Mike Explains The Fallacy Of Granting Exceptions To Abortion Bans

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: Email | RSS

 

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – By the way, if you’re wondering who said this, it was Donald Trump that told this to Chuck Todd, that he is for exceptions.  And since Ronald Reagan was for them, then that makes them okay.  As I said, just because Reagan was for something, if Reagan was wrong, it doesn’t make it okay.  Check out today’s transcript for the rest….

FOLKS, a message from Mike – The Audio Clip of The Day files, Project 76 feature presentations, Church Doctrine audio & video clips and everything else on this site are supported by YOU. We have over 70, of my personally designed, written, produced and directed products for sale in the Founders Tradin’ Post, 24/7,  here. You can also support our efforts with a Founders Pass membership granting total access to years of My work for just .17 cents per day. Not convinced? Take the tour! Thanks for 18 years of mike church.com! – Mike

HERE’S YOUR FREE AUDIO PREVIEW OF THIS CLIP OF THE DAY – TO HEAR THE ENTIRE EPISODE JOIN FOUNDERS PASS NOW! FOR HUNDREDS MORE CLIPS, VISIT THE CLIP OF THE DAY ARCHIVE HERE

[private |FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76|Founding Brother|Founding Father|FP-Lifetime]

 

[/private]

 

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike:  Joel in Tennessee, Joel, are you there?  Joel is next on the Mike Church Show.

Caller Joel:  Thanks for having me on, Mr. Church.  I love your show, long-time listener.  I’m a physician and you were talking about health and safety of the mother as an indication for abortion.  I can tell you that that does not exist.  There is no accepted medical indication where abortion is a treatment of choice to save the life of a mother.  The treatment is delivery of the fetus.  That fallacy or argument or whatever you want to call it was made up basically by a group of lawyers at some point in the whole abortion debate.

Mike:  Do you know where?  You said somewhere in the —

Caller Joel:  I don’t know where —

Mike:  I’ve heard this before as well.  It always occurs to me whenever I hear that, whenever I hear someone say that, that that is a person that is compromised, is in error, and does not have the conviction that life begins at conception.  That to me, therefore, does not have that principle.  That to me is an indication of that because that’s a way to get out of it.  That is a way also to make way for other, to say and do or support and do other things that have disastrous consequences for life and upon life.  It’s another one of these political conveniences that are used by people that don’t want to make a stand.  They don’t want to pick a side.

Caller Joel:  No, they don’t.  You see the talking heads on the news shows and that’s the fallback position for the pro-death side.  [mocking] “You’re against the safety of the mother.  You want the mother to die.”  No, but nobody ever comes back and points out that there’s no medically accepted indication for an abortion.  Nobody comes back and says that.  It doesn’t exist.  You can get the obstetrics text book of your choice.  It’s not in there.

Mike:  This is what usually happens.  By the way, if you’re wondering who said this, it was Donald Trump that told this to Chuck Todd, that he is for exceptions.  And since Ronald Reagan was for them, then that makes them okay.  As I said, just because Reagan was for something, if Reagan was wrong, it doesn’t make it okay.  That’s a lousy way to defend an errant point of view.  This is one of these so-called teachable moments that we can have here, Joel.  You can learn from this precisely because of something that you just said.  Just think about this.  [mocking] “I am for the exception of rape and incest and saving the life of the mother.”  Does anyone ever ask the question, the follow-up question: Are there any instances in which you know that killing an unborn child has been a treatment to save the life of a mother?  No one asks the question.  This is one of these — if you study just a little bit of philosophy, a little bit of logic, in philosophy the major premise — the major premise is that what Trump said or what others say is true, and that is that you can save the life of the mother by murdering the yet-to-be-born child.  That’s the major premise.  It is presented as though it is already a conclusion.

Do you realize how many things are presented as though it is already a conclusion when in fact there has not been a discussion of, a logical exploration of, or any kind of deliberation or debate over whatsoever?  But if you can present it as something that is already known and is agreed upon, then anyone like me that would say that’s not a valid exception, that’s wrong, is then [mocking] “You’re just being doctrinaire.  You’re just being hard-headed.  Now you’re just being immovable or intractable or obstinate.”  No, no one ever debated the prior question.  And because it was intimated and you just get to present it as though it’s true doesn’t make it true.  If you try to make it so that — if you tried to prove that it’s true, I bet you can’t.  This is how a lot of these war on police arguments work, too.  They work the same way.  It’s a foregone conclusion.

End Mike Church Show Transcript