Republican South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman repeatedly pressed three pro-abortion witnesses on whether they support “infanticide” at Wednesday’s House Oversight Committee hearing.
Norman asked the three witnesses if they agree with ending the life of a “perfectly healthy child” at the moment of birth. Jane’s Due Process Youth Program manager Sarah Lopez said she did “not accept the basis of that question.”
“I do not agree with the basis of that question, but I do believe abortion is health care,” Lopez said. The representative said he interpreted that answer to mean she supports killing a baby at birth.
Democratic Georgia state Rep. Renitta Shannon accused Norman of using “inflammatory language” that is not based on reality, further arguing that infanticide is not taking place in the medical field.
“Do you agree that if a healthy child is born, that it is a woman’s right to decide whether it lives or dies?” Norman pressed.
“What I think is, based on your question, you have a very low opinion of pregnant people,” she said. “Because if you think anybody —” (RELATED: Pro-Abortion Doctor Dodges Representative’s Question On Whether Partial Birth Abortion Should Be Allowed)
“Answer the question,” Norman said.
“I am answering it. You want an answer, or are you going to keep talking over witnesses? What I am telling you is nobody would carry a pregnancy and then decide on a Monday, because they are bored, that they want to have an abortion. That’s ridiculous, and it’s inflammatory and what you’re saying, you’re talking about families who are in tough situations where folks have been excited about carrying a pregnancy. Most of the abortions that happen later in pregnancy are really tragedies where it’s really a disappointment for everyone involved.”
Fatima Goss Graves, the president of the National Women’s Law Center, characterized Norman’s questioning as “dangerous” since abortion providers receive threats on a daily basis due to “inflammatory and outrageous language.” The South Carolina representative argued it is “inflammatory” to label abortion as “health care.”
He then questioned the witnesses on whether an unborn child should be considered a human being in cases of homicide. Currently, 38 states have fetal homicide laws that define the killing of a pregnant woman a double homicide, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Over half of the states, 29, apply these laws to the earliest stages of fetal development.
“It is inflammatory when she says ‘healthcare,'” he argued. “This being said, do the three of y’all favor doing away with the laws that are on the books [that] if a mother is carrying a child, and is shot, is that homicide or should that be abolished too?”
“I have no idea what law you’re talking about,” Graves said. “One of the most dangerous times is being pregnant and that is in part because of the sort of violence that pregnant people sometimes experience.”
Norman argued that the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is the “greatest decision this Supreme Court has made” since it handed the right to regulate abortion back to the states. He criticized the rhetoric of some on the Left who argue that states would not allow physicians to take action if the pregnancy is a threat to the woman’s life or ectopic pregnancy.
“It is totally absurd,” he said. “The Supreme Court got it right. I hope each state will ban abortions, infanticide which the three of you are in agreement with.” Graves interjected saying she is not in favor of infanticide.
