Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I support Cruz over Trump but am closer to Trump's views on abortion. If you think abortion is the taking of human life and should be punished, not just the abortionist but everyone else involved in the crime should be punished, including the woman and a boyfriend who provides the money and/or drives her to the site of the illegal abortion. If you hire a hit man and get caught, you and the hit man are both prosecuted.

As a practical matter we are not going to ban abortion in cases of rape and incest. Trump is being realistic about this.

1 posted on 04/23/2016 2:43:51 AM PDT by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
To: reaganaut1
"Gird your loins!"


2 posted on 04/23/2016 2:45:40 AM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
As a practical matter we are not going to ban abortion in cases of rape or incest

A sensible approach would be to say that the rape or incest had to be reported within a very short time frame....two months at the longest. That would achieve three things:

It would increase the possibility of prosecuting the perpetrator

It would could down on bogus claims of rape

It would save the life of pre-born infants

3 posted on 04/23/2016 2:52:15 AM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

What about prison terms for suicide attempts?


4 posted on 04/23/2016 3:22:52 AM PDT by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust conservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

‘As a practical matter we are not going to ban abortion in cases of rape and incest. Trump is being realistic about this.’

That is where 85% of the population was in a poll sometime back. Might have eroded somewhat. Abortion is now better understood.

But heck — ultra-religious GW had the same position.


5 posted on 04/23/2016 3:28:31 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (Obama giving away the internet: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3407691/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

The whole pro-life movement is muddled. The constitutionally sound approach to the abusive Supreme Court decisions, is for the governors of the states to nullify those decisions. The two approaches attempted by the pro-life movement for the past 40 years, a constitutional amendment, and putting so-called pro-life judges on the court, are futile.


6 posted on 04/23/2016 3:35:36 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

It was stupid for Trump to even bring up the subject of the “exceptions.” The President has no role to play in passing the state statutes that will someday outlaw abortion.

One thing is certain. Hillary is incomparably worse than Trump on every issue, including abortion.

The focus of the pro-life movement should be the governors. Since the Supreme Court decisions on abortion command the governors to act criminally, that is, not enforce their state abortion laws,it is up to the governors to nullify the Supreme Court decisions. And that should be the demand of the pro-life movement.


7 posted on 04/23/2016 3:40:55 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
“The suggestion that the platform should weaken its position on the pro-life issue would set back years of hard work in the pro-life movement,” said Tom McClusky, vice president of March for Life Action.

And what exactly has all that hard work accomplished? The pro-life people really should learn from the left how to use incrementalism. Concentrate on the stuff that most people agree with like parental consent, partial birth abortion, and good supreme court justices. Once you win there move on to the next item. Instead they want to fight over something that will chase away people who agree with them on those issues, while accomplishing nothing.

8 posted on 04/23/2016 3:41:42 AM PDT by Hugin (Conservatism without Nationalism is a fraud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Trump is not going to have a fight with pro-life groups. Hitlery will promote killing babies already born.

The choice is easy.


9 posted on 04/23/2016 3:48:25 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper (Just say no to HRC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
As a practical matter we are not going to ban abortion in cases of rape and incest. Trump is being realistic about this.

As a practical matter, perhaps not. But if the Republican party's core position is opposition to the whole idea of abortion then why weaken the platform?

10 posted on 04/23/2016 3:50:45 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

“the three-time married billionaire who only recently came to oppose abortion”

Only recently became republican as well. One of the things about
liberals is everything they say, do or promise has an expiration
date. That’s whats always been my concern about Trump.
Will he still be a republican after he is elected?


12 posted on 04/23/2016 3:55:37 AM PDT by Slambat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Here we go again. Politico doesn’t give a damn about the pro-life movement. Except, of course, to use it as a wedge to stop Trump. At the state level, pro-lifers have made great advances only to get stopped by federal judges. What have elected Republicans, who have held Congress for 18 out of last 22 years, done about these judges?

What about the funding of PP? Have Republicans stopped that too?


13 posted on 04/23/2016 3:57:40 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Rafael Cruz: Canadian-born, Cuban ancestry, ineligible for POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
I say the following as a matter of Realpolitik, not as a statement of personal beliefs.

Trump's advisors will likely tell him to blow off any objections that may arise from pro-life groups. And, given their apparent strategy of trying to soften Trump's image, that's the smart thing for them to do.

Pro-lifers, faced with the choice of somebody who is apparently soft on the subject of life and somebody who is radically pro-abortion will obviously go with the former.

The dems are too stupid to bring up Trump's past before he evolved into being pro-life (sort of). The reason why is because, as a party, they are far too ideological and would view that as making him more acceptable to moderates and their own party members. Given the Hildabeast's horrible likeability, they don't want to do ANYTHING to make the Donald more acceptable to their base...even though it would destroy his support among social conservatives.

The point is that they are going to blow off pro-lifers from this point moving forward...and I would imagine this to be doubly the case once the primaries next week are over.

We need to double down our support for Trump going forward so that the dems know that they won't be able to fracture his base (and I say that as a non-supporter).

Remember: what Mr. Trump believes or doesn't believe is utterly irrelevant at this point. We have made our collective choice in the matter and now we have to live with that choice. The only thing that is important is defeating the Hildabeast.

16 posted on 04/23/2016 4:07:37 AM PDT by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1; Jim Robinson

There should be ZERO reasons, even shaky almost made up reasons, for this headline to ever even have a chance to be written about anyone a God-fearing conservative, a FR member or for that matter the owner of FR would support for President of the United States. This is an absolute of this site and as I said any God-fearing real conservative.


19 posted on 04/23/2016 4:19:28 AM PDT by John W (Under One Year And Counting!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
At the same time, Trump has not toned down his praise of Planned Parenthood, which he says “has done very good work for many, many — for millions of women” despite the fact that the group is reviled by anti-abortion advocates as “a seller of baby body parts.”

So Trump supports using public funds for murder for fun and profit.

Nope. I cannot support that.

24 posted on 04/23/2016 4:39:23 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Trump tries to stick with what can be done vs. going with idealistic platitudes - we need to take such step if we really want to change things for the better.


32 posted on 04/23/2016 5:33:54 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

“the three-time married billionaire”

I thought this post was about abortion? What does the number of times Donald Trump was married have to do with it?

NOTHING! It was just that the author thought they would take this as another opportunity to try and smear Trump. Last time I looked, marriage and divorce were LEGAL.


34 posted on 04/23/2016 6:08:52 AM PDT by faucetman (Iowa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Trump is positioning himself alongside the majority of Americans who oppose abortion, when you include these exceptions. Meaning that a majority of all Americans oppose abortion.

Juxtaposing himself with Cruz, who is against exceptions.
Even with this position, Trump is pro life, Hillary is pro abortion. Tempest in a teapot.

Myself I liked Trump’s earlier position that women and doctors should “be punished”.

I think they should be charged with MURDER as that is exactly what they are doing. Murder for hire, period.


36 posted on 04/23/2016 6:18:26 AM PDT by faucetman (Iowa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
for the three exceptions" — rape, incest and to protect the life of the mother

Why is incest always included in these exceptions? I mean incest that is not also rape.

41 posted on 04/23/2016 6:49:00 AM PDT by libertylover (The problem with Obama is not that his skin is too black, it's that his ideas are too RED.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

New York values.


42 posted on 04/23/2016 7:03:40 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

I’m still waiting for “social conservative” George W. Bush to cut a single penny from Planned Parenthood. Perhaps in his 5th term.


48 posted on 04/23/2016 8:17:52 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson