>> IN THE
>> IN THE LONG DEBATE OVER ABORTION RIGHTS, ONE RARE AREA OF AGREEMENT GENERALLY IS OVER
THE RIGHT TO ABORT IN CASES
WHERE A WOMAN GOT PREG NAPT
DURING A SEX CRIME LIKE RAPE,
INCEST, TRAFFICKING OR BY
COERCION.
>> THE BILL HEADED TO THE SENATE
HAS NO EXCEPTIONS LIKE THAT,
DESPITE SOME OF THE 14
AMENDMENTSES FLOATED BY
LAWMAKERS TO ADD SOMETHING LIKE
THAT.
ALL OF THEM FAILED.
STATE REPRESENTATIVE DAVID
BERRERO REPUBLICAN FROM SWEET
WATER VOTED TO ADVANCE THE
ABORTION BILL IN THAT POST
MIDNIGHT VOTE.
HE IS HERE RIGHT THERE WITH US
TODAY.
SO GOOD TO SEE YOU.
AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING
WITH US.
>> REPRESENTATIVE, GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING.
>> GLAD TO WELCOME YOU BACK.
WELL, YOU JUST HEARD GLENNA SAY
THAT THERE ARE NO OF THOSE
EXCEPTIONS IN THE FLORIDA BILL
WHICH YOU VOTED FOR, WHY
SHOULDN’T THERE BE EXCEPTIONS
FOR RAPE, INCEST AND OTHER
PREGNANCIES COMMITTED DURING A
SEX CRIME.
>> SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
HAVING ME, MICHAEL.
AND THIS WAS ACTUALLY THE VOTE
THAT I’M THE MOST PROUD OF IN MY
TENURE HERE AS A STATE
REPRESENTATIVE IN FLORIDA.
YOU KNOW, THOSE WHO ARE FOR
ABORTION, THEY TURN THEIR EYES
TOWARD THIS INCONVENIENT TRUTH
AND THE RAULT IS THAT-- REALITY
IS THAT UNBORN CHILDREN, I SAY
CHILDREN, THEY’RE NOT JUST
FETUSES ARE PERSONS.
THEY’RE INDIVIDUALS, JUST LIKE
YOU AND I AM.
AND "ROE VERSUS WADE" WAS
DECIDED, NEARLY 50 YEARS AGO.
WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHY, WHERE
THEY WERE AT, AND THEY DIDN’T
COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THIS
WAS A PERSON WITHOUT DESERVES
CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.
BUT WHERE WE ARE TODAY, THE
ADVANCEMENTS THAT WE HAVE MADE
WITH SCIENCE AND ULTRA SOUNDS
AND IN THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THESE
UNBORN CHILDREN CAN SUCK THEIR
THUMB AT 15 WEEKS K FEEL PAIN AT
15 WEEKS.
>> HAVE A HEARTBEAT.
>> REPRESENTATIVE, I’M GOING TO
HAVE TO INTERRUPT YOU HERE, WE
RESPECT YOUR POINT OF VIEW.
WE UNDERSTAND.
I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT ARE
YOU SPEAKING AS AN ARTICLE OF
FAITH, AS A CATHOLIC WHO
BELIEVES THAT LIFE BEGINS AT
CONCEPTION.
THAT IS A, YOU KNOW, PERFECTLY
FINE THING TO BELIEVE AND WE
RESPECT IT.
THE QUESTION I ASK THOUGH IS
WHEN A WOMAN GETS PREGNANT IN A
CRIME HEN SHE IS RAPED, OR A
MEMBER OF THE FAMILY IS GUILTY
OF INCEST, WHY SHOULDN’T THERE
BE AN EXCEPTION SO THAT THAT
CHILD CAN BE ABORTED, THE MOTHER
DOES NOT WANT THAT CHILD.
>> WELL, LOOK, THE EXEMPTIONS
THAT BELIEVE IN THE LAW ARE NOT
NULLIFIED.
I BELIEVE THIS LAW IS SILENT TO
THOSE EXCEPTIONS.
SO THE NOTION THAT THIS LAW
DOESN’T ALLOW FOR THOSE
EXCEPTIONS, I THINK ARE BASED ON
THIS PLE MISS THAT-- PREMISE
THAT THEY DON’T ALREADY EXIST.
AND THE FACT IS THAT THESE
EXCEPTIONS ALREADY EXIST IN THE
LAW.
WHAT THIS LAW SAYSES IS THAT
AFTER 15 WEEKS GIVEN THE CURRENT
EXIST IN THE LAW, ABORTION WITH
WOULD BE ILLEGAL, THAT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING OF IT AND WHAT I
WOULD TELL YOU IS EVEN AS
SOMEBODY WHO IS ADAMANTLY
PROLIFE, I DON’T THINK, AND
AGAIN I RESPECT THAT EXPERIENCE
AND I EMPATHIZE WITH THOSE WHO
HAVE GONE THROUGH THAT VERY
TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCE, AND AS
REPRESENTATIVE BARTELMAN WAS
TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, YOU KNOW,
THIS IS A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT
DECISION.
HOWEVER IF YOU ARE A PERSON, YOU
DESERVE THE FULL CONSTITUTIONAL
PROEX IT-- PROTEKS OF THE LAW,
NO ONE IS GOING TO SAY TO
SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN BORN IN THE
PRODUCT OF A RAPE INCIDENT THAT
THAT PERSON SHOULD BE KILLED OR
THE MOTHER OF THAT PERSON SHOULD
HAVE THE RIGHT TO DILL THAT BORN
PERSON, FOR THE VERY SAME REASON
YOU SHOULDN’T BE ABLE TO ABORT
SOMEONE WHO IS THE PRODUCT OF
RAPE.
IF IT IS A PERSON T DESERVES
CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION.
YOU SHOULDN’T BE ABLE TO DEPRIVE
THAT PERSON AS DUE PROCESS OF
LAW.
>> THERE WAS A LOT OF THAT
CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENT IN THE
DEBATE AS WELL, TO YOUR POINT.
BUT I’M INTERESTED IN TALKING A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE NUANCES OF
BOTH SCIENCE AND RELIGION
BECAUSE THE SCIENCE THAT YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT IS ACTUALLY
DEBATED WITH BY SOME SCIENTISTS
WHO DO FEEL THAT THIS, A FETUS
IS NOT VIABLE UNTIL WELL INTO
THE SECOND TRI MUSTER.
AND ALSO THE BIEB SELL NOT ALL
THAT CLEAR, THERE IS A PORTION
OF THE BIEB THEAL SAYS LIFE
BEGINS AT FIRST BREATHE WHICH OF
COURSE WOULDN’T BE UNTIL BIRTH.
SO THOSE THINGS ASIDE, I’M
INTERESTED IN THIS EXCEPTION,
THAT IS VERY POPULAR, THAT THAT
THE EXCEPTION TO THIS RULE,
COUNTRYWIDE AND ACROSS THE AISLE
IS A VERY POPULAR EXCEPTION TO
STRICT ABORTION RULES.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS
TO REPRESENTATIVE GROHL’S POINT,
VERY LIMITED PERCENTAGE OF THOSE
PREGNANCIESES ARE IN THE TOTAL
NUMBER.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE AFTER 15
WEEK ABORTIONSES IN THAT VERY
SMALL PERCENTAGE, HALF OF THOSE
IN THE SECOND 15 WEEKSES, HALF
OF THEM ARE THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN
RAPED OR VICTIMS OF INCEST OR
HUMAN TRAFFIC OR COERCION.
AND I THINK THAT CONTEXT IS VERY
INTERESTING.
WHEN IT HAS TO DO WITH POSSIBLE
TRAUMA AND DECISION MAKING.
COULD YOU WEIGH IN ON THAT,
PLEASE?
>> WELL, I WOULD JUST SAY THIS.
THIS LAW COULD POTENTIALLY SAVE
ABOUT A THOUSAND UNBORN CHILDREN
AFTER WE PASS IT, AFTER THE
GOVERNOR SIGNS IT.
EVEN DESPITE THE EXCEPTIONS THAT
ALREADY EXIST.
SO IF A WOMAN HAS A FATAL FETAL
ABNORMALITY, SOMETHING THAT
COULD LIKELY LEAD TO AN IMMINENT
DEATH IMMEDIATELY UPON BIRTH
AFTER THE CHILD, THEN SHE WOULD
BE ABLE TO ABORT, THAT IS WHAT
CURRENTLY EXISTS BEEN THAT
EXCEPTION IT BUT EVEN DESPITE
THAT, IT STILL, WORTH PASSING
THIS BILL BECAUSE YOU WOULD
SAVE, LET’S ASSUME IT WAS 50%
LIKE YOU SAID, YOU WOULD STILL
SAVE AT LEAST 500 UNBORN
CHILDREN EVERY YEAR.
I WOULD PASS ANY BILL THAT WOULD
SAVE AT LEAST ONE CHILD.
AND THIS IS MY FUNDAMENTAL
QUESTION, GLENNA, AND I WILL ASK
THIS DIRECTLY TO YOU, WHO ARE
YOU INSIDE OF YOUR MOTHER’S
WOMB.
WHAT WERE YOU?
Z WHEN WERE YOU SUCKING YOUR
THUMB INSIDE OF YOUR MOTHER’S
WOMB, WHEN YOU COULD HEAR THE
NOISES AND THE MUSIC THAT WAS
PLAYING OUTSIDE ABOUT YOU.
>> WELL, ACTUALLY, IF ARE YOU
ASKING ME THAT SHALL.
>> WHO WERE YOU.
>> I WILL ANSWER THAT SINCE YOU
ASKED ME.
AND I DON’T REMEMBER ANY OF
THAT.
I DON’T KNOW THAT I DID.
AND THAT IS KIND OF THE THING.
WE JUST DON’T KNOW AT THAT
POINT.
CAN WE STOP A MOMENT BECAUSE I
WANT TO PLAY YOUR COLLEAGUE
DANAH-- A REPUBLICAN FROM
ST. LUSTY COUNTY, ALSO REVEALED
SOMETHING REALLY TRAUMATIC
DURING THAT PUBLIC FLOOR DEBATE.
AND LET’S ALL TAKE A LISTEN TO A
CLIP OF HER STORY.
>> I’VE BEEN RAPED AND I’VE HAD
AN ABORTION.
AND I WAS ALWAYS PROLIFE UNTIL I
HAD A CHOICE.
AND THEN HI A CHOICE AND I
SELFISHLY MADE THE CHOICE TO
HAVE AN ABORTION.
AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT I HAVE
REGRETTED EVERY DAY SINCE.
NOBODY AT PLANNED PARENTHOOD
TRIED TO TALK ME OUT OF IT.
NOBODY OFFERED ME MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES.
>> CAN YOU-- HOW DO YOU HEAR
THAT, DO YOU HEAR THAT, WELL,
MAYBE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
REALLY IS THE HEADLINE HERE.
HOW DO YOU HEAR THAT?
>> DANAH SAY HERO.
AND JUST LIKE ALL THOSE WHO ARE
SHARING THEIR VERY PERSONAL AND
TRAUMATIC, EVEN, STORIESES THAT
WE’RE SHARING ON THE HOUSE
FLOOR, THEY ARE EXPERIENCES THAT
I CANNOT RELATE TO.
AND I WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO
RELATE TO.
IT IS TOOK A LOT OF COURAGE TO
BE ABLE TO SHARE THOSE WORDS BUT
WHAT DANAH SAID, HAVING AN
ABORTION DOES NOT TAKE AWAY THE
FACT THAT THIS IS A PERSON.
AND IT MAKES YOU WONDER WHO THIS
PERSON COULD HAVE BEEN HAD I NOT
ABORTED.
THE REASON WHY THERE IS SO MUCH
REGRET POST ABORTION IS BECAUSE
WE REALIZE THAT WE’RE TAKING THE
LIFE OF AN INNOCENT PERSON.
nd IF WE’RE TAKING THE LIFE
OF AN INNOCENT PERSON, IT
SHOULDN’T BE LEGAL TO DO SO.
AND 50IERS HAVE PASSED SINCE
"ROE VERSUS WADE."
AND WE SEE, THE SCIENCE SHOWS,
IT IS SO UNDENIABLE THAT THIS IS
THE SEPARATE INDIVIDUAL HUMAN
BEING.
AND THEREFORE SHOULD HAVE
CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AND
THAT IS WHY WE SHOULD PASS THIS,
CONTINUE TO PASS LAWS.
>> WELL, I DO WANT IT TO POINT
OUT, I OBVIOUSLY AM NO MEDICAL
EXPERTS BUT SCIENTISTS DIVIDED
ON WHETHER THAT FETUS IS A
VIABLE HUMAN BEING UNTIL 24
WEEKS, WHICH OF COURSE AS YOU
WELL KNOW IS WHAT THE LAW IN
FLORIDA AND MOST OF THE UNITED
STATES HAS BEEN FOR THE LAST 50
YEARS.
DAVID, LET ME ASK YOU THIS
QUESTION.
THE SUPREME COURT IS GOING TO
ISSUE A DECISION IN THE NEXT
COUPLE OF MONTHS ON THE
MISSISSIPPI LAW WHICH SETS A 15
LIMIT, 15 WEEK LIMIT FOR AN
ABORTION.
BUT WHY DID THE FLORIDA
LEGISLATURE FEEL COMPELLED TO
MOVE FORWARD BEFORE THE SUPREME
COURT ISSUED ITS RULING.
>> WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT WE’RE
ALL ANTICIPATING AND BY THE WAY
FLORIDA IS NOT THE ONLY ONE,
THERE IS A SMALL HANDFUL OF
STATES THAT ARE NOW MOVED PASSED
15 WEEK ABORTION BAN IN
ANTICIPATION OF-- AND I THINK WE
REALIZE THAT "ROE VERSUS WADE"
AND THE SUBSEQUENT PLANNED
PARENTING VERSUS CASEY WERE
DECIDED WRONG AND THEY ARE
REALLY UNTENABLE LEGAL STANDARDS
FOR THE STATESES TO ABIDE BY.
IF YOU USE VIABILITY MORE, AS
TIME GOES BY TECHNOLOGY
ADVANCES, IF IT WILL SHOW THAT
"ROE VERSUS WADE" SHOULDN’T BE
USED BECAUSE AT SOME POINT WE’RE
GOING TO SEE, WE ALREADY HAVE
SEEN THAT CHILDREN HAVE SURVIVED
OUTSIDE OF THE WOMB AT 20
WEEKSES OF GESTATION AND AS
SCIENCE ADVANCES AND TECHNOLOGY
ADVANCES AND THE ABILITY TO
SUPPORT AN UNBORN CHILD OUTSIDE
AFTER HE HAS BEEN DELIVERED,
THAT COULD VERY WELL LEAD TO TEN
WEEKS THEN FIVE WEEKS THEN 0
WEEKS.
IF YOU USE THAT VIABILITY
STANDARD YOU WOULD PROBABLY BE
ABLE TO SAY THAT YOU SHOULDN’T
HAVE ABORTION FROM THE MOMENT OF
CONCEPTION BECAUSE THAT CHILD IS
VIABLE FROM THE MOMENT OF
CONCEPTION.
>> AN ARGUMENT WE WILL CONTINUE
TO WATCH.
WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT,
DAVID, WE APPRECIATE YOU AND IT
IT IS GREAT TO SEE YOU AND THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING WITH US TO
TALK ABOUT WHAT IS FOR A LOT OF
PEOPLE VERY DIFFICULT TO TALK
ABOUT.