There is only one pro-life candidate on the ballot Tuesday. Period.
Donald J. Trump, like Ronald Reagan before him, has taken the long road to the pro-life movement, but once there, you have to give it to him, he has not run away from the issue in public.
As late as 1999 Mr. Trump was pro-choice, or pro-abortion. He came to the pro-life side, in his own words, because of witnessing his friend’s raise children whom they had planned to abort. As he explained in an interview:
“I [always] hate[d] the concept of abortion. And since then, I’ve very much evolved. And what happened is 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. And I am very, very proud to say that I am pro-life.â€
As a candidate, he has probably been more vocal and controversial in his pro-life stance than any candidate in recent memory. During the last debate with Hillary Clinton, he championed his pro-life position and in the closing segment and left Mrs. Clinton literally speechless when he directly challenged her on the so-call “partial birth abortion†procedure, asking her whether or not she thought a child only days away from birth should be killed. Mrs. Clinton only offered a strange smile in response.
During the debates, Mr. Trump was also very specific that the list of potential Supreme Court Justices that he has made public, were “all pro-life†in general philosophy and that he believed that with two or more appointees, the court would overturn Roe v. Wade and send the determination of abortion status back to the individual states – where it belongs.
In an unusual political letter to pro-life leaders in September, Mr. Trump outlined four specific objectives he would pursue as President:
1) Nominating pro-life justices to the U.S. Supreme Court.
2) Signing into law the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would end painful late-term abortions nationwide.
3) Defunding Planned Parenthood as long as they continue to perform abortions, and re-allocating their funding to community health centers that provide comprehensive health care for women.
4) Making the Hyde Amendment permanent law to protect taxpayers from having to pay for abortions.
Against this solid pro-life agenda, is juxtaposed Hillary Clinton and the out-going President, both of whom are rabid pro-death proponents, even to the practice of aborting children in the very last days of gestation, and in Mr. Obama’s case, even after a child survives an abortion procedure and is alive outside the womb.
Neither were repulsed when Planned Parenthood was discovered to be selling off various body parts of aborted babies for profit. They both merely double-downed on their support (and to their shame, the Republican leadership in Congress could not find it in their collective conscience to defund the taxpayers forced contribution to the barbaric practice).
Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are the fraternal partners in the long train of socialist radicalism in its various forms over the last century and half that is captivated – entranced – by death. Always has been. It is buried deep in the intellectual DNA of the hard left – faithfully forming every successive generation’s disregard for human life as surely as physical DNA commands all the attributes of appearance. The untold tens of millions of dead at the hands of the twentieth century radicals speaks for itself.
So too, are the 60 million babies killed inside the womb in the U.S. alone since 1973; and the staggering 1.4 billion babies aborted since 1980 worldwide.
For those who believe that the preamble to the Declaration of Independence is expository, that each person has “…certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness,†then only one candidate agrees with you.
For faithful Jews and Christians, the God of Scripture has already spoken: “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.â€
18 comments
Why stop with Trump? Given the Democratic Party platform completely embraces the wholesale slaughter of innocents, there is no good reason to support a Democrat ever. I can stomach higher taxes, but sticking needles into babies hearts to kill them? Never.
“For faithful Jews and Christians”- you have no standing for speaking for anyone but yourself. You might know a bit about Christianity but speaking for Jews takes more than a brief look at Wikipedia. It is laughable that you try to use your view of what a good Jew is to make your point. Stick to defending the “holiday” season.
Hey Max why don’t you go grab your goat and meetup with your bosses John and Tony Podesta for a bite to eat at one of those swanky Georgetown bistros?
Genesis, chapter 1, verse 27 of both the Christian Bible and Bereishit,
the first book of the Jewish Torah, are the same. I speak for no one but
myself – He speaks for Himself.
I assume from your profile, name, and previous writing that you are Christian. If that is the case, it is very offensive as you to try to make your case using Judaism as a support for your Christian position. Your attempt to combine Jews and Christians in your argument forgets the history and current environment where this alliance is non-existent outside of your own writings.
Perhaps, Max, it is offensive to you. It is not offensive, however, to those who know that the first five books of Moses, the Torah, are in fact the first five books of the Christian Bible. So, if you are offended, you must take it up with the Creator God of the Universe. They are His words, He wrote them, and they are the Truth for Christians and Jews. It really doesn’t depend on your opinion, believe it or not. .
You perhaps can complain to Him, while you are at it, about the Judeo-Christian ethic (notice the combination) that has informed the modern western world, which I assume you are in favor of disbanding. Me? I’m terribly tired of people who are hurt, offended, require safe zones, have spiritual chips on their shoulders, or who simply like to argue to no apparent point about something they know nothing about.
Typical a republican intervention into personal lives. This is a or a comment on abortion. It is a comment on you trying to hijack Judaism for your postings on this blog. Next you will be saying that you represent blacks and hispanics because they are Christians and therefore must be the same as you.
http://www.jewishprolifefoundation.org/
There are also plenty of Christians who do not attack abortion like those here. Not sure why you think one organization speaks for all Jews on any topic, let alone abortion
Again, please state your Jewish rationale for being pro-abortion. I’d like to hear it.
Never gave you a stance on abortion so you have no basis to ask that question. By asking that question, are you projecting your own mastery of Judaism?
The writer here is trying to speak for all Jews. He does not even speak for all Christians. My suggestions is that he refrain from assuming that his words represent Jews of any kind
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/172400/jewish/Big-Families.htm
What is your point here? How does your posts permit a Christian from assuming they can dictate how Jews should believe?
Isn’t “Be fruitful and multiply’ a mitzvah?
Care to explain how a “good” Jew supports abortion?
You are changing the subject here, Mr. Dickson. The issue I have is with Me Giere pretending that Jews and Christians are the same and that he can represent both groups.
No, you changed the subject of the blog post.
I don’t think he is pretending to represent both groups but all Christians have knowledge of Jewish scripture through the Old Testament.
he is precisely trying to speak for Jews and use his own believes to state what Jews should believe. Then he gets defensive when his offensive remarks are not loved and respected by all Jews. A