Posted on 02/15/2016 1:17:55 PM PST by SubMareener
Let me be clear--I am pro-life. I support that position with exceptions allowed for rape, incest or the life of the mother being at risk. I did not always hold this position, but I had a significant personal experience that brought the precious gift of life into perspective for me. My story is well documented, so I will not retell it here. However, what I will do with the remaining space is express my feelings about life, and the culture of life, as we approach the 43nd anniversary of the Roe v. Wade.
I build things. There is a process involved in building things. We tap into a lot of disciplines with engineering being one of the most important. The rules for putting structures together are as strict as are the rules of physics. These rules have stood the test of time and have become the path to putting together structures that endure and are beautiful. America, when it is at its best, follows a set of rules that have worked since our founding. One of those rules is that we, as Americans, revere life and have done so since our Founders made it the first, and most important, of our "unalienable" rights.
Over time, our culture of life in this country has started sliding toward a culture of death. Perhaps the most significant piece of evidence to support this assertion is that since Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Count 43 years ago over 50 million Americans never had the chance to enjoy the opportunities offered by this country. They never had the chance to become doctors, musicians, farmers, teachers, husbands, fathers, sons or daughters. They never had the chance to enrich the culture of this nation or to bring their skills, lives, loves or passions into the fabric of country. They are missing, and they are missed.
The Supreme Court in 1973 based their decision on imagining rights and liberties in the Constitution that are nowhere to be found. Even if we take the court at its word, that abortion is a matter of privacy, we should then extend the argument to the logical conclusion that private funds, then, should subsidize this choice rather than the half billion dollars given to abortion providers every year by Congress. Public funding of abortion providers is an insult to people of conscience at the least and an affront to good governance at best.
If using taxpayer money to facilitate our slide to a culture of death was not enough, the 1973 decision became a landmark decision demonstrating the utter contempt the court had for federalism and the 10th Amendment. Roe v. Wade gave the court an excuse to dismantle the decisions of state legislatures and the votes of the people. This is a pattern that the court has repeated over and over again since that decision. Perhaps Roe v. Wade became yet another incidence of disconnect between the people and their government.
We are in the middle of a presidential political cycle and votes will be cast in just days. The citizens of this nation will have the chance to vote for candidates that are aligned with their individual worldviews. It is my hope that they will choose the builder, the man who has the ability to imagine the greatness of this nation. The next President must follow those principles that work best and that reinforce the reverence Americans hold for life. A culture of life is too important to let slip away for convenience or political correctness. It is by preserving our culture of life that we will Make America Great Again.
Cruz only needed to look on Trump’s website
Did Cruz tell another lie that I missed?
If an unborn baby isn’t a life when the father is a rapist, it doesn’t magically become a life when the father isn’t a rapist.
And now we have that interview.
Cruz's campaign posted the video earlier today of Trump with Tim Russert on Meet the Press in 1999.
Russert asked Trump about gay marriage. Trump didn't want to comment on it, but said he has no problem with gays in the military.
He explained, "I've lived in New York City and Manhattan all my life, okay? So my views are a little bit different than if I lived in Iowa."
When Russert asked Trump about abortion, he said he's "pro-choice in every respect" and again cited his New York background, which he said has a "different attitude" from most of the country
http://www.mediaite.com/online/heres-the-1999-donald-trump-new-york-values-interview-cruz-has-been-talking-about/
________________________________________
"the way Trump described his "evolution" from the pro-choice to pro-life position raises some interesting questions.
He said: "Friends of mine years ago were going to have a child, and it was going to be aborted. And it wasn't aborted. And that child today is a total superstar, a great, great child. And I saw that. And I saw other instances."
Now, I'm one who cheers whenever someone publicly switches from supporting abortion rights to supporting human rights for all - including the unborn. I am glad to see people like Norma McCorvey, the "Jane Roe" of the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion, or Bernard Nathanson, founder of the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, become pro-life activists.
But I find it difficult to cheer Trump's conversion, because the reason he gives for being pro-life doesn't correspond to the pro-life ethic.
Trump says he is pro-life because of a "superstar" child who could have been aborted.
Consider how he responded to a reporter who wondered if he would have become pro-life had the child been a "loser":
"Probably not, but I've never thought of it. I would say no, but in this case it was an easy one because he's such an outstanding person."
To summarize Trump's view: "I'm pro-life because we shouldn't abort fetuses that may grow up to be outstanding people."
But opponents of abortion take a different position: "I'm pro-life because we shouldn't kill innocent human beings, no matter who they might grow up to be."
Trump's reason for being pro-life depends on the potential outcome of the child in the womb, rather than the fact that there is a child in the womb. But the pro-life ethic is grounded in the inherent worth of all humanity. It is wrong to commit violence against innocent human beings. Full stop.
And that's where, ironically, Trump's position sounds similar to the pro-choice idea that the human fetus is "potential life" or that the value of the unborn depends on whether or not the child is "wanted."
Extending Trump's logic leads to more problems. If we adopt the position of abortion opponents merely because of what a child may grow up to be (a "superstar!"), then why should we care if 67 percent of Down syndrome children are aborted after a prenatal diagnosis? What would Trump say if he were told there's a better chance an "unwanted" child from an impoverished or minority neighborhood would grow up to be involved in crime? ..."
http://www.religionnews.com/2016/01/26/problem-trumps-change-heart-abortion-commentary/
That’s Trumps position today while he is trying to get the republican nomination. It’s not what his position has been in the past... Do you believe it will be his position in the future? I don’t.
If an unborn baby isn’t a life when the father is a rapist, it doesn’t magically become a life when the father isn’t a rapist.
- - - - -
It doesn’t. Life is Life. The question is what are the limits of governmental intervention. Some women are strong enough to carry a child of rape to term, and look on it as a blessing. Some aren’t. Some thing with incest. These situations have two victims, and it is reasonable for the government to butt out of them.
In other news, ...
Linzey went on to say, “Donald Trump is ruthlessly honest. That means America can trust him to do what he says he will do. The alternative is to have a president who must do what his special interest groups tell him to do during his entire term as president. This means that the president’s relationship with Jesus Christ would take back seat to his relationship with his special interest groups. And when you disappointment them, terrible things can happen to the president and his legacy. The hype among some candidates about how ‘Jesus is Lord’ and quoting Scripture to win the Evangelical vote is a charade.”
Read more at: http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/9384977423.html
He did not write this!!! When have we ever heard him speak in this language? Never. Someone carved out a position for him and he signed his name to it. He’s a phony conservative and a chameleon. Sorry but I’m tired of him.
I am with you....
-— Linzey went on to say, “Donald Trump is ruthlessly honest. That means America can trust him to do what he says he will do. -—
Who is Linzey and what is she smoking?
Trumps exceptions are the same are mine.
“He did not write this!!!”
That is a 100% guarantee.
You nailed it. Trump doesn’t speak this way.
Same here. I would add to the law that if the raped women chooses to have an abortion, then the rapist is charged with murder in addition to rape.
“That means America can trust him to do what he says he will do. -—’
When Trump says he will be making deals with democrats, I believe him.
Ted Cruz knows what Trump’s positions are. He does not care he is trailing badly and is desperate to catch up. So I guess he thinks going on a lying binge will help him. I think its going to backfire bigtime.
That presser on major TV by Trump today was pretty intensive. And he warned GW at the same time.
Yep and when Trump says he may run as 3rd party (twice now), I believe that too.
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.