk about that. Sure. Leftism on college campuses obviously is the predominant ideology, and that ideology suggests a couple of things. Number one, that the history of the United States was founded in racism, sexism, bigotry of every sort, and that that has poisoned America's cultural history throughout, and that it's almost impossible to get away from it unless you acknowledge that you are part and parcel of the problem and then hand over all power and all ability to speak to people who presumably are not white, straight, and male for whom the system was supposedly designed.

That's the idea that they put forth on college campuses. That combined with the idea, the Marxist notion, that equality of outcome is something to be sought, not equality of rights, but equality of outcome.

It's not about a right to free speech. It's about the idea that if I speak and you speak and I'm better at it than you and our outcome is different, then something totally unfair has happened. The same thing in the economic sphere.

If I'm rich and you're poor or vice versa, it doesn't matter whether I made bad decisions and you made good decisions or the opposite. All that really matters is that we finished in different places, and that's something that has to be rectified by the heavy hand of government.

Right, and one of the things I think that was powerful about that particular clip that we aired right here at the beginning, you were talking to a man that goes by the name of Zoe, and in that clip you were bold, courageous.

I was very excited to see. I thought you were respectful and humble, but also just truthful in terms of you said, and I think you said, what is your biology, what is your genetics, sir? And that set Zoe off.

And your popular phrase, facts don't care about your feelings, I think is something that means a lot in our day and age when so much is built up and wrapped around the issue of emotion. Well, I feel like I'm a man, I feel like I'm a woman, and you just don't go along that line.

So can you talk just about that, the need to embrace that ideology, that facts don't care about your feelings in this day that we live?

Well, I mean, I think it's important, obviously, to be cordial and be polite as often as humanly possible, but you have to do that without sacrificing reality. And I think one of the things the left has done is turned the right's penchant for politeness and decency against itself by suggesting that now you have to, if you want to be polite or decent, you have to view the world in exactly the way that I do.

And that's what has happened with, for example, the transgender pronoun debate, the idea that even if you're not objectively a man or objectively a woman, I have to call you by the pronoun that you seek to be called because otherwise I'd be being impolite or being rude.

And that's not the question. The question is in public debate, when it comes particularly to how a society defines sex, are we going to do so on the arbitrary basis of subjectivity, or are we going to have some sort of objective standard by which we decide whether a person is a man or a woman, and what are we going to teach to our children?

Because it's not just about what I call you, it's also about what you force me to teach my children in, for example, public schools. Am I forced to teach my five-year-old that she can become a boy if she wants to, which obviously is untrue and is significantly damaging to the psyche if you're talking about kids who don't even know about puberty yet.

And unfortunately, the left has decided that it's much more important to push an agenda where all lines are removed on behalf of equality and sameness than to reinforce reality. And I think that it's become a controversial proposition simply to say reality is reality, and nothing we do can change that.

But that controversy, I think, is necessary in a world where the left refuses to not only abide by reality but suggests that reality and recognizing it is racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic.

All right. I think just what so many people see as just a fresh of breath air with you and your work is just that commitment to objective reality, not the subjectivity that we see so often in front of us today with college campuses, universities, and what's really just being pumped out.

And so it's a powerful thing, and it seems, again, compelling that we actually have to talk about that. And Ben, one of the things that I think is compelling is that this particular worldview shift and this ideology of this subjectivity or emotions really playing the defining role, it's coming out of universities, the places that are supposed to be rooted in logic, reason, objectivity, facts, biology, science.

And what we see really is just the antithesis of that coming out of the university system today. We see really this worldview that's really developed and built upon pure emotion, not facts, not history, not reason, not sound thinking.

And so that's, I think, one of the things that's making you such a formidable opponent to those on the left. And so one of the things that so many of us get excited about, and Ben, if you don't know a lot about us, our particular organization, End Abortion Now, we have been able to, by God's grace, save, at this point, thousands of lives across the country outside of abortion clinics trying to minister to and to love the women and the fathers going in.

And it's just been an incredible experience to be able to hold these children in our arms. And one of the great and tremendous blessings of what you are doing is just how you define, say, an issue like abortion.

You hang on that facts don't care about your feelings. You hang on the objective reality and not the subjective feelingness of the issue. And so you define it properly, and you do it boldly. And one of the things that we appreciate, Ben, is just that you do that.

You call it murder. You call it killing. And it's something that many legislators aren't willing to do. And honestly, Ben, and this is, of course, discouraging, but many even in a pro-life movement aren't willing to take the kind of bold stand that you do.

And I think that yours is the most effective. I want to play this clip here, and this is Ben. And one of my very favorite clips about Ben talking about abortion. This is clip number two. Go ahead, Marcus.

She says that she's thinking about reproductive rights one minute from having a baby. This is about as perverse a notion as I could possibly imagine. That as you're about to have your child, you're thinking, boy, wouldn't it be great if I could still kill this thing?

If you want to go to Planned Parenthood and get a contraceptive, go for it. I don't care. I do care when you start killing babies. This is a problem for me. Here I am. Look how pregnant I am. There's a baby in here.

This is my beautiful child. And I was thinking, maybe I should just kill it. We make these moral judgments all the time when we see a violation of moral law, and it is a violation of moral law to kill another human being, which is why we have murder laws.

And there you go. That's powerful. And I think what I want to hang on there, Ben, and just hear you just elaborate on, is you rightly bring the issue of abortion down to the moral issue, which all, as you know, all legislative moves really have some component, some moral component to them, and you bring it right there to the moral issue, and I think that's vitally important to get.

You talk about this actress who did a video, and I love your response to it, Ben. Just the passion you had there was so important to me. In terms of her saying she's just a minute away from giving birth and she should still have the right to kill this baby.

There's a baby in there, and I ought to be able to kill it. And you talk about abortion as a moral issue, as an issue of murder and killing.

Can you just elaborate on that a bit? Sure. I mean, one of the things that I always try to do, I'm obviously an Orthodox Jew, I'm somebody who believes in the Bible, but I try not to cite the Bible, I try not to cite religion as the basis for arguments in the secular realm.

And when you're talking about abortion, you don't have to go to the Bible. I mean, that can provide the fodder for your worldview, but it doesn't have to be the source for the arguments that you're making.

And the argument that I typically make is this is either a life or it's not. And scientifically speaking, it is a life, which means that its value is greater than zero. And now the question is, is its value greater than a woman's quote-unquote right to choose?

Well, if the idea is that a woman has a right to kill another human being because the human being exists inside the womb, or a potential human being exists inside the womb, depending on how you want to define it, then you have to be honest and clear-eyed about how this works.

And unfortunately, those on the left don't want to do that. They want to avoid the fact that this is a baby in the womb. They want to avoid the fact that a human life begins at conception, which is obviously scientifically true.

They want to ignore the moral ramifications of all of that. And so they seek a bunch of different ways of avoiding the reality of that situation. They'll seek to suggest that it's about a woman's right to choose being infringed upon, although I don't care about her choice in virtually any other aspect of life, just as I don't about any other human being.

They'll suggest that if the baby is not quote-unquote viable, then this is an excuse for killing the baby, which, number one, doesn't apply to people who are outside the womb. If they're not viable, you don't just get to stab them.

And second of all, you know, viability is a moving scale at best because we're all viable in different ways. People who have pacemakers are people who would not be able to survive absent outside technology that is implanted in them, for example.

So whenever you get away from the fundamental definition of life as an attempt to preserve abortion, what you're really doing is ignoring a lot of the facts on the ground. And what I seek to do is say, listen, you want to be pro-choice?

At least you're going to have to reckon with the reality of what it is that you stand for and not obfuscate with a lot of euphemisms.

No, I agree. I think it's powerful, too. And I think one of the most effective things that you're doing, Ben, in this issue is you have effectively reduced the pro-choicers' position to absurdity. All of the excuses that are given for taking the life of a pre-born child, which you're exactly right.