In a recent interview with NBC’s Hallie Jackson, Harris was asked if there were any restrictions on abortion that she would accept. “So, as a question of pragmatism then, what concessions would be on the table?” Jackson asked. “Religious exemptions, for example? Is that something you would consider if Republicans control Congress?”
Harris replied, “I don’t think we should be making concessions when we’re talking about a fundamental freedom to make decisions about your own body.” She further added:
“I’m not going to engage in hypotheticals because we could go with a variety of scenarios. Let’s just start with the fundamental fact. A basic freedom has been taken from the women of America: the freedom to make decisions about their own body. And that cannot be negotiable, which is that we need to put back in the protections of Roe v. Wade, and that is it.”
Kamala Harris argues there should be zero compromises or limits to abortions in America….
NBC’s @HallieJackson: “So, as a question of pragmatism then, what concessions would be on the table? Religious exemptions, for example? Is that something you would consider if Republicans… pic.twitter.com/AT4JGVrbm0
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) October 22, 2024
So the essential argument being made here appears to be that no one should have the right to refuse to participate in abortion — not even under the defense of religious freedom, religious exemption, or of conscience rights. Would this mean that in a Harris administration, religious groups will be forced to pay for the killing of preborn children through their insurance plans, for example, despite their clear opposition to it? Would this mean a doctor who refuses to participate in committing abortions (exercising his or her own ‘bodily autonomy’ in choosing not to take life) would be banned from practicing under the Harris administration? […]
— Read More: www.liveaction.org
