Advocates for abortion almost exclusively couch their argument in terms related to rights and privacy, never the actual procedure that, by design, ends the life of an unborn human.

But for US Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX), the opportunity recently arose to press one such pro-abortion activist on which form of the deadly procedure is her “favorite.”

As Fox News reported, it went about as one might expect, with the witness simultaneously trying to avoid answering the question while shifting the focus away from abortion itself:

“What’s your favorite type of abortion?” Gill asked Jessica Waters, a senior scholar at the American University School of Public Affairs.

Waters, whose research focuses on “reproductive rights law,” “abortion regulation,” and “state control of reproductive decision-making,” refused to answer.

ADVERTISEMENT

“I’m an advocate for patients having access to the full realm of reproductive healthcare,” Waters said.

The moment — and the attention it immediately sparked online — highlights the continued priority of the abortion issue among Republican lawmakers and conservatives, and came during a hearing before the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government.

Gill leaned into the gruesome picture often left behind by some of the procedures.

“The first kind is called a ‘suction abortion,’” Gill said.

“This is when the cervix is dilated and a strong suction, 29 times the power of a household vacuum cleaner, tears the baby’s body apart and sucks it through the hose into a container. Do you prefer that method?”

“I stand by my former testimony,” Waters said.

Gill’s willingness to make it uncomfortable in order to highlight the barbarity of abortion resonated with many social media users:

WNG provided additional details about the nature of the congressional hearing:

The exchange occurred during a Tuesday House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994, also known as the FACE Act. The law criminalized the obstruction of access to places of worship and so-called reproductive health facilities, a category that includes both abortion centers and pro-life crisis pregnancy centers. The subcommittee, which has slightly more Republican than Democratic members, held the hearing to examine the Constitutional implications of how the Biden administration applied the law, according to its website. Republicans have accused Biden officials of weaponizing the law against the pro-life movement.

ADVERTISEMENT

Waters was one of four witnesses testifying at the hearing. The other three witnesses represented pro-life protesters and two conservative organizations, the Thomas More Society and the Heritage Foundation. The other three witnesses’ testimonies all criticized the Biden administration for frequently using the FACE Act to disproportionately punish pro-life protesters. Some of them also argued that the law was too vague and gave the federal government too much power.

Here’s a longer clip of the testimony with more context:

This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.
 

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.