Wednesday’s Senate HELP Committee hearing on chemical abortion drugs produced a jaw-dropping moment when Sen. Josh Hawley repeatedly asked board-certified OB-GYN Dr. Nisha Verma a simple yes-or-no question: can men get pregnant? The witness repeatedly refused to give the direct answer, instead talking about treating “people with different identities” and calling yes-or-no questions a “political tool,” a clip that quickly spread across social media and conservative outlets.
This wasn’t some abstract debate — the hearing was specifically about the safety and distribution of abortion drugs like mifepristone, and Republicans were pressing witnesses about real harms and regulatory failures tied to these pills. Senators expressed alarm about reports of adverse events and the rushed approval of generics, arguing that the American people deserve clear, science-based answers from medical experts, not evasive talking points.
What should have been straightforward biology turned into a spectacle of modern political correctness, with Dr. Verma deflecting a biological reality under the guise of “complexity” and “polarization.” Senator Hawley, rightly exasperated, insisted on a plain answer and reminded the committee — and the public — that women get pregnant, not men, a point rooted in simple biology that’s now apparently controversial to some in the medical elite.
Americans watching this exchange saw something worse than a bad answer; they saw the weaponization of medicine to advance ideology. When doctors start qualifying basic biological facts to avoid “polarizing” questions, trust in medical institutions erodes and patients pay the price. Conservatives should be furious that politically motivated language is being prioritized over the clarity women need when their health and children’s lives are on the line.
This episode is part of a larger pattern in which identity politics is crowding out sex-based protections and common sense in public policy. Senators referenced recent fights over athletic competition and legal definitions that show how these questions aren’t academic but affect sports, privacy, and the safety of women and girls who deserve real protections. The stakes of obfuscation are not just prideful politics — they are the everyday realities for mothers, daughters, and clinicians trying to provide honest care.
Republicans were right to press for clarity, and conservatives should demand accountability from witnesses who come before Congress to represent “science.” If medical experts will not plainly state biological facts or will hide behind jargon to avoid uncomfortable truths, then lawmakers must tighten oversight and the public must ask tougher questions. Claims about elevated adverse-event rates and the safety profile of abortion drugs deserve scrutiny, not platitudes; the American people deserve better than evasions from those entrusted with public health.
This is a wake-up call for patriots who still believe in truth, medicine, and the dignity of women. Don’t let the elites gaslight you into silence — demand answers, support officials who defend biological reality, and make your voice heard at the ballot box. If we lose the language of science to ideology, we lose our ability to protect the vulnerable and preserve the rights that define women’s health and safety.
