Democrat Lawmaker Can’t Answer Simple Question About Human Life

News: US News
by Christine Niles  •  •  February 1, 2017   

Congressman Eric Swalwell refuses to concede humanity of unborn child

You are not signed in as a Premium user; you are viewing the free version of this program. Premium users have access to full-length programs with limited commercials and receive a 10% discount in the store! Sign up for only one day for the low cost of $1.99. Click the button below.

In Tuesday night's episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight, the Fox News host sparred with U.S. Democratic representative Eric Swalwell of California over Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch.

"I just want to know if you agree with this or not — and I'm quoting him directly," Carlson began, reading aloud words written by the 10th Circuit judge in his book The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. "'Human beings are intrinsically valuable and the intentional taking of human life by private persons is always wrong.'"

Turning to Swalwell, Carlson asked, "Do you believe that?"

Agreeing that human beings have intrinsic value, Swalwell added, "However, Roe v. Wade says that a woman has a right to make a decision about her own healthcare —"

Interrupting, Carlson said, "Ok, but I'm not asking you about Roe v. Wade. I'm asking you to assess what he has said here, not about Roe v. Wade."

Carlson quoted Gorsuch again and asked whether Swalwell agreed that the intentional taking of human life by private persons is always wrong. Instead of answering directly, the California lawmaker said that "two of the most personal decisions" someone can make involve abortion and assisted suicide.

"Are you going to answer my question?" Carlson asked, trying a third, fourth and fifth time unsuccessfully to get a simple yes or no to his query. Finally, after laughing in incredulity, he asked "Are you really afraid of saying the intentional taking of life is wrong?"

Carlson also challenged him to answer whether abortion is "the taking of human life."

"She's terminating something that she does not want, and that's her choice," Swalwell responded.

"OK, but do you think it's human life?"

"I think at viability, a baby should be decided by the woman," the congressman answered. "She's the one who has to have it."

"You brought it up," Carlson said. "That's why I'm pressing you. But do you think before viability it's a human life or something else?"

"I think it's not viable yet, Tucker."

The back and forth continued until Carlson gave up: "You're not going to answer my question, now or ever, I suspect."

Swalwell's official website offers the typical talking points of liberal congressmen, promising to uphold marriage "equality" and "reproductive rights." A member of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus since 2013, Swalwell works to advance abortion access in California.

"I am a strong supporter of women's rights and the ability of women to make their own healthcare decisions, and I am proud to join the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus," Swalwell said in 2013. "[Women] must be provided access to a full panoply of health care options, including contraceptive and reproductive services."

Swalwell is also a strong proponent of gay "marriage."

"Love is love and I'm thrilled the Supreme Court overturned the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and returned marriage equality to California in 2013," states Swalwell on his official website.

Swalwell also supports Obamacare, particularly its contraceptive mandate forcing religious employers to participate in regimes that cover contraception for employees.


Have a news tip? Submit news to our tip line.

We rely on you to support our news reporting. Please donate today.
By commenting on you acknowledge you have read and agreed to our comment posting guidelines

Loading Comments