The recent undercover video showing a Planned Parenthood official negotiating for the sale of the organs of aborted babies has caused a firestorm of outrage. But both political parties will use this scandal for political gain. Ron Paul remembers from Congress the bipartisan deal allowing US funding of abortions worldwide. And if "black lives matter" -- which they do -- why is the holocaust of millions of black abortions not being discussed?
The recent undercover video showing a Planned Parenthood official negotiating for the sale of the organs of aborted babies has caused a firestorm of outrage. But both political parties will use this scandal for political gain. Ron Paul remembers from Congress the bipartisan deal allowing US funding of abortions worldwide. And if "black lives matter" -- which they do -- why is the holocaust of millions of black abortions not being discussed?
The recent undercover video showing a Planned Parenthood official negotiating for the sale of the organs of aborted babies has caused a firestorm of outrage. But both political parties will use this scandal for political gain. Ron Paul remembers from Congress the bipartisan deal allowing US funding of abortions worldwide. And if "black lives matter" -- which they do -- why is the holocaust of millions of black abortions not being discussed?
Well, why don't you start by telling me where you used to pay it.
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With me today is Daniel McAdams.
Daniel, good to have you with us today.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
Good.
I'd like to talk a little bit today about what a lot of people are talking about.
And it is this grotesque scandal going on with Planned Parenthood.
I never think of them as being planning parenthood.
They're planning other things.
They're planning how not to become parents.
And many people have just seen the video, and it's been on TV a whole lot, how bad it really has gotten.
But there's two issues here.
One is the principle of abortion and right to life, and whether the fetus is human and whether killing the fetus is an act of violence, and how do you handle this?
That's one issue.
But another issue is who pays for this?
And I've argued that I think the far left, the pro-abortion people, are going to make a grand mistake, and this might represent this grand mistake, and that is forcing people who devoutly believe that taking this life is equivalent to killing a human being.
And they claim that the taxpayer ought to pay for it.
And then we hear that the taxpayer is paying over a half a billion dollars to Planned Parenthood to do this.
And we don't know a whole lot about that.
I think there's been some stories in the paper about it's even difficult to find out how this money is being spent.
Yeah, that's true.
You know, Mary Hansen, who writes for the Federalists, she was one of the first when this latest scandal broke, which is, as you know, the selling of the body parts, the organs of these unborn children.
She broke the story about federal funding.
And obviously, you know, she sent a freedom of information request to the government.
And as you know, these things can take years to process.
And so she requested an expedited process because the issue is in the news right now.
Everyone's talking about it.
Well, her request was denied for expedited FOIA processing.
And here was their reasoning.
This is a health and human services.
They said, this is not a breaking story of general public interest.
They only wish.
You know, obviously this is a big story.
Even, you know, everybody that's for abortion, we put them in one category of being leftists.
But there are some people who have a humanitarian instinct and they're doing well, and they might not even be for the funding.
And all of a sudden, you know, this comes up.
So this might dampen enthusiasm because there's moves already in the Congress to try to cut back.
But, you know, that's only part of it.
Because I think that we have to look at the big picture.
And the big picture is that we have the situation we have today, even the funding, because of two political parties, the Republicans and the Democrats.
I mean, when Republicans were in charge, they had the House, the Senate, and the Presidency.
They did nothing to cut back on this.
And I recall, and I'm sure you do too, when I was in Congress, there was funding in our foreign aid packages, which would go to doing abortions.
And the Conservative Republicans had an agreement with the left, will you grant us this Mexico language?
And we'll say that none of this money can be spent for abortion, only for birth control.
And the Republicans would go along with this, and everybody would be happy.
The Republicans were against abortion.
They stopped the funding, and the left got their money.
And then you ruined the party because you said all the money is fungible.
You gave them this for this, and it frees up money for that.
Well, and I wanted to make that point that you have to look at the whole picture.
You have to deny all funding because of that point you make.
It's fungible.
Yeah, they spend more money on birth control pills.
They have more money left over to do the abortion.
But the principle is so bad.
I mean, people can have a principle stand against abortions, one thing.
But they should have a principle stand that why are governments involved in this and taking money from one group and forcing them to pay for this.
So Republicans tend to work together.
You take the issue of welfare itself.
I mean, why do we have welfare?
Oh, it's all the Democrats.
Oh, sure.
When the Republicans, then they don't vote for any welfare.
They vote for welfare for poor and a lot of welfare for the rich.
But it's always this competition going on.
But I remember when I tried to cut that funding out, the people who became enraged were the pro-life Republicans because they had a deal set.
I was messing up their deal.
We were going to get the credit for stopping money being spent on abortions.
And at the same time, the Democrats would get the money.
Democrats didn't care.
They knew they were going to get the money.
But it was so bad that some of the top leaders in the right-to-life movement in Congress were furious with me.
One even would not vote for her.
He just ducked the vote because he didn't want to be seen voting against this funding.
That is pure hypocrisy.
Yeah, I remember when you raised your hand and you offered to cut all the funding.
And I know you won't say it, but it was Chris Smith and Henry Hyde, great champions of the pro-life movement.
And I remember the fury that rose in the room when you spoiled the party.
Well, yes, and unfortunately, it continues this way in Washington.
But you know, the other issue that comes up has to do with who gets aborted.
Well, some people say only poor people get aborted.
Well, that's not true at all.
Is it only unmarried girls?
Well, they get a lot, but a lot of married people get it.
But if you go by race, guess what?
Blacks get the most abortions.
And one of the stories that I have told that really got my attention was: you know, 1973 is when I gave my first political speech.
It had to do with, of all things, the Federal Reserve and money.
We had just gone through this episode of getting off the gold standard and putting on wage and price controls.
It was chaotic, high inflation, and high unemployment rate.
So I gave the speech at a Republican function, and a question came up about abortion.
I said, because Roe versus Wade came out in 73 that particular year.
And I took my position that I believed it was human life and to kill a human life was an act of aggression and I didn't support it.
And afterwards, the person didn't say this in public, but it was a middle-aged Republican businessman, typical Republican.
He came over and he says, Ron, he says, let me tell you, this is good.
He says, because this will mean that the blacks will be aborted.
And I thought, holy man.
And this was from a conservative Republican.
And, you know, I dismiss that.
That's not conceivable.
But when you look at these statistics, 16 million blacks have been aborted since 1973.
And all done in the name of humanitarianism and goodness and helping people.
Well, you know, this horrific sentiment that this gentleman expressed to you was not that different from the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Senger, who was a eugenicist.
She believed that Non-whites need to be killed, that people who are deformed need to be killed.
So, really, what he was saying is consistent with the founders of Planned Parenthood.
But, you know, on the blacks, it's interesting, I was looking at Pat Buchanan's column today, and it was very, you know, he makes a point, and it is a very good point.
The Black Lives Matter movement is expressing legitimate concern about the number of violent confrontations that young black men are having with police officers, and we know how those are turning out.
But he points out that the number of black men and boys killed by police officers every year is less than one-tenth of one percent of the number of blacks that are killed in the womb every year.
You know, and when you talk about the group that supports, you know, the abortion program, they're generally described as progressive.
I sort of like the word progressive.
I'd like to think of myself as being progressive in ideas, but that's not what they think.
This is so regressive, you know, using violence like this.
I mean, they were more advanced when Hippocrates lived, you know, and thought that doctors shouldn't be involved in this, but now doctors are involved in all kinds of things from torture to euthanasia and abortion.
And this film that we looked at is just the epitome of a physician talking like this.
But then there's the other thing that Republicans, you know, in spite of their inconsistencies that we already pointed out, there's many that are very consistent.
They believe sincerely in pro-life positions, but they just as sincerely believe that these young people, men and women now, should join the military, join the forces, defend liberty, and not only for defending our country, but for preemptive war.
Go 6,000 miles away and get involved in this.
And they depend on that.
And they see no inconsistency.
So I think a pro-life position is, yes, you protect the best you can the rights of the unborn.
And also when they're older, and some people put out statistics that more blacks percentage-wise die in war as well as in crimes.
That is a good hypocrisy that the left often points out about the pro-life Christian right-wing people is that they're pro-life until the kid is 18 and then they send him off.
Yeah.
You know, you spent a long career in medicine and you were intimately involved in this issue for a number of years.
Unborn Rights Debate00:04:02
And you even wrote a book about it, you know, and you've shared, I know, with me and with many others, some of your earlier experiences with this.
Yes, I've often mentioned that when I was in medical school from 57 to 61, had finished college, by the time I got out of medical school in 61, I had not heard the word abortion in my medical career.
They weren't talking about it, negative, positive.
It was just a non-issue.
By 1968, after the revolution of the 60s, and I claim that the law doesn't cause the abortions, that people's morality changes the abortion.
The solution will come from the people, not from the law.
But by 1968, I was in the residency and they were doing abortions, and it bothered me.
Because one time I walked in an operating room and they were doing, because we would do that to observe surgeries.
And here they were doing a C-section, but it was on a small baby.
And they lifted the baby out a couple pounds, but the baby cried and whimpered a little bit, and they put it in a bucket.
And it happened.
It lasted for five, ten minutes.
But everybody in the room just sort of pretended it didn't exist.
And that is when I decided I had to resolve this in my mind.
So I went and talked to the professor who was supportive of this.
And he said, well, you know, there are some very, very bad abnormalities, and it's just as well a boredom as to worry about it later on.
And that's what his argument was.
I said, yeah, but sometimes you can't tell for sure.
You might have to wait for birth.
At that time, we didn't have great ultrasound.
And he says, yeah, that's true.
We would wait for birth.
But then at birth, if you could tell that this child was grossly deformed, then you should kill the child that is born.
And wow.
I said, yeah, but I followed up with my concern.
I said, yeah, but we don't know about some of these diseases for a year.
He says, under those circumstances, maybe a year is the cutoff point.
And you can imagine with that attitude existing in the 60s, and here we have people selling body parts.
You know, it's pretty bad as far as I'm concerned.
But anyway, I think this issue is going to be around for a while.
Hopefully it resolves.
I hope we get more information.
I hope we get more people look at this based on principle and think more consciously about the right to life.
And truly, there's justification to saying an unborn has rights.
I, as a physician, if I harm the fetus, I can be sued, rightfully so.
If you're in an automobile accident, a woman loses her child and aborts, that child is recognized as a living human being.
If the man dies and the woman has the child, inheritance rights are established at conception.
So there's a lot of legal arguments that it is truly a live human being.
And if it is, the taking of that life is an act of aggression.
And there are always going to be difficult situations because they want to turn the argument to the day after conception, to the day before birth.
They don't want to, the pro-abortions never want to think about it a week or two or a month or two before birth.
It's always something vague.
It's not so vague now when we look at this story where they want to gently do the abortion to preserve the tissue and sell it so they can get their fancy automobiles.
And these are physicians talking.
It is a moral crisis.
This will not be solved by passing a law.
Right now, the law should be involved, and we certainly ought to defund all of this type of money that goes to the destruction of life.
Respect for all life is what we need if we want to live in a free society.
We cannot have respect for liberty if we don't have respect for life.