Hillary: 'The Unborn Person Doesn't Have Constitutional Rights'

Hillary Clinton broke the universal code of the abortion business recently when asked about the constitutional rights of an unborn child.

"Well, under our laws currently, that is not something that exists," Clinton said. "The --- the --- the unborn person doesn't have constitutional rights."

Struggling with an answer, Clinton unwittingly called an unborn child "a person." While that's a no-brainer for most, it's a major no-no in the abortion industry.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/embed/yCF_xjfTz3c?showinfo=0;rel=0;fs=1 expand=1]

"If I may quote from the Planned Parenthood guidebook," Glenn said Monday on The Glenn Beck Program:

"She's not only violating all of the Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger laws, she's also wrong about the law," Glenn said. "If you're a drunk driver and you hit a car and it has a pregnant woman and she loses the baby and she dies, you've just killed two people. Not one, but two."

For some reason, we've made this mental leap that it's killing a person if you're a drunk driver, but it's just a fetus if you're a mom doing it.

"You can't have it both ways," Glenn said. "You can't have it both ways."

Enjoy this complimentary clip from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: How do we come together as a nation, when we're so divided and we're so far apart on things like this? The answer is: Maybe we're not supposed to. Maybe on this particular issue we never will. And that's okay.

There was a time in my life when I was unfeeling, uncaring. I was selfish. I only thought about me. I only thought about my next drink. I only thought about my next buck. I didn't even think about my family.

I've changed. And I see this very clearly. What she just said is an unborn person. Person is a legal term. Person identifies someone as having constitutional rights. And she just broke the universal abortion law. You don't say those things. And if I may quote --

PAT: Right. Right.

GLENN: If I may quote from the Planned Parenthood guidebook: They discourage pro-choice advocates from using such terms as "abort a child." Instead recommending more accurate or appropriate alternatives, quoting, such as end of pregnancy or have an abortion.

Abort a child is medically inaccurate as the fetus is not yet a child, says the guide.

Terminate a pregnancy is commonly used. However, some people prefer to avoid this, as terminate has negative connotations. Terminator, or assassinate, for some people. The guidebook also advises against the terms baby, dead fetus, unborn baby, unborn child, when discussing what's about to be aborted. Instead, it recommends the term embryo, fetus, and the pregnancy. The alternatives are medically accurate terms, as the embryo or fetus is not a baby.

But the specific term "person" is a legal concept that includes rights and statuses that the law protects, including the protection of a person's life under the laws against homicide.

How is Hillary Clinton not only violating all of the rules by calling an unborn child a person --

PAT: Right.

GLENN: -- she's not only violating all of the Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger laws, she's also wrong about the law. That's why if you're a drunk driver and you hit a car and it has a pregnant woman and she loses the baby and she dies, you've just killed two people. Not one. But two.

The law does actually respect and give rights to that person in the womb. For some reason or not, we have -- we have made this mental gymnastics jump to say, "Yes, you're killing a person in a car if you're a drunk driver, but if the mom wants to do it, it's just a fetus, and it's definitely not a person." You can't have it both ways. You can't have it both ways. And this is one of those things where we were silent for too long.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: I've thought about our silence an awful lot this weekend. We were silent too long. And we cannot be silent anymore.

PAT: Yeah. And does it get anymore wrong about the Constitution not protecting unborn people? We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. What is an unborn baby but your posterity, protected right from the very beginning of the Constitution?

GLENN: Let's just say this: My daughter, she got pregnant. And I immediately congratulated her for carrying the non-human organism that's inside her body. My wife immediately began planning a fetus shower.

(laughter)

PAT: Nice. Nice.

STU: So I have a quick legal question on this. So this is interesting. If an unborn child does not have constitutional rights, can we quarter soldiers inside the womb?

(laughter)

GLENN: I --

STU: That's their house, right? So I think we have rights to park as many soldiers as we want inside of pregnant women because they have no constitutional right and the Third Amendment doesn't apply to them.

GLENN: Okay. All right.

STU: Thoughts? Thoughts? Can we debate on this one?

GLENN: No, I think we're going to think on that one.

STU: Okay.

It's obvious. Of course, you have constitutional rights.

PAT: Of course.

STU: I mean, this idea -- you have to go into the delusional denial of saying this isn't a person to get to these arguments.

PAT: A terrorist -- they will make -- and Hillary Clinton would certainly make this case, terrorists who commit an act of terrorism on our soil or illegal aliens who are here are protected by the Constitution. Everybody within our borders, protected by the Constitution. But an unborn baby isn't?

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: An unborn baby has zero rights? That's ludicrous.

GLENN: It's ludicrous. It's ludicrous. It is -- for instance, let's take -- when we come back, I want to take something that was said by Sarah Palin this weekend.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: Because it is -- it's very similar. It's very similar. Who do we care about? What people do we care about? The answer to abortion is love. Love the mothers. Love the children. The answer is adoption. You want to stop abortion: adopt a child. Demand that adoption is the answer. The answer always comes from love.

Featured Image: Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks at a rally with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo after he signed a law that will gradually raise the state's minimum wage to $15 while also establishing paid family leave for New York workers on April 4, 2016 in New York City. Supported by unions, workers and progressives across the state, Cuomo stated that the current minimum wage of $9 an hour is too low to support a family. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

The Biden Admin EXPANDED abortion access because they DON'T believe in the Constitution

Joshua Lott / Stringer, JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

This month has already produced an extreme example of why we need a functional and more conservative Congress in order for America to have a chance at moving forward—because the Left does not believe in the Constitution.

Sure, if you confronted a Democrat in Congress, they would probably claim some sort of allegiance to the Constitution—but as a practical matter, they do not believe in it.

Instead, the Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch. Why? Because it has the furthest reach through all the various departments, and it can move the fastest—in short, because it’s the most dictatorial. It only takes a department head to write a new memo, or even better, the President to sign a new executive order to carry the force of law.

The Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch.

Do you recall any of the Left’s favorite Supreme Court decisions over the years—something like gay marriage for example—and how Republicans immediately tried to subvert it, using the executive branch to try to nullify the decision? Yeah, that never happened. But that is exactly what Democrats have done in recent weeks to expand abortion access.

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions. When the miraculous overturning of Roe v. Wade happened last summer, President Biden called it “a realization of an extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court.”

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions.

Recently the FDA approved local pharmacies to issue abortion pills. For the first 20 years after these pills were developed, they were not treated like typical prescription drugs. They had to be dispensed in-person by a doctor. That in-person requirement is now gone.

Keep in mind that the Left’s go-to line is that abortion is always about the health and safety of women, yet a 2021 peer-reviewed study found that chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions. Between 2002 and 2015, the rate of abortion-related ER visits following use of the abortion pills increased by 507 percent.

Chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions.

And now the Biden administration is making these less-safe abortions much more accessible. Thanks to the FDA’s rule change, Walgreens and CVS have already agreed to dispense abortion pills in states where abortion is legal—effectively turning these stores into new abortion clinics.

As for states that have abortion bans, "Team Biden" announced a new way around those too. Three weeks ago, the Justice Department issued a legal opinion that the U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal. What’s their rationale? That the sender cannot know for sure whether the recipient will use the pills illegally or not. So it’s totally okay.

The U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal.

Georgetown Law professor Lawrence Gostin told the Washington Post that this Justice Department opinion is “a major expansion of abortion access in the United States.”

So, to recap—the Biden administration has used the FDA, the Justice Department, and the Post Office, which all fall under the executive branch, to provide an end-run around the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

Expanding abortion was easy—simple policy tweaks and declarations that carry the force of law without an ounce of input from actual lawmakers in Congress—all because it comes from the grotesque, bloated, apparently pro-death executive branch.

Glenn is one of the most outspoken critics of the World Economic Forum and their vision to use crises to reconstruct the world order known as The Great Reset. The recent WEF summit in Davos confirms what Glenn has long warned about: globalist elites seek to upend our democracy, freedoms, and way of life to achieve their utopian climate goals. Here are 15 quotes from the 2023 Davos Summit, revealing their true intentions in their own words:

1. Saving the planet

When you hear the word, "Davos," the first thought that should pop into your mind is an elite group getting together to save the world from imminent climate disaster... at least they think of themselves that way. According to John Kerry:

I mean, it's so almost extraterrestrial to think about saving the planet.

2. Private jets

What most people think when they hear the word "Davos" is a group of global elites flying in on private jets to talk about climate change... and yes, John Kerry does own a private jet, no matter how many times he denies it:

I fly commercial [...] Exclusively.

3. Global Collaboration Village

You always hear some weird, dystopian projects coming out of WEF, like "The Global Collaboration Village," a new metaverse community aimed at strengthening "global cooperation." It sounds like the next installment of Brave New World. According to Klaus Schwab, Founder and President of the WEF:

The Global Collaboration Village is the pioneering effort to use the metaverse for public good, to create global cooperation and to strengthen global cooperation in the metaverse or using metaverse technologies. For me, it's a dream coming true because the village allows the Forum to create a more larger and open platform where everybody can participate.

4. Climate revolution

However, the core theme throughout WEF summits is the immediate need for a climate revolution and how businesses are selfishly blocking the revolution because they want to make an extra buck. Here's how John Kerry summed up the sentiment:

How do we get there? The lesson I have learned in the last years [...] is money, money, money, money, money, money, money.

5. Do or die

This often turns into alarmist language, like having to choose between wealth and our planet's survival... Joyeeta Gupta, Professor of Environment and Development in the Global South at University of Amsterdam, said it eloquently:

If we do the minimum at this pivotable moment in our history, then we and our children – even if we are rich – will live in the danger zone. But if we – business people, governments, citizens, cities – take action today, then we and our children will have a future worth looking forward to.

6. Colossal risks

Potsdam Institute's director Johan Rockström, used similar language, claiming we are "taking colossal risks with the future of civilization":

We are taking colossal risks with the future of civilization on Earth, we are degrading the life support systems that we all depend on, we are actually pushing the entire Earth system to a point of destabilization, pushing Earth outside of the state that has supported civilization since we left the last Ice Age 10,000 years ago.

7. Rain bombs

"Colossal risks" like... rain bombs? We didn't make that up. Ask Al Gore:

That’s what’s boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers, and the rain bombs.

Courtesy of the World Economic Forum

8. Survival comes down to this

How do we secure our survival? According to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, we have to "end our addiction to fossil fuels." This entails wiping out our entire energy industry, displacing millions of workers, and relying on global governments to usher in a new green industry. In his words:

So, we need to act together to close the emissions gap, and that means to phase out progressively coal and supercharge the renewable revolution, to end the addiction to fossil fuels, and to stop our self-defeating war on nature.

9. Complete transformation

It isn't hyperbolic to argue that the globalist climate goals will completely transform the world economy. Even EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen admitted:

The net-zero transformation is already causing huge industrial, economic and geopolitical shifts – by far the quickest and the most pronounced in our lifetime. It is changing the nature of work and the shape of our industry.

10. Scientific necessity

Of course, to bring about this "net-zero" transformation, we will have to override small, "political expediencies" like democracy to do what is "scientifically necessary." According to Zurich Insurance Group’s head of sustainability risk John Scott:

We’re living in a world right now where what’s scientifically necessary, and what is politically expedient don’t match.

11. Illegal hate speech

Doing away with "political expediencies" would also require the censorship of dissent, which would likely manifest in hate-speech laws. When asked by Brian Stelter how the discussion of disinformation relates to everything else happening today in Davos, European Commission VP Věra Jourová shared this prediction:

Illegal hate speech, which you will have soon also in the U.S. I think that we have a strong reason why we have this in the criminal law.

12. Climate first

We will also have to forego national interests on the international stage. America won't be able to advocate for policies and interests that benefit Americans. Instead, we will sacrifice national interests for the sake of global climate interests. French economy minister Bruno Le Maire said:

The key question is not China First, US First, Europe First. The key question for all of us is Climate First.

13. The role of war

We can also expect globalist leaders to use crises, like the war in Ukraine, to expedite the "net-zero transformation." Chancellor of Germany Olaf Scholz said:

Ultimately, our goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 has been given an additional boost by Putin’s war. Now we have even more cause to move away from fossil fuels.

14. Blame game

Globalist leaders will continue to blame ALL of the crises in our society on climate change to justify the "net-zero transition," from the energy shortage to "mistrust, selfishness [and] xenophobia." Prime Minister of Spain Pedro Sanchez said:

Our present struggle is not only against Putin or the energy shortage. It is also against fear, mistrust, selfishness, xenophobia, and environmental disaster. And its outcome will define life in the West and beyond for decades to come.

15. Sacrifice for the greater good

While we sacrifice our national interests for the sake of the "greater global good," we can expect our foreign enemies, like China, to benefit. Suisse Chairman Axel Lehmann said:

The growth forecasts now for China is 4.5%. I would not personally be surprised when that would be topped.

Conclusion

Glenn has been clear about the distinction between wanting to transition to green practices on your own accord and being forced into that transition by globalist, unelected elites. Leaders at Davos will continue to use alarmist language to justify their crackdown on democracy and freedom to bring about their leftist utopia. We have to cut through the alarmist language and in order to protect our freedoms.

Glenn has focused on exposing the dark side of the gender movements waging our culture war, and now, there's a new "trend" emerging as an offshoot to the transgender movement. A growing online community, particularly of men, who consider themselves "involuntarily celibate" or "incels" believe they can live a better life as a trans woman. Why? This community purports the world is rigged against men, particularly against traditionally "unattractive men." What's the solution? Stop being a man...

Incel or "involutarily celibate" communities have existed online in the dark corners of Reddit and Discord for years. The groups are marked by a hatred towards women, blaming them for rigging the world in their favor and denying them of sex. Several members of this growing community have been responsible for large acts of violence, most notably Alek Minassian, who killed 10 and injured 16 after driving a van into a busy area of Toronto in 2021.

However, the transgender movement has presented a new option for incel members: if you can't beat 'em, join 'em... or, in the Transmaxxers' case, "become them."

The online Transmaxxer's Manifesto says, “Since females have the upper hand on the dating market, transitioning from male to female will usually improve your options when it comes to getting sex.” According to the manifesto, transitioning to female not only opens up a different pool of sexual partners, but moreover, you gain access to female-only spaces and are “able to extract resources from males.”

“Since females have the upper hand on the dating market, transitioning from male to female will usually improve your options when it comes to getting sex.”

Another member wrote, "If you do not currently feel like living as a female you might have to work on fixing that ... Identifying as male or being emotionally attached to a male body is bad for you if being male results in you living a bad life.”

This new movement is significant because it is in stark contrast to the mainstream narrative that "transgenderism" is an innate quality. Now, it can be an "option" people choose for social advantage. A moderator going by the alias “Vintologi” on the Transmaxxing Discord server, which boasts over 1,200 members, told The Daily Caller:

Transmaxxing is about transitioning for personal gain rather than focusing on things like "gender identity." ... What matters when it comes to medical transition is whether or not said transition would actually be beneficial, thus the extent to which gender identity is innate does not inform us much regarding when medical transition is appropriate.

One incel member on Reddit lamented that he can't Transmaxx to "have sex with white trans women" and to have "all the benefits of [being] female."

Transmaxxing sheds light on a concerning issue as an increasing number of people, particularly the youth, identify as "transgender." What used to be considered as a "finge case" is now being seen as a social advantage. Glenn recently sat down with de-transitioner Chloe Cole, and the amount of pressure she experienced to become a transgender man AS A TEENAGER was ASTOUNDING. She discussed the new community, friendships, and affirmation she gained when she started her transition journey, and she lost ALL of those social perks when she began de-transitioning. She exchanged affirmation for death-threats, friendships for stone-cold silence.

Transmaxxing is a very specific example of a larger movement that is deeply concerning. Not only is the thansgender ideology problematic on its own merits, but now, we are seeing a rise of a distinction of "social advantage" based on gender affiliation. This is deviating away from the original notion that transgenderism is an innate quality. Now, many consider it more "socially advantageous" to identify as transgender than with your biological gender.

At the same time President Biden's misplaced classified documents were sitting in his house, garage, and office at the Penn Biden Center, a whole lot of Chinese money was flowing around him. Is this just a coincidence, or did the Chinese get anything in return? Investigative journalist John Solomon joins to break down what was going on here ...

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.