Yoda would point out that ALL of them since Row vs Wade must have been;
for future American Citizen murder is STILL with us.
Do or do not; there is no try. talking about how it offends thee so much.
Posted on 01/18/2016 2:16:20 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
When Ben Carson was rising in the polls, Donald Trump was quick to attack the former neurosurgeon for being "pro-abortion not so long ago."
The attack was more than a bit hypocritical because Trump himself was "very" pro-abortion not so long ago. In 1999, Tim Russert asked Trump if he would support a ban on "abortion in the third-trimester" or "partial-birth abortion."
"No," Trump replied. "I am pro-choice in every respect." Trump explained his views may be the result of his "New York background." Now that Ted Cruz has attacked Trump's "New York values," Trump's views on abortion will be getting a second look by many Republican voters.
During the first Republican presidential debate, Trump explained that he "evolved" on the issue at some unknown point in the last 16 years. "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," Trump said. "I am very, very proud to say that I am pro-life."
When the Daily Caller's Jamie Weinstein asked Trump if he would have become pro-life if that child had been a loser instead of a "total superstar," Trump replied: "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."
That Trump could go from supporting third-trimester abortion--something indistinguishable from infanticide, something that only 14 percent of Americans think should be legal--to becoming pro-life because of that one experience is a bit hard to believe. If it's true, the story still indicates at the very least that Trump is not capable of serious moral reasoning.
The more important question is not what Trump said in the past but what he would do in the future. Trump says he's pro-life except in the cases when a pregnancy endangers the life of the mother or is the result of rape or incest, although it remains unclear if he thinks abortion should be generally legal in the first three months of pregnancy (a position that is more accurately described as "pro-choice").
Trump has said he'd sign a ban on abortion during the last four months of pregnancy, when infants can feel pain and are capable of surviving long-term outside the womb. But after undercover videos were released showing Planned Parenthood involved in the trafficking of aborted baby body parts, Trump said he wasn't sure if the Planned Parenthood should lose all of its federal funding. He later shifted, saying: "I wouldn't do any funding as long as they are performing abortions."
Even if the mercurial Trump followed through on his promises to sign pro-life legislation, it wouldn't matter if he appointed liberal justices to the Supreme Court. The Court is just one appointment away from a solid liberal majority that would likely find a right to taxpayer-funded and late-term abortion.
By the end of the next president's first term, four sitting justices will be over the age of 80. Originalist Antonin Scalia and "swing-vote" Anthony Kennedy will both be 84. Liberal activists Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer will be, respectively, 87 and 82. There's really no telling how far a lockstep-liberal majority would go on other issues like guns, immigration, national security, and the death penalty. If Trump appoints a liberal activist--intentionally or not--the rest of his domestic agenda doesn't matter much.
The more likely result of a Trump nomination, of course, would be a Clinton presidency and the certain appointment of liberal justices. But in the event that Trump actually wins, what kind of Supreme Court justices would he appoint? When a voter asked Trump in December if he'd defund Planned Parenthood and try to repeal Roe v. Wade, Trump wouldn't answer the question. "The answer is yes, defund," he replied. "The other, you're gonna need a lot of Supreme Court justices, but we're gonna be looking at that very, very carefully, but you need a lot of Supreme Court judges. But defund yes, we're going to be doing a lot of that."
In 2015, Trump said he thought his sister Maryanne Trump Barry, a federal appeals court judge who struck down New Jersey's partial-birth abortion ban, would be a "phenomenal" Supreme Court justice. "We will have to rule that out now, at least," he added.
The bigger problem is that Trump's general hostility toward limited government conservatism indicates that he would not want to appoint a constitutionalist to the Supreme Court. Trump still supports allowing the government to seize private property for commercial use, and a Supreme Court justice who shares this view will almost certainly be a liberal activist on issues across the board. Even if Trump wanted to appoint a constitutionalist, there's no reason to think he'd know how to pick one in the first place.
On Saturday, Trump floated former senator Scott Brown, who supports a right to abortion, as a possible vice presidential running mate. "I tend to agree with @AnnCoulter on priorities here. If Trump immigration plan implemented, doesn't matter," tweeted Breitbart.com Washington editor Matthew Boyle. "I don't care if @realDonaldTrump wants to perform abortions in White House after this immigration policy paper," Coulter wrote in August.
Anti-immigration obsessives may not care about Trump's views on infanticide and judges. But a strong majority of primary voters in a conservative, pro-life party surely will.
I really get it. Haven't you noticed? When Trump talks about personal issues, he's sincere.
Why not have some fun, work to save the USA, and jump on the Trump Express! Maybe attend a rally or two. Tell us what you'll do to Make America Great Again!! Stop being so critical and nasty.
I see.
It doesn’t have anything to with wanting the presidency...
It’s the art of the deal, he’s selling and you’re buying.
And what kind of morality is based on “The kid became a superstar so I changed my mind on abortion” and “If the kid had been a loser I’d still be for abortion”???
That should disturb you - a lot.
No one is a saint on this issue, so we roll the dice regardless. I’ll go with the guy that has not wavered regarding clearing them out in THIS CAMPAIGN, and that is only Trump.
And how many do you know that have said:
“The kid became a superstar so I became antiabortion” and “If the kid had been a loser I’d still be for abortion”.
The quote isn’t exact but the meaning is. You can read it for yourself.
Ugh, he’s wavered the entire campaign. He continually talked about letting the good ones stay and now supports “touchback citizenship.” You didn’t learn your lesson from McCain or Romney my question is when will you learn your lesson? You are ready to vote for McCain and Romney all over again. And now you want to support a candidate who said Romney was too tough on immigration.
“He continually talked about letting the good ones stay...”
You wouldn’t happen to have a LINK to him saying that?
I didn’t think so.
It's just too weird to have supposed conservatives doubting someone who is out there defending life and saying that those who may have started out on the wrong side can learn from life experiences, and become better people for it.
"Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump stated that after he would "get them back where they are," he wants to "expedite" the legal immigration process for the "good" illegal immigrants in the US "of which there are many" after and that "I want people to come into the country," provided they do so legally on Monday's "Hannity" on the Fox News Channel...
He continued, "I would expedite it [the process[ because some of these people are fantastic people. I've been to the border. I was there a few days ago. I met some people. These are fantastic people, and they have great reputations within their community. So, what I'd do is I'd expedite it. But, you have to have laws. If you don't have laws, you don't have a country. I would get them out and try and - the good ones. And the bad ones, they're gone. They never come back. They'll never get back into this country. But, the good ones, of which there are many, I want to expedite it so they can come back in legally."...
Nov 26, 2012: Donald Trump: Mean-Spirited GOP Won't Win Elections
"....Romney's solution of "self deportation" for illegal aliens made no sense and suggested that Republicans do not care about Hispanics in general, Trump says.
"He had a crazy policy of self deportation which was maniacal," Trump says. "It sounded as bad as it was, and he lost all of the Latino vote," Trump notes. "He lost the Asian vote. He lost everybody who is inspired to come into this country."
The GOP has to develop a comprehensive policy "to take care of this incredible problem that we have with respect to immigration, with respect to people wanting to be wonderful productive citizens of this country," Trump says......
I’ll save you the trouble, Trump has not wavered on sending all of them home - and he hasn’t wavered on supporting touchback amnesty (he did and still does).
You may be confused with Rubio, who has promised to “let the good ones stay” or Cruz, who until a month ago, also never mentioned mass deportations.
You don’t bet the country on someones recent words that contradict their past words without actual deeds to back them up. To assume Trump has had an epiphany because he says so is extremely foolish.
He wants something. He’s very good at getting the things he wants. He’ll tell you as much. He has a long history of doing whatever it takes to get it. Including bragging about buying politicians to further his goals. One day so and so is the “greatest” and then when he’s got what he wants so and so is an “idiot”. There’s a pattern here that should not be ignored.
Thanks, appreciate it...as you show, EVERY illegal has to leave under Trump.
Let’s not pile on Nick too much here, he’s still FReeper.
Trump said “let the good ones return”.
Interesting. Yes, creepy. Well done.
[Putting Trump hat back on ... “Dangit!”]
In his 1987 book “Art of the Deal”, Donald Trump put it bluntly: “I play to people’s fantasies. ... I call it truthful hyperbole. It’s an innocent form of exaggeration - and a very effective form of promotion.”
Yoda would point out that ALL of them since Row vs Wade must have been;
for future American Citizen murder is STILL with us.
Do or do not; there is no try. talking about how it offends thee so much.
"I didn't leave the Democrat Party. The party left me."
He can appoint Mickey Mouse but it has to be approved by the Senate.........
Abortion and Presidents has been a non-issue since RvW and will forever remain so.......
The MSM always brings up the issue during election years in order to cause dissension within the republican party. Not surprising they never bring up abortion and democrats even tho there are a great number of democrats who are pro-life.....
Ah ... that’s Trump being ‘open book’, ‘nothing to hide’.
Of course he had evil thoughts that made him an abortionists. ALL abortionists are motivated by evil thoughts.
What you heard was a frank confession. Smart of the interviewer to ask him that question too.
Here is my evolution on the abortion issue — worse than his:
When in high school, I saw the [now notorious] artistic depiction of embryos looking like weird creatures before they became human. So ... I was able to dehumanize them in my mind.
That’s creepy of me, isn’t it? How an unborn child looks should be irrelevent. It was a deceitful bit of artwork, BTW. But it helped dehumanize infants.
All pro-abortion people have evil thoughts dancing around in their heads.
I also believed in abortion to prevent overpopulation. But it helped to think that they were ugly deformed creatures. Both evil thoughts helped fortify each other like a cross-beam in my soul.
Then people here on this forum showed me photos of beautiful unborn infants even in the early stages. Blew me away.
Trump admitted that how he was dehumanized was based on a child’s happiness/chances of success/whatever.
That is less creepy than my own.
Dammit!
In this country the VOTERS decide policy!!!
Do not EVER forget this!
Quit whining and DO something about it!
|
Are you still killing your unborn? -- GOD |
In 1999 I was pro-abortion.
By the Grace of God & through the Teachings of the Catholic Church I realized the wrongness of abortion.
People do change their view.
Peace :)
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.