Trump's Position on Abortion Slammed [semi-satire]

This week former President Donald Trump announced that "my position on abortion is that we should follow the Supreme Court's ruling that the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution leaves the power to determine whether abortions are legal up to the states. Given the strongly held differences on this issue, it is obvious that there is no consensus among voters. Under these circumstances, the best resolution is to use the 'laboratory of democracy' created by our federal system to try out different approaches in different states."

The New York Times complained that "Trump chose politics over principles. Every enlightened thinker realizes that the right to obtain an abortion is essential to women's health and freedom. Those who oppose this right are simply wrong. The only ethical policy is for government to provide this right for every woman by funding it from public money. To do less is to compromise with evil."

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Az) called the Supreme Court's decision "a return to the same 'states' rights philosophy' that justified slavery and Jim Crow laws. Only this time the victims are every woman capable of bearing children. The next step will be a ban on contraception and conscripting women as breeding stock for the rich and powerful. I'm sorry to see that Arizona has literally returned to the horrendous 1864 ban on the desperately needed abortions that Democrats are trying to enshrine in federal law."

First Lady Jill Biden contrasted "Trump's depraved opposition to women's health with my husband's sacrifice of his own religious objections to abortion in order to unify the country behind the simple principle that it is a woman's right to control her own body, to decide whether or not to have an abortion for any reason and at any time. To make women's liberation complete, Joe generously has determined to have the government fund the procedure so that lack of money will not force anyone to bear an unwanted child."

Trump acknowledged that "not everyone will be happy with my decision. But neither will everyone be happy with the Democrats' determination to force everyone who opposes abortion to fund it with their taxes. Unity isn't feasible. Compromise is. By allowing different policies in different states contention can be moderated and peaceful coexistence can prevail. Perhaps with time and mutual toleration a more enlightened and merciful future can evolve. In my opinion, aborting a child by dismembering it in the womb in the third trimester of his or her life is cruel and heartless. Maybe in time more people will come to agree with me on that. In the meantime I believe it would be useful to move away from vilifying those who do not yet agree on the issue."

In related news, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Mn) warned that "President Trump picked Judges who believe that elected representatives are the people who should make our laws. That's what led to the Supreme Court being packed with people who abandoned the abortion rights granted by the 1973 Supreme Court and created the confusing mess we see today with each state deciding for itself whether abortion will be allowed, restricted, or outlawed. Democrats are united in the belief that the old Roe v. Wade rights ought to be restored. Women who want the right to terminate their unwanted pregnancies have only one logical choice in this year's elections--vote Democrat as early and as often as they can in every jurisdiction in which they may find themselves in the days between now and November."

If you missed any of the other Semi-News/Semi-Satire posts you can find them at...

“Every enlightened thinker...”

Just what does NYT believe to be an “enlightened thinker”?

Enlightened thinkers come in many forms and varieties, and it may be compared to “critical thinking”. Apparently there is not supposed to be ANY alternative entertained, according to the groupthink that NYT seems to want to impose on all discourse on the matter.

Abortion was supposed to be “safe, legal and RARE”, which was part of the rationale for adopting Roe v. Wade in the first place. “Legal” it became, but in many instances in the practice, it also became unsafe, with a 50% mortality rate (the baby dies in almost every instance, plus some few mothers do not survive the procedure) and WAY too common.

Abortion may only peripherally considered to be a form of birth control, especially when so many other forms are much safer and and widely available. Abortion perhaps should be considered in the same light as body mutilations involved in an evil practice mislabeled as “transgender transformations”. In many instances, abortion results in sterility, as do most of these operations and hormone treatments that are supposed to “transform” male to female, or vice versa. The only transformation possible is male to neuter, or female to neuter, unable to reproduce.

And that may be the whole objective, to minimize or destroy the capability to reproduce.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.