The exceptions are unacceptable. A woman can say she doesn't feel like going through childbirth and they'll say that's dangerous for her. Less than 1% are sacrificed to save the life of the mother.
Cruz only needed to look on Trump’s website
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.
Trumps exceptions are the same are mine.
You mean latest Trump position on abortion. He had a radically different opinion back before being pro-life was politically advantageous.
The exceptions are unacceptable. A woman can say she doesn't feel like going through childbirth and they'll say that's dangerous for her. Less than 1% are sacrificed to save the life of the mother.
Since when did “pro-life, except...” become “staunchly pro-life”, exactly? Oh, yeah, since Trump.
Sounds like Pelosi’s “legal, but rare” to me.
FR posters have treated National Review's extensive opposition to Trump (NR dedicated an entire issue to that opposition, with numerous conservative pundits contributing their own opposition to Trump) as Holy Writ, as the unerring truth. So which is it, Cruzers? No wonder you guys suffer so badly from cognitive dissonance.
“Let me be clear” is Ted Cruz’s terms not Trumps, he doesn’t talk like this!!!
This is a fraud by a Cruz bot....off to Trump it goes....
This is real from Trump:
Issues
Schedule
About
Gallery
Trump Logo
Positions
States
Get Involved
Media
Shop
Donate
Press Releases
Internal Banner Image
View All Press Releases
- February 15, 2016 -
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC. OPED - The Culture of Life
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.