
<p>During a debate on abortion, Florida Congressman Brian Mast placed a $20 bill on the desk and announced that “Any one of you or your colleagues wants to speak up and tell us when life begins, it&#8217;s sitting here for you.&#8221;</p>



<p>Mast knew his money was safe because in the 50 years that abortion has been a major controversial issue in America – since the Roe v. Wade decision – no advocate for terminating the life of an evolving human being has been willing or able to answer that question definitively – scientifically.</p>



<p>I know that from my research and from my own similar inquiry to abortion advocates. ; The essential question underlying the entire abortion is when is that magical moment when a developing human being transforms from a disposable piece of flesh to a person with all the inalienable constitutional rights of a human being? ; It is the difference between elective surgery and murder – potentially genocide.</p>



<p>The assumption of the pro-abortion community is that the life in the womb is valueless. ; It is not a human being. ; “It has no rights to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” ; They will tell you that they do not see it as a human being. ; Well duh! ; If they did, they would be condoning murder. ; Personally, I do not believe those having abortions – or performing abortions – are guilty of murder in a civic and legal sense only because they have been led to believe the fetus is not a person.</p>



<p>BUT … to preserve their belief they must avoid, at all costs, any discussion or consideration that the unborn IS human and IS entitled to life as a basic right. ; They do not engage in that debate because they know that they cannot address the issue of when a developing human is imbued with the rights of personhood. ; They cannot win that argument. ; They cannot maintain their belief if forced to address the biological facts. ; They must remain in the vagueness of their delusion to maintain their belief … their decency … their proclaimed moral ground.</p>



<p>Like Mast, I have frequently challenged pro-abortion folks with that question – although not with a $20 bill. ; In friendly dialogue, they simply retreat to their belief and refrain from further discussion. ; In less friendly discussions, they blow up … distract … attack … and get out of the debate. ; In either case, it is the same result. ; Not only the avoidance of an answer but a personal fear of even considering the answer&#8230;</p>



<p>When does a developing human in the womb become a citizen with rights and protections is the singularly most critical question. ; Once that fetus in the womb obtains personhood, the entire justification for abortion-on-demand collapses. ; The economic situation of the mother or any inconvenience caused by the birthing process are no longer justifications for terminating the life of that individual – that person. ; The unborn child I suddenly imbued with all the rights and legal protections of the recently born child.</p>



<p>Our society terminates the life of evolving humans without any sound scientific specificity as to when that change takes place. ; In fact, the transformation point jumps around according to the arbitrary political and social zeitgeist of the day. ; What was once considered a legal abortion is later deemed to be murder. ; And you can see those willy-nilly determinations in court records.</p>



<p>Mast made an important point in again drawing attention to the pro-abortion lobby’s inability to fix a time in gestation when that thing in the womb becomes a person. ; As usual, none of his Democrat colleagues claimed the prize. ; As usual, they went on the attack.</p>



<p>It was reported that Mast’s challenge left Democrat Congresswoman Jackie Speier of California (of course) nearly speechless. ; Despite her self-proclaimed inability to speak, Speier had a lot to say.</p>



<p><em>&#8220;Uh&#8230; it gets more painful every single day. When you think about it, you&#8217;ve got an attorney general (Todd Rokita) in Indiana who has smeared a healthcare professional in that state who did exactly what she was supposed to do in providing an abortion to a ten-year-old. But he was gonna bring charges against her. We have a colleague on the other side of the aisle who is now putting down $20 bills as if we&#8217;re gonna race over there to get that $20 bill to answer his question. ; I mean, what are we doing here?! Have we lost it? ; This bill simply codifies what is interpreted in the Constitution in the 5th Amendment. Now, we have Justice Kavanaugh, who said, was asked the question, &#8216;may a state bar a resident of the state from traveling to another state? The answer is no.&#8217; But interestingly enough, the right to travel – those words – are not in the 5th Amendment. So, if we have an originalist Court, we do have to pass this bill.&#8221;</em></p>



<p>That from a nearly speechless woman. ; It appears Speier has been taking word-salad lessons from Vice President Harris. ; But I digress.</p>



<p>Speier did not like Mast’s “theatrics.” ; Theatrics on the floor of the House? ; Heaven forbid!! ; Ah … wait. ; Was Speier part of a Democratic Party that interrupted the work of the House with a sit-in? ; If that was not “theatrics” it must have been an insurrection by today’s definition. ; Ooops! ; Again, I digress.</p>



<p>There are two problems with politically selecting an arbitrary day for the transition to personhood. ; The first is that it is arbitrary and subject to change. ; We once believed life began at birth. ; Medicine and technology now suggest personhood occurs when the fetus can survive outside the womb with general care. ; There are theories of brainwave activity, fetal heartbeat, and the presence of pain. ; None of these provide a definitive answer. ; And yet, there are those on the extreme edge of abortion advocacy who would rip apart a fully formed baby that is at full term.</p>



<p>The second problem is what I call the “previous day” issue. ; If you select any day in the gestation period, the fetus is essentially unchanged from the previous day. ; There is no distinction upon which to make a rational or scientific determination. ; The only truly exceptional moment I … conception. ; That I hen the male and female DNA and all … that I all … the trait of a human being are in place. There can be rational and moral arguments for allowing abortion where the mother’s life I at risk … in cases of rape and incest.</p>



<p>Mast struck at the heart of the issue. ; When does the evolving human in the womb attain the status of personhood – with all the rights and protections? ; Until that can be resolved in a scientific or rational manner, Speier’s indignant response to Mast’s question is irrelevant. ; ;</p>



<p>So, there ‘tis.</p>



<p><strong>&#8216;Have we lost it?&#8217;: Jackie Speier rips House Republican for flashing cash during abortion rights bill debate</strong></p>



<figure class="wp-block-image"><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/RSPxE8lHccUmvEd71-u8kZfhNIqDR7DODrQawM6sUwDXngo3q6NXToQpjiBqar7A2JdT1fGQu6rbQeAFiA_kbfaJG3eqQ_cXWUzkI4dgmcMpfbBKu3Y4sZbKNcohb0i2Itth2Fxcf6EDwyu9YVo1nA" alt="'Have we lost it?': Jackie Speier rips House Republican for flashing cash during abortion rights bill debate"/></figure>



<p>© ;AlterNet&#8217;Have we lost it?&#8217;: Jackie Speier rips House Republican for flashing cash during abortion rights bill debate</p>



<p>United States Congressman Brian Mast (R-Florida) on Friday attempted to coerce Democrats in the House of Representatives into validating right-wing talking points about abortion by flashing cold, hard cash.</p>



<p>Mast performed his stunt during a floor debate over House Resolution 8297, which if it passes would protect the right to interstate travel to get an abortion.</p>



<p>&#8220;I got a $20 bill here. It&#8217;s not worth as much as it used to be worth. I&#8217;ll put it down here on the table. Any one of you or your colleagues wants to speak up and tell us when life begins, it&#8217;s sitting here for you,&#8221; Mast boasted.</p>



<p>Mast&#8217;s theatrics left Congresswoman Jackie Speier (D-California) nearly speechless.</p>



<p>&#8220;Uh&#8230; it gets more painful every single day. When you think about, you&#8217;ve got an [attorney general] in Indiana who has smeared a healthcare professional in that state who did exactly what she was supposed to do in providing an abortion to a ten-year-old. But he [Todd Rokita] was gonna bring charges against her. We have a colleague on the other side of the aisle who is now putting down $20 bills as if we&#8217;re gonna race over there to get that $20 bill to answer his question,&#8221; Speier said in response.</p>



<p>&#8220;I mean, what are we doing here?! Have we lost it?&#8221; she exclaimed. &#8220;This bill simply codifies what is interpreted in the Constitution in the 5th Amendment. Now, we have a [Supreme Court] Justice, [Brett] Kavanaugh, who said, was asked the question, &#8216;may a state bar a resident of the state from traveling to another state? The answer is no.&#8217; But interestingly enough, the right to travel – those words – are not in the 5th Amendment. So if we have an originalist Court, we do have to pass this bill.&#8221;</p>



<p>Watch below ;<a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/jackie-speier-brian-mast-20">or at this link</a>.</p>

Congressman Mast burns abortion proponents with a $20 bill
