for the first time since roe v. wade in the late 1990's, something dramatic happened. as we were talking about, remember what it was? a baby in the womb at least 20 weeks with arms and legs and eyes and ears, it is a baby. and it was being delivered all but the head and killed. for the first time, the folks on the other side could not ignore that what was being killed was a baby. it was right there in the doctor's hands as the baby was almost delivered and killed by the doctor. for the first time since roe v. wade, attitudes on -- in public opinion polls changed about abortion and the continue to change. why? because we lost. had bill clinton signed that bill when we first passed it, no one would ever have heard of partial birth abortion but he did not. god blessed us for fighting the fight. we continued and we got it passed, overruling the supreme court and the supreme court said it was wrong and we passed a bill and said you are wrong. the first section said why they were wrong. [applause] that procedure is banned. we

for the first time since roe v. wade in the late 1990's, something dramatic happened. as we were talking about, remember what it was? a baby in the womb at least 20 weeks with arms and legs and eyes and ears, it is a baby. and it was being delivered all but the head and killed. for the first time, the folks on the other side could not ignore that what was being killed was a baby. it was right there in the doctor's hands as the baby was almost delivered and killeby the doctor. for the first time since roe v. wade, attitudes on- in public opinion polls changed about abortion and the continue to change. why? because we lost. hadill clinton signed that bill when we first passed it, no one would ever have heard of partial birth abortion but he did not. god blessed us for fighting the fight. we continued and we got it passed, overruling the supreme court and the supreme court said it was wrong and we passed a bill and said you are wrong. the first section said why they were wrong. [applause] that procedure is banned. we were b

for the first time since roe v. wade in the late 1990's, something dramatic happened. as we were talking about, remember what it was? a baby in the womb at least 20 weeks with arms and legs and eyes and ears, it is a baby. and it was being delivered all but the head and killed. for the first time, the folks on the other side could not ignore that what was being killed was a baby. it was right there in the doctor's hands as the baby was almost delivered and killed by the doctor. for the first time since roe v. wade, attitudes on -- in public opinion polls changed about abortion and the continue to change. why? because we lost. had bill clinton signed that bill when we first passed it, no one would ever have heard of partial birth abortion but he did not. god blessed us for fighting the fight. we continued and we got it passed, overruling the supreme court and the supreme court said it was wrong and we passed a bill and said you are wrong. the first section said why they were wrong. [applause] that procedure is banned. we

for the first time since roe v. wade in the late 1990's, something dramatic happened. as we were talking about, remember what it was? a baby in the womb at least 20 weeks with arms and legs and eyes and ears, it is a baby. and it was being delivered all but the head and killed. for the first time, the folks on the other side could not ignore that what was being killed was a baby. it was right there in the doctor's hands as the baby was almost delivered and killed by the doctor. for the first time since roe v. wade, attitudes on -- in public opinion polls changed about abortion and the continue to change. why? because we lost. had bill clinton signed that bill when we first passed it, no one would ever have heard of partial birth abortion but he did not. god blessed us for fighting the fight. we continued and we got it passed, overruling the supreme court and the supreme court said it was wrong and we passed a bill and said you are wrong. the first section said why they were wrong. [applause] that procedure is banned. we

they're not what i'm saying this is all the thing i want to know oh ok so the way the reason that roe v wade was decided the way it was is because it was inconclusive as to when human life began and now as we have technology showing that human life does begin at conception people like sam are very squeamish about getting in so please stop the program last time we had on this you know of course in my last time on the show she said it would be to do you all the issues we talked about when life began let's reality i was over here have her that's time and i'm telling you right now you're putting words in my mouth i did never said those things the bottom line is did you have a row versus wade was passed because women were dropping like flies because we don't give them access have there to legal and safe abortions they're going to do it anyway that's not what you think if i had not have to try to answer your question or if life begins at the moment of conception at birth fertilization of you that you're suggesting i am suggesting that i'm sitting out in the front lines should we be going to the in

the scholarship on this has been and the emergence in the late 70's not directly in response to roe v. wade. that is a misconception directly in response to that. that was part of the story but there were other things happening as well in fact some of the earlier court decisions taking out of school for a civil happened in the 60's. those start to make some movement towards the citizens mobilizing but that emerges more powerfully into the 80's and i would actually say that it seems to have peaked and perhaps in 2004. i don't want to suggest that it has peaked and then disappearing because with the pattern has been usually is a rise and fall in the influence of the religious right such that was especially journalists they like to write the obituary of the religious right every six to eight years and then sure enough, two years later it emerges in a more powerful forum so it's been a fairly recent phenomenon and one that has come on and fallen off and come on again. >> and is there a generational divide in terms of what resonates? >> in terms of residence, yes. so, the polling suggests the yo

but i also believed very strongly in a woman's right to choose, so i was thrilled when roe v. wadepassed and, in fact, marched on washington in 1992 and again in 2004, you know, a woman's right to the choose. but a problem that i see now when you said the women's movement isn't doing anything, what women's movement? i think young women don't recognize what women went through before there was the right to choose and to get that passed. and so they just take it as something that they'll never lose, but they are in danger of losing it. so young women really need to get busy. >> well, i think that that's why it's so incumbent upon those of us who have been through those trials and tribulations to share our stories. it is really important for us to share those stories generation to generation so that young women do know. but i find that young women today are -- i really see an upsurge in interest, and they -- but, you know, every generation has to speak in its own tongues. and it's not going to be the same fight that we fought, and it's not going to be the same language even that we use

back when i was in high school the whole issue of abortion began to emerge before roe v. wade because states were considering whether they should legalize abortion or not. and there was a couple in cincinnati by the name of dr. jack and barbara wilky, he a physician, she a nurse, who were at forefront of this movement. and they gathered people like my parents and other people around their coffee table to discuss how we could protect ohio from legalizing abortion. and then of course roe v. wade hit in 1973. and the campaign escalated to a national debate. but along the way and they weren't the only once, by the way, mr. speaker, there were people all across coffee tables all across america debating how we're going to protect life. but it was barbara, among the group, and they were talking on the telephone, it was before email and blackberries and even fax machines, were talking on the phone long distance with one another, but it was barbara at her kitchen table to jack that said one day, you know, jack, i just don't understand this whole debate. my gosh, we're protected, our na

but i also believed very strongly in a woman's right to choose, so i was thrilled when roe v. wade passed and, in fact, marched on washington in 1992 and again in 2004, you know, a woman's right to the choose. but a problem that i see now when you said the women's movement isn't doing anything, what women's movement? i think young women don't recognize what women went through before there was the right to choose and to get that passed. and so they just take it as something that they'll never lose, but they are in danger of losing it. so young women really need to get busy. >> well, i think that that's why it's so incumbent upon those of us who have been through those trials and tribulations to share our stories. it is really important for us to share those stories generation to generation so that young women do know. but i find that young women today are -- i really see an upsurge in interest, and they -- but, you know, every generation has to speak in its own tongues. and it's not going to be the same fight that we fought, and it's not going to be the same language even that we us

free exercise clause, the establishment clause, jurisprudence, he expressed strong opposition to roe v. wade into the clinic access law. he testified before congress that he believed that the violence against women's act was unconstitutional. his writings on the actions of federal district court judge john spree so in a quitting abortion protesters could not be read as anything other than praise for the extralegal behavior of both defendants and the judge. and he was confirmed and members on the site gave him the benefit of the doubt. >> madam chairman, i appreciate that. i don't dispute anything you said, and a deadly judge mcconnell did what he promised to do. my only point is there's no recourse for the committee or for the senate is voting to confirm a nominee who doesn't do who doesn't do what they promise to do. so that is, that's the contrary we find ourselves in. >> well, i don't want of a back and forth, but professor luke, can promise but he can't do know. he can only once get appointed and then you measure that. there's no way he has said he would. >> and again, thank you for allo

see, after roe v. wade people at my kitchen table and in my family were talking about money, federal money being used for abortion and, i mean, my mom and dad were mad, shoot, even i was mad. and henry hyde was mad too and in 1976 he offered the hyde amendment and it simply said that federal taxpayer dollars were barred from funding abortion period, case closed. and that amendment has been consistent with the policy of this house ever since. so i wanted to meet that hero, that gentle man. and when you walk into my office you see a picture of he and i on the last day that he served in this house. of all the people that i've ever met he's truly my hero. anyway, every year we debate this and even in the health care bill it was a hotly contested issue and after the bill was voted on, the president had an executive order that at this point still stops the federal funding of abortion in health care, we believe. but that's a very fragile piece of paper and i really believe this body needs to recodify in the health

. >> host: would you overturn roe v. wade?gr >> guest: absolutely. i think it was one of the greatest abominations in jurisprudence in the history of the court. >> host: why? >> guest: because it creates a legal fiction that a human being is not a person simply because it happens to be in a particulae place. and we do that. the rationale that we're seeing actually play out in courtth decisions is that, well, if, yoi know, we saw it in the partial-birth abortion case which i was heavily involved in. that if a child in the womb can be killed, well, how about a h child almost in theow womb? and i remember having this long debate with barbara boxer on the floor of the senate during the partial-birth abortion debate, and i said what if child's foot is all that's left in the mother, can you kill the child?0 and she spent 20 minuteser refusing to answer that question. thi and eventually she said, well, no, you can't. and i said, well, you know, what if only the toe is left in? and so she just, all of these is irrelevant. i said, no, this is exactly thee poi

re-examining the first amount free exercise, the establishment clause, jurisprudence, strong opposition to roe v. wadefied that the violence against women is unconstitutional. his writings on the action of federal district court in accounting according protesters could not be read as in addition other than phrase for the extralegal behavior of the department and the judge. and he was confirmed and remembers on this side gave him the benefit of the doubt. >> madam chairman, i appreciate that. i don't dispute. i believe judge the did what he said. voting to confirm the nominee who doesn't do what they promise to do. and so that is the -- that's the quandary that we find ourselves in. >> well, i don't want to have a back and forth. professor liu can be appointed and there's no way to measure he has said he would. >> again, thank you for allowing me to just briefly respond. we've had the experience in the case of the sport justice who came in in the case of the second amount and the right to keep and bare arms. said it was an individual right. and subsequently wrote a decision on the court and disavowed t