[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
politics and politicians Title: Trump: If abortion is banned, there has to be some form of punishment for women who do it Charles Cooke calls this an ideological Turing test, i.e. a question whose answer reveals how plausible it is that Trump really is who he claims to be. The standard answer from nearly all serious pro-lifers is that it’s the abortionist, not his patient, who should be sanctioned if and when abortion is banned. The March of Life explains why: Ted Cruz, when he’s inevitably asked about this now, will give some variation of that same response. Trump, whom his conservative critics suspect of being an opportunist on abortion rather than committed to the cause, went a different route. You can almost see the wheels turning in his head here: He knows, as a political matter, that he can’t let Cruz get to his right on abortion. Republicans will let him slide on a lot — a lot — but if he gives them reason to think he’s BSing them on an issue at the very core of social conservatism, it could give Cruz the break he needs to take off. And so, when he gets the question from Matthews about what to do with women who insist on having abortions in a hypothetical future where the practice is banned, he goes with his gut — and his gut is “stay to the right.” So … sure, let’s punish women for abortion. This is the message the party’s carrying into the general election against the first woman major-party nominee, huh? By a guy who’s already having major problems polling among women, no less. It’s easy to understand how an amateur would stumble into this answer, writes Matt Lewis, but why would you want to nominate an amateur? Yet these political compromises are necessary in order to cobble together a palatable and defensible (if admittedly inconsistent) public policy position that might someday actually be able to win the argument in mainstream America. Part of the goal is to remove the ability for pro-choicers to demagogue the issue by scaring vulnerable women. Now, thanks to Trump, that’s back on the table. Trump’s already trying to walk it back even though the townhall with Matthews from which this was clipped hasn’t aired yet: — Sarah McCammon NPR (@sarahmccammon) March 30, 2016 Hillary’s already attacking him over it. So is Team Cruz, as you’ll see in the second clip below. Trump can run from it but it’s on tape and every down-ballot Republican will wear it now if he’s the nominee. And the best part, as one Twitter pal said, is that Trump will eventually (“eventually” as in “probably within the next few hours”) deny that he ever said it to begin with. Still think this is all part of a master strategy or could it be that he really is winging it? — The Lead CNN (@TheLeadCNN) March 30, 2016 Poster Comment: The next Trump scandal. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 118. Trump: If abortion is banned, there has to be some form of punishment for women who do it
Trump is absolutely correct. If, and the word is IF, an act is made a serious disregard or affront to the law, the act must be punished or there is no law. That's a secondary consequence that must by considered when passing a law.
#6. To: rlk (#2) Indeed.
#9. To: redleghunter (#6) Indeed. It is committing the abortion that is punishable. The abortionist is the criminal, not the woman who is a victim of abortion (along with her murdered unborn child). This has been the dogma of the pro-lifers for decades, something only an ignoramus panderer like Trump would not know. That is because he is -- as he always was -- an advocate for all abortions, including partial-birth abortion, having praised his own sister for the NJ abortion decision she issued as a federal judge.
#88. To: TooConservative, rlk (#9) The abortionist is the criminal, not the woman who is a victim of abortion (along with her murdered unborn child). I understand the pro life position politically. However rlk is correct legally and logically. If I paid you to off someone you would be clearly the murderer and I would be guilty of conspiracy to murder or complicit. A woman seeks out an abortionist to kill her child. That is the first law violated if Roe overturned. The second law broken by the woman would be obtaining an illegal medical procedure. Now there are many cases where a battered woman hired another to kill the battering husband. Some of those women are not convicted due to mental and physical trauma. However logically Trump is accurate. If a woman seeks an illegal abortion then she is involved in premeditated murder.
#97. To: redleghunter (#88) However logically Trump is accurate. If a woman seeks an illegal abortion then she is involved in premeditated murder. Then why did he flipflop and decide the woman should not be punished in only a few hours? So did Trump have it right to begin with and now he's punking out to let these millions of women off the hook or is he correct now about the abortionist is the criminal?
#98. To: TooConservative (#97) You are asking me to get inside his head. Not gonna do that.
#100. To: redleghunter (#98) Your reticence surprises me a little. We see a few here who were initially demanding the woman be punished as severely or more severely than the abortionist. Then Trump flipflops and they're thrown into disarray with only two still adhering to Trump's initial punish-the-woman position. I'm not sure Trump realizes he has crossed the pro-lifers in a way that deeply offends them. Over the years, I've noticed that offending pro-lifers or pro-gunners in a campaign is almost invariably fatal to a candidate. Giuliani in 2008 was a perfect example of this but far from the only one.
#101. To: TooConservative (#100) I'm not sure Trump realizes he has crossed the pro-lifers in a way that deeply offends them. You don't speak for pro life people. You're not.
#102. To: A K A Stone (#101) You don't speak for pro life people. I don't claim to speak for them. But I have noticed how they punish any deviation from their policy positions with many other candidates. Crossing the pro-lifers is generally fatal to a candidate. Trump hadn't crossed them in this campaign until now. Generally, the pro-lifers remain friendly and open to the idea of even rabidly former pro-abortion candidates like Trump or Giuliani. But one major deviation and they do turn on that new friend. And they have their own entire communications network outside the usual media, all female-dominated. You don't see it coming until it hits your candidate over the head like a 2x4. We'll see if Trump did offend them deeply. It won't take long for the polls to show it.
#105. To: TooConservative (#102) "Crossing the pro-lifers is generally fatal to a candidate." When did he cross them -- when he was for or against punishing women who murder their babies?
#108. To: misterwhite (#105) When did he cross them -- when he was for or against punishing women who murder their babies? This particular policy item was hotly debated over the years in the pro-life organizations. Overwhelmingly, they reject any punish-the-woman policy. In the meantime, the Dims constantly accuse us of wanting to punish the woman even though we have denied it for decades. They still use it as part of their War On Women strategy. Certainly, the Dims will use this against Trump if he is the nominee but they will also use it against all GOP candidates. This is why you've never heard any credible GOP candidate ever suggest a punish-the-woman policy. And that is why I think the women who quietly dominate the pro-life movement nationally may react very negatively toward Trump. This argument is long over. Until Trump opened this can of worms by running his big blabbermouth yesterday. Trump's gift to the Lefties and their propaganda. Less remarked upon is Trump mentioning that any change in abortion law would inevitably result in the return of back-alley abortions, yet another pernicious myth that will certainly rile the pro-lifers. The nicest thing you can say of Trump's remark is he was ignorant. That's not a very positive quality. If you're looking for signs that Trump has truly riled the pro-lifers, I'd watch for any statements about Trump's remarks by Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum, the various state and national Right To Life orgs and the newer Susan B. Anthony List activists (the younger generation of pro-life women).
#115. To: TooConservative (#108) "The nicest thing you can say of Trump's remark is he was ignorant. That's not a very positive quality." I'd simply say he was caught off-guard by being asked a hypothetical about an issue everyone considers settled law. It didn't help that Matthews was looking for his gotcha moment, so he phrased the question around whether the woman should be punished. I've been following politics a long time, and I've never heard this "punish the woman" approach before. Certainly if the abortion decision is turned over to the states, won't each state decide that, not the President? Yes, Trump should have been prepared for that f**ked up hypothetical but, to his credit, he immediately corrected his position.
#118. To: misterwhite (#115) I've been following politics a long time, and I've never heard this "punish the woman" approach before. Certainly if the abortion decision is turned over to the states, won't each state decide that, not the President? I was a vice-president 10 years with the largest state pro-life group in the country. I remember when the issue of who should be punished was hotly debated.
Replies to Comment # 118. "I remember when the issue of who should be punished was hotly debated." Argued, yes. Debated? I don't see the debate points for excusing the mother. Everything from the beginning to the bloody end is her decision. Not even the biological father has any say-so. Women aren't "victims". Not when they're the ones making all the choices. Women should at least be honest and say that they're pro-life ... unless they want an abortion.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 118. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|||||
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|