TRUMP TWEETS against ‘fake news Sunday political shows,’ and AGAINST pro-life bills!?

El Presidente Trumpo continued a rant he started on Saturday night this Sunday morning.

He ripped into the “fake news Sunday political shows” this morning:



And yesterday he warned against the bills that are making their way to the Supreme Court banning abortion without an exception for incest or rape!!!

This is a little bizarre because he has derided Reagan in the past for not being an actual conservative, but here he is citing him as if he’s the patron saint of politics. In any case, it shouldn’t be too surprising that he’s not down with the cause of completely wiping out abortion, as he used to be pro-choice. And I’m sure his base will forgive him for it….

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
newest oldest most voted
Marcus Woodson
Member
Active Member
Marcus Woodson

The bots are out tonights and they have Sooper in their sights

I’m a poet and I don’t know it smile

Thor77
Member
Trusted Member
Thor77

The guy just takes every side of an issue and lets his minions fight it out. That being said, this is all about posturing for 2020 elections

EisenhowerConservative
Member
Member
EisenhowerConservative

SooperMexican is a NeverTrumper. He subtly, but constantly mocks not only Trump, but his supporters. It’s why this site has lost many of it’s visitors.

By the way, why is his username “SooperMexican”? I’m a fellow Mexican-American and I’d never choose a username like that. If anything, I’d call myself a SooperAmerican. I’m American first. Apparently, he doesn’t feel the same way. I think it speaks volumes about him.

russ
Member
Active Member
russ

Totally agree! Guy banned me like 3 times for supporting trump. Guess I’ll get banned again for bring it up.

I used to absolutely love this site. The trump hate was unreal especially in the primary with ted Cruz. No one now admits how conservative trump has been

ConstitutionalRepublic
Member
Active Member
ConstitutionalRepublic

I absolutely concur !

SuperMexican is not fooling anyone but himself.

ConstitutionalRepublic
Member
Active Member
ConstitutionalRepublic

I absolutely concur, and have stated this many times.

SuperMexican is not an actual pro-American Constitutional Conservative Lincoln Republican, he is if anything a closet Trump hating center-leftist running a conservative media web site, which he exposes with every word he types.

He is not fooling anyone but himself.

russ
Member
Active Member
russ

I’d be interested in seeing how much the traffic has gone down here…

Used to be one of my goto websites, now is a rarely used fringe site

Thor77
Member
Trusted Member
Thor77

If anyone has left here it’s the never Trump crowd. You obviously don’t come here enough to know that … seems more like a drive by liberal tactic to come here and spew crap

russ
Member
Active Member
russ

I stopped coming here because I was on there trump train first…..while all you jerks were insulting me and bragging about Ted Cruz during primary season.

Don’t question me!

My bona fides is legit

Thor77
Member
Trusted Member
Thor77

Anyone who has to proclaim his bonafides are legit has none to begin with. And being the first on the trump train isn’t something a conservative brags about. You’d feel at home with your homies at BreitFart.

Marcus Woodson
Member
Active Member
Marcus Woodson

By the way, why is his username “SooperMexican”?
He was SooperMexican when you were in diapers and there was a real thing called message boards.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

Also, he spells “Super” wrong! Like some kind of Mexican! This absolutely proves that he’s a Russian liberal.

DinoDoc
Member
Active Member
DinoDoc

ROFLMAO. Pitch Perfect Parody of a Breitbart Fan

Texas Chris
Member
Noble Member
Texas Chris

Parody? That’s the real deal right there, Doc.

Right Scoop
Member
Member
Right Scoop

I love it when people come to this blog and essentially accuse Soopy of being an illegal all because they don’t like something he wrote.

And now you come along and essentially accuse him of the same thing, suggesting he doesn’t love America as much as he should because because you disagree with him.

You can disagree with him if you want, but to attack him over his internet name is below the belt.

This is your only warning on this. You won’t get another.

BoscoBolt
Member
Active Member
BoscoBolt

Once again, Trump reminds us that he is actually an abortion advocate.

Gross. One cannot claim to oppose the murder of pre-born children, and also believe that there are situations where the murder of pre-born children is acceptable.

Abortion is murder – every single time.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

Do you really believe that Trump does all that tweeting with 1 finger,I don’t.He probably has a ghost tweeter.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

do you believe his comments just suggested he does not want Roe vs Wade. as Law.

Texas Chris
Member
Noble Member
Texas Chris

Roe v Wade isn’t law.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

Thanks Texas Chris,why does it have to be overturned by the Supreme Court?

Texas Chris
Member
Noble Member
Texas Chris

Roe v Wade is a Supreme Court decision that overturned a Texas law banning abortion. The Texas law was law; Roe v Wade is an opinion.

And yes, Roe should be overturned, and the power to regulate abortion be left up to each state.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

Thanks again.

cookiebob
Member
Trusted Member
cookiebob

I don’t even consider that Alabama law truly against abortion because they know it’s not going to be taken up by the Supremes and will be overturned fast.

So what’s the point? To get on the record, without fixing anything, I find that reprehensible! It’s fake, and it’s why there is still abortion, because everyone is virtue signaling showing how much better they are than others, and doing NOTHING!

Empty virtue signaling is worse than nothing.

klaffner
Member
Member
klaffner

We will see. It is public knowledge that the purpose of the Alabama law is that it leaves zero wiggle room for the court on the question of LIFE. They are forcing a ruling on that single subject. I am not sure as you as to how it is going to go.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

[Deleted]

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

cookiebobcookiebob It’s far more strategic than that. It’s a legislative attempt to get the Supreme Court to *find* that a fetus is a human being.

The logic behind it is impeccable. Even if it somehow resulted in the most draconian level of enforcement, which I doubt, it’s a solid effort to begin righting what Roe v. Wade made so very wrong.

And I take a pure Federalism position on the issue. So I do not support a national ban, just like I wouldn’t support the federal government subsuming state laws on murder, rape, and fraud.

cookiebob
Member
Trusted Member
cookiebob

I am more of a Federalist on this too, and right now that is law in Alabama and I think they make claims about strategy, I just don’t think it works like that… the court strikes it, it’s gone… the Supremes are never taking up something this controversial, once it’s struck down it’s gone, and it has some easy things to strike it on like that you can’t replant a fetus from a tubal pregnancy.

I think it’s an empty gesture for re election.

Contemplator
Member
Active Member
Contemplator

You say “…it has some easy things to strike it on like that you can’t replant a fetus from a tubal pregnancy.”

You’ve made this slanderous claim so many times in recent days. Would you please actually show us the link where it can supposedly be shown that Alabama politicians are nuttier than fruitcakes?

D Guest
Member
Trusted Member
D Guest

People need to actually read the Alabama law. It specifically says it does NOT prohibit abortion in the case of an ectopic (tubal) pregnancy. Because as we know, an ectopic is never viable, does not develop properly, and would probably kill the mother if not removed.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

cookiebobcookiebob
If the Supreme Court takes it up, it’s going to be very hard to address the no-exceptions aspect without weighing in on when life begins.

Texas Chris
Member
Noble Member
Texas Chris

The logic behind it is impeccable.

100% agree.

And I take a pure Federalism position on the issue. So I do not support a national ban…

Hot dang Bob you’re on fire today.

Contemplator
Member
Active Member
Contemplator

The more states pass laws against abortion, the more likely it is that the Supreme Court will be forced to realize that America doesn’t see Roe v. Wade as “settled law.” I’ve been amazed at the recent turn of events and hope pro-life states keep them coming.

TomNewman64
Member
Noble Member
TomNewman64

I have no problem with his abortion tweet. He’s laying out his personal opinion, which is different from mine. But I think his is the most likely position to be taken by SCOTUS if they overturn Roe v Wade.

joyfulgiver
Member
Noble Member
joyfulgiver

Speaking of Ronald Reagan… “I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.”
September 21, 1980, Presidential Debate in Baltimore.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

Classic!

TomNewman64
Member
Noble Member
TomNewman64

Brilliant! We should demand a poll of the opinions of those still in the womb on abortion.

philliesthoughts
Member
Noble Member
philliesthoughts

I think the fact that they are living, growing and becoming vital second by second tells us how they would be voting. Life does not thrive if it is against itself living.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

If you are in a classic, heated topic discussion, here’s a pro tip:

Ignore any replies or arguments that begin with any form of, “So what you’re saying is…”

It’s like a big warning sign… “Strawman Ahead”

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

It’s called conversation. It’s short hand for, “What I hear you saying is….” The question is trying to illicit clarification of a position. What I read from your statement is that you don’t want your statements and positions questioned or clarified.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

Nice example of a strawman argument. Well done.

Texas Chris
Member
Noble Member
Texas Chris

What you’re saying is you don’t have an argument so you must misstate what Bob said.

TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

While I am all for bills challenging to Roe v Wade, we’re at risk of making the perfect the enemy of the good. Whether it was New York legalizing infanticide or Governor Northam endorsing infanticide, pro-abortion overreach was alienating moderates. Their radical agenda was pushing Americans to the pro-life position. And the pro-life response? …to throw it away in pursuit of perfection. Many in the pro-life movement are willing to sacrifice banning most abortions in an attempt to end all abortions now. That’s unrealistic, politically naive, and counter-productive to stopping the murder. Aside from being life and death, this issue is divisive because legalization of murder in the womb was imposed on America without broad consensus. We have broad consensus on banning late term abortions. Many states enjoy broad consensus on banning most abortions after the heartbeat is detected. Let’s save lives now, and then work on building consensus on… Read more »

C.W. Smith
Member
Active Member
C.W. Smith

TXGRunnerTXGRunner Right now, I think the momentum is shifting strongly in our favor. Life and death is what it ultimately comes down to, and if we really believe that, it only makes sense to frame it that way, and to be uncompromising about it. Wheeling and dealing is something lawmakers can do behind closed doors, but for the ground-level activists to entertain it makes them appear disingenuous, which in turn blunts and damages their entire argument.

To use a sports analogy (and I hate sports analogies), you play to win. If you compete in the Olympics, you go for the gold. If you end up with the bronze, that’s okay too, but you don’t go into it aiming for the bronze, never mind telling everyone that’s what you’ll settle for.

trytothink
Member
Noble Member
trytothink

This is a little bizarre because he has derided Reagan in the past for not being an actual conservative

How is it bizarre? It’s Trump. Consistency isn’t his strong suit.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

Sure cannot disagree with that comment.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

but here he is citing him as if he’s the patron saint of politics.

It doesn’t help that people are affirming him in that.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

Literally no is affirming him in that.

The fact that Trump treats politics like a rat with a chainsaw treats a maze is why he has so many fans.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

Progressives always revere their leaders like holy men, Bob. That’s why they make so many excuses for them, rationalize their every word and deed, and assert his genius at every turn (even when it makes no sense at all). They did the same thing to Barack. No matter what he said or did, to his followers he could do no wrong.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

So you’re waiting for the second coming before supporting anyone? After all, nobody is perfect, not even you.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

I’m not asking for perfection. I’m asking for principles that are more or less in line with my own.

Progressivism is not. This is why I could not support Donald, and why I’m gobsmacked that so many on the right do.

joyfulgiver
Member
Noble Member
joyfulgiver

“it shouldn’t be too surprising that he’s not down with the cause of completely wiping out abortion, as he used to be pro-choice.”

I look at it this way, the President has gone from pro-choice to pro-life with exceptions. While I don’t agree with the exceptions, I do believe that he eventually will come around on this, too.

You must admit, that his Pro-life stance is far better than anyone of the liberal candidates running against him. They are all anti-life…

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

Avatarjoyfulgiver Exactly. The, “Perfect as the enemy of good,” position is useless in almost every case.

The one time you really need that kind of absolutism in a leader is when you need someone to drop The Bomb.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

Except that it’s been made very clear that perfection isn’t what’s being sought.

Principle is.

I am not going to abdicate those for “wins.” Why do you? If you cheat on a test to get an A – hey, great, your GPA soars. Is that all that matters? Because while the GPA soars, your integrity tanks. Is that worth it?

It’s not to me.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

Assuming he’s flipped, and not just telling his bloc what they want to hear – which is a real issue with this guy. But hey, you’re right, if it gets us less abortions in America, great.

BUT I do refuse to play this game anymore:

his Pro-life stance is far better than anyone of the liberal candidates running against him

I don’t care what the competition is. I didn’t vote for Not Hillary in 2016, and I won’t be voting Not Joe in 2020. If Donald earns my vote, I’ll give it to him. If he doesn’t, then he’s not getting it solely on the basis that he’s not someone else.

I am 100% done with that binary sh*t – and this country would be a lot better if more folks stopped being slaves to it.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

ATAT
Rational self interest is the political heart (not the spiritual heart) of conservatism. It’s the main reason I have caucused with conservatives in the past.

You are being gobsmacked because running face first into hard fact is rough on the circuits.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

Rational self interest isn’t looking at a jar of 50% poison and 100% poison and drinking the former.

It’s not drinking either.

Progressive Right vs Progressive Left isn’t a choice. It’s a scam. If it’s going to be forced on you against your will, then so be it – but consenting to it gives it your stamp of legitimacy. Conservatism doesn’t do that.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

ATAT Nice metaphor. Doesn’t apply.

Rational self interest is using principal to guide your decisions. Your metaphor is about clinging to absolutism, which oddly enough, is the very position you have been flogging.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

It’s not absolutism, unless you consider absolutism to be unwilling to accept progressivism whatsoever when there are alternatives. (Or, are you denying the existence of alternatives?)

I am more than willing to make acceptable compromises when reality doesn’t quite run parallel to principle. You seem to think that I should be willing to make unacceptable compromises – when reality flies in direct opposition to principle.

Yea, I’m not going to do that. Why do you?

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

ATAT What possible compromises in your life could Trump be involved in? He’s an officeholder, not the Wizard King of ATAT Land.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

“They” are the ones being broomed aside. Don’t mistake people being thrilled with Trump’s actions as being the same as Obama’s lemmings.

That would mean you have completely ignored all of the incredibly over-the-top anger he generates whenever he indicates any willingness to support liberal left positions on anything.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

Don’t mistake people being thrilled with Trump’s actions as being the same as Obama’s lemmings.

I sure as hell can’t tell the difference.

That would mean you have completely ignored all of the incredibly over-the-top anger he generates whenever he indicates any willingness to support liberal left positions on anything.

Please. I have watched them cheer in full-throated support of his leftist actions. The most recent is his insane spending package. “Oh but we NEED that,” they all pretzel to rationalize, “Because like… infrastructure! And I don’t even know what that means!”

The problem is that Donald is an “Ends Justify The Means” type president. That’s a wholly progressive ideology – and everyone’s just going right along with it because he’s wearing the correct jersey.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

“Oh but we NEED that,” they all pretzel to rationalize, “Because like… infrastructure! “

You have to sift long and hard to find anyone holding that position. That’s what makes your arguments so untenable.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

30 seconds on breitbart dude.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

You’ve discovered the fringe. Congratulations. I thought you meant among people with some sort of Q rating on the right.

ShantiGirl
Member
Active Member
ShantiGirl

I never thought I would share this online but I’m getting tired of people who are not experienced with incest demand that children of incest should not be a reason for abortion. I am a father/daughter incest survivor. I was lucky. I didn’t get pregnant, but I know from personal experience that it takes years and years to process such violence and a young woman who is the victim will NOT be in a decent mindset to have such a child. No one on the pro-life side seems to think about the genetic issues. Father/daughter incest is like playing Russian Roulette. The chances of having an extremely damaged child are very good in such a situation. But I suppose for the sake of such child, the victim of incest should be required to carry, deliver, and possibly raise such a child. I am Pro-Life, but I will not sit in… Read more »

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

It’s all about you? Snuffing out life because it’s inconvenient is your answer? To answer your question, yes, most of us are thinking about the baby, and that his/her life is every bit as precious as yours.

TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

She wasn’t making it “all about” herself. She was relating horrific, personal experiences that informed her opinion.

While I don’t agree with her final position, I respect the fact her opinion is informed, considered, and based on trauma I can’t begin to comprehend. Accordingly, even as I disagree, I can manage to be courteous and respectful toward her.

It’s knee-jerk, flippant and insulting reactions like your, “It’s all about you?” that alienate many who are otherwise close to the pro-life position.

This isn’t the Alamo and your no William Barrett Travis drawing a line in the dirt insisting people are 100% for you or your enemy. Even Travis said he’d hold nothing against any man who opted to leave. You seem to be ready to show 5 times as much venom at a pro-lifer who differs with you on exceptions as you are at Governor Northam who openly endorses infanticide.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

You really think that by questioning somebody’s position will drive them away? If you really believe that then I’m guessing you don’t think much of your fellow man, or woman that they would be so easily flipped.

TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

You weren’t “questioning” her position, which would be completely legitimate. You were calling her conceited and selfish in making it all about herself. You were insulting her position instead of countering it in a respectful manner.

Writing is two dimensional so people can easily misinterpret tone. Your answer suggested a lack of empathy and respect, a dismissive tone. Did you mean that? I don’t know, but those sorts of attitudes tend to alienate some.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

I don’t have much time for emotional rationalizing, that’s how we got to where we are in the first place. That’s how we get less than 10% of the population dictating to the other 90%, through appeals to emotion.

And yes, when somebody plays the victim card and suggests that alone makes their position unassailable, I’m going to call them out.

Don Sutherland
Member
Active Member
Don Sutherland

Her argument was not “all about” her. She drew upon a horrific personal experience–one which few have had and few can ever relate to on a first-hand basis–to explain why she will not judge the victims of incest. That is not an argument about ‘convenience.’

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

No one on the pro-life side seems to think about the genetic issues. That’s because they’re irrelevant, outside of the fact that their genetics makes them an individual and unique human being. The chances of having an extremely damaged child are very good in such a situation. I have never met a child with physical/mental/emotional disabilities that wasn’t delighted to simply be alive. No child comes out of the womb seeking death, and I’ve never heard of one whose first words were “Kill me.” But I suppose for the sake of such child, the victim of incest should be required to carry, deliver, and possibly raise such a child. I’d like to believe that having the strength and determination to make a good (life) out of a terrible and tragic (incest/rape) would be enough motivation to see that child to term. After that, pass him off for adoption if you… Read more »

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

Actually it usually takes a few generations of inbreeding for there to be substantial harm. But keep on denying the humanity of those born of incest if it makes you feel better.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

What in all the nine hells are you even talking about? Do you even read posts before you reply to them?

TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

C’mon, did you really expect him to read all the way to the 17th word before flying off the handle? I think you’re asking a bit much of some… /sarc

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

See above, and then think about not pointing so many fingers back at yourself.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

I would hope you accept my apology. When I first read you post it hadn’t properly formatted, with quotes, on my browser, which made all of the text look as if it was attributed to you.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

thumbsup

D Guest
Member
Trusted Member
D Guest

I think he didn’t realize you were quoting the person above, and instead thought they were your own comments. I couldn’t see your block quotes until I upvoted your comment.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

The issue turns on the humanity of the child. If the baby is truly a human being, then it’s life deserves protection. Certainly, carrying the child to term is difficult, but so is taking part in ending the life of an innocent child –a child as innocent as the mother.

Abortion can’t unring the bell. The horror of the rape will always be there. Take a listen to this testimony of a father who took his daughter to an abortuary after she was raped. There are two sides to this story. https://therightscoop.com/patrick-madrid-on-why-the-rape-and-incest-arguments-for-abortion-dont-hold-water/

TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

Everything you wrote is correct and why I agree there shouldn’t be exceptions for rape and incest. However, we’re not in academia or seminary debating theoretical or moral questions. The president is talking about public policy. Personally, I don’t think he is any more pro-life now than he was pro-abortion 15 years ago — he’s playing to his audience. In this sense, that’s smart of him because a clear majority support restrictions on most abortions with the rape and incest exceptions. Pushing bills without exceptions hurts our cause. Poorly informed, recent converts, and those who only partially support the pro-life position are alienated when pro-lifers start talking about exceptions and trashing anyone who favors the exceptions. We’re splitting our movement and playing into the hands of the pro-abortion crowd for a small percentage of abortions. Let’s save as many babies as we can today. Let’s ban the abortions we can… Read more »

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

I was arguing the principle. I acknowledge that legislating involves prudential judgements.

In the case of the Alabama law, I don’t see any compelling reason to surrender peremptorily. If the law can pass in Alabama, we should celebrate that.

Other state legislatures should pass laws that make sense for their states.

Regarding SCOTUS, it is exceedingly unlikely that they will overturn Roe v. Wade, because of Roberts. He is a coward. And I don’t trust Kavanaugh, either. Regardless, incest and rape exceptions are tangential to our opponents’ intentions, which is unrestricted abortion through birth.

My position is that the states (like Alabama) should pass their laws and enforce them, disregarding the Supreme Court. An unjust law is no law at all. Make Roberts enforce his decision.

TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

If RBG has to leave the bench and the current president replaces her, then overturning Roe v Wade is very possible (now that would be an all out nomination fight to make the Kavanaugh fight look like child’s play.) Fair enough and I agree states should pass whatever laws fit their culture and consensus within their state — that is, after all, the point of having states. I am concerned about laws like Alabama’s though because of how they are used outside of Alabama. We’ve already see the pro-abortionists use it to say, “look, see how radical and extreme they are, they want to imprison women [doctors] for abortion…” (of course she didn’t add [doctors] until she was proven to be lying. Her argument to those leery of “bible thumpers” would be much weaker if the Alabama law included exceptions, but she would make it anyway. This must be a… Read more »

TomNewman64
Member
Noble Member
TomNewman64

Thanks for sharing. I think it’s important we face the real trauma that exists rather than sweeping it under the rug. My mind is not changed, but you have given us some sobering thoughts to consider.

Contemplator
Member
Active Member
Contemplator

I’m skeptical that all your neighbors’ problem was in the parents being related. I recently read that the chances for genetic defect are somewhat greater than normal in cases of incest, but aren’t really terribly high. I’m sorry, I don’t have time to look it up again right now. I’m also very sorry for what you went through.

Pregnancy can bring exposure that stops an incestuous relationship; abortion can cover it up and let it continue.

D Guest
Member
Trusted Member
D Guest

I’m sorry for what you suffered, but I gotta say, I find your statement “Is that the kind of life that should be saved?” to be absolutely chilling.

” I am not God. ”

Actually, you are putting yourself in the place of God when you make pronouncements on which lives are “worth” saving. Please reconsider. You are allowing your thoughts to go down the road of the eugenecists.

@GHalv
Member
Trusted Member
@GHalv

Taking the all or nothing position and insisting on making less than .5% of pregnancies (rape and incest) THE issue leads to MORE abortions. The Alabama law, sadly, will strengthen and reaffirm Roe v. Wade, because they made .5% THE issue, and allowed 99.5% of abortion to be ignored.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

So your problem is with intellectual honesty?

TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

No, my issue is with political neophytes who are more interested in virtue signaling and polishing their brass buttons than they are in ending murder.

Go research the Georgia Right to Life controversy from around 2014. GA RTL was led by a perfectionist who did his darnedest to scuttle a pro-life amendment to a budget bill. The weak as water GOP leadership was willing to allow the amendment, but only if it included exceptions for rape and incest. That’s unfortunate, but at least we’d get most of what we wanted.

The GA RTL went to work to destroy consensus for the amendment…that’s when ultra-pro-lifer Erick Erickson joined another Georgia pro-life group and GA RTL fell apart. Erickson recognized better to save many lives now than watch millions more die because we insist on perfection now.

trytothink
Member
Noble Member
trytothink

Yeah, I think that these lawmakers are really shooting the movement in the foot. They could save a lot of babies’ lives if they took a firm but compromising position on the issue. By trying to take the absolutist position, they’re just going to be overturned and their whole effort wasted. Worse, they’re going to validate the pro-choicers who for years have been saying that pro-lifers were going to eliminate all access to abortion, even in the cases of rape and incest.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

I suspect they’re hoping for SCOTUS to make a Solomon’s choice on it. But that’s a pretty dangerous gamble.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

Donald’s doesn’t appear to be a deep thinker, so it’s easy to understand why he’s falling for the rape and incest exceptions and the life-of-the-mother canard. There’s no need to re-plow that ground, since there’s a post here that handles the subject extremely well.

But this is ironic because the current, popular, pro-life surge is almost entirely attributable to Trump’s outspokenness.

TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

The pro-life surge is attributable to overreach by pro-abortion radicals willing to out themselves as infanticide advocates.

Something like 86% of Americans oppose late term abortions and think they should be prohibited. The number is higher for actual infanticide as endorsed by Gov. Northam.

Whatever we think of exceptions, the political reality is most Americans are not deep thinkers on this issue and oppose prohibitions on abortion without restrictions.

Let’s save as many lives as we can now. Then we can educate people about the small number of exceptions and work on that later. By insisting on everything now, we will lose and many more babies will die.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

>> The pro-life surge is attributable to overreach by pro-abortion radicals willing to out themselves as infanticide advocates. <<

Trump made it an issue. He deserves most of the credit.

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

The rape or incest argument IMHO is a ruse to allow abortions. However, I remember growing up there was a girl in the neighborhood who was mentally challenged and everyone said it was because she was the child of incest. As a kid I didn’t know what it meant and to this day I don’t know if it was true. Never knew what happened to her either. Incest was also the reason you weren’t allowed to marry close relatives. Had to be at least a “third cousin”.

The “life of a mother” is an entirely different case and is a choice which today is extremely rare. Does anyone though remember the movie “The Cardinal” where he had to choose between the baby and his sister and chose the baby?

joyfulgiver
Member
Noble Member
joyfulgiver

This is a link to my Pastor’s book website, “Well Versed: Biblical Answers to Today’s Tough Issues”, the chapter on abortion. Well worth watching the video and picking up a copy of the book. What he doesn’t say in the video, but outlines in the book, is the fact that rape and incest abortions make up less than .118% of all abortions. He points out his oldest daughter (adopted at birth) was the result of a vicious rape, and when she was 12 years old she told a group of Hospital board members, “I may not have been a “wanted” pregnancy, but I am a VERY wanted child.” http://www.wellversedbook.com/chapters/10-abortion-3/ “The Cardinal” where he had to choose between the baby and his sister and chose the baby? I am not familiar with the movie, but I do know women who have been pregnant and on their death bed who have declared,… Read more »

TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

This is not about our personal position on exceptions. I agree with you, but the political reality there is consensus to ban most abortions if we allow exceptions. Okay, let’s save 95%+ of the babies and then we can work on educating people on the exceptions. Without exceptions, support drops dramatically. Focusing on the exceptions only serves to split pro-lifers, alienate those who would otherwise be pro-life, and make pro-lifers look as radical as the pro-abortion politicians endorsing infanticide. Let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the good. Let’s not lose everything why we debate a small percentage of the cases. If I could get an outright national ban on abortions after 20 weeks today, with exceptions, I’d take it. That’s better than what we have today. If I could get 15 weeks or 10 weeks, or after a heartbeat is detected, I’d take any one of those deals… Read more »

Erdnay
Member
Active Member
Erdnay

In the case of rape and incest the mother should have the choice. To force her to carry a baby to term for the father of a MS13 or some other thug is tantamount to slavery. If she decides to have the child and either keep it or put it up for adoption the father should pay child support, healthcare, and college tuition.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

Is it thus your position that babies born of rape or incest are somehow less than human?

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

To force her to carry a baby to term for the father of a MS13 or some other thug is tantamount to slavery.

No, it’s not. It’s simply a consequence of tragedy.

If the thug cut the nose off her face instead of getting her pregnant, she still has to walk around without a nose until she can have it reconstructed. It may suck, but it simply is what it is. That’s not a pass for killing another human (who had nothing to do with her tragedy).

If anything, it illustrates the need for truly specialized care for women impregnated through rape. Literally, hand and foot waiting on them through that process to make it as comfortable as possible. What that we invested charity specifically for that, we could really undercut the progressive cop-out with this excuse for abortion.

C.W. Smith
Member
Active Member
C.W. Smith

ATAT

If anything, it illustrates the need for truly specialized care for women impregnated through rape. Literally, hand and foot waiting on them through that process to make it as comfortable as possible. What that we invested charity specifically for that, we could really undercut the progressive cop-out with this excuse for abortion.

Now that’s an interesting idea.

Raptor Rider
Member
Active Member
Raptor Rider

Just a couple years ago I finally realized I can not accept the rape and incest exclusions. I struggled with thinking about the women forced to carry and give birth after suffering what had already happened to them. The fact that we would be punishing an innocent life and that all life is created in God’s image made me realize if I support life I can not condone abortion for any reason except the actual life of the mother. That being said I would be ecstatic if abortion was restricted to only those three reasons and never after the first trimester.

Landscaper
Member
Noble Member
Landscaper

The Patrick Madrid thread from yesterday is worth a listen if you didn’t already. The ‘rape or incest’ argument certainly was put to rest for me after listening to his first caller.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas
TXGRunner
Member
Noble Member
TXGRunner

The philosophical or moral position is not the point. Ultimately, our position needs to be successfully implemented into public policy.

Today, there is a chance of getting significant restrictions on abortions with exceptions. We should push for that.

Today, there is no chance of getting significant restrictions on abortions without exceptions. Worse, by pushing for no exceptions, we are alienating people who otherwise will support bans on most abortions.

Let’s end what we can end today. Let’s save lives starting today, instead of continuing to let babies be murdered because we couldn’t get a law that perfectly matched our position.

ryan-o
Member
Noble Member
ryan-o

Ok, maybe I’ll agree to the rape or incest exception if we kill the rapists and incestuous parents, too. If anyone deserves death, it’s them, right?

ryan-o
Member
Noble Member
ryan-o

Well, I disagree. Wholeheartedly. The baby didn’t rape anyone. The baby didn’t commit incest.

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Famed Member
Dr. Strangelove

ryan-oryan-o Great point.

Michelle Lee
Member
Active Member
Michelle Lee

Pro choicers will argue that it is traumatizing for the mother to have to carry a “demon seed” to term. That it makes her re-live the rape in every second of the pregnancy.

desireeodey
Member
Trusted Member
desireeodey

Yet planned butcherhood never reports said rape and incest crimes. If the woman’s trauma mattered, pro aborts and planned butcherhood would want the person who committed this crime locked up.

C.W. Smith
Member
Active Member
C.W. Smith

Avatardesireeodey Good point.

Pongo
Member
Member
Pongo

I agree.

nc checks and balances
Member
Noble Member
nc checks and balances

The perfect is the enemy of the good. I also believe life begins at conception, but if we could get to the point of ending abortions except for these rare cases, think of the millions of lives that would be saved!

That fight would still go on, it would not be over.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

If those cases are so rare, they may as well be included. You either believe the scientific fact that human life starts with conception or you don’t. When you start making exceptions you find yourself on a slope, and the bottom of that slope has led to politicians giving serious consideration to terminating life after the infant is born.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

Legislating always involves prudential judgements, so an all-or-nothing approach isn’t necessary. But we shouldn’t back away from arguing against the rape and incest exceptions for two reasons. First, babies conceived in rape and incest are still babies –human beings whose lives deserve protection. Secondly, initial pro-life legislation with rape and incest exceptions can be positioned as a compromise or “middle” position, while the rape and incest loopholes could be closed later.

nc checks and balances
Member
Noble Member
nc checks and balances

It’s the Overton Window strategy which the Left has used against us for years.

Watchman
Member
Noble Member
Watchman

I’ve never understood the rape and incest argument. How does two wrongs make a right?

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

WatchmanWatchman I can’t speak for the women in those situations but my guess would be that it has to be a very horrible nightmare to be pregnant with their dad or brother’s baby. I wouldn’t support waiting past the accepted deadline for any other abortion though (with rape and incest). Like one of the states went down to 8 weeks I believe. I think if you push that down to zero it will never stand for very long.

Watchman
Member
Noble Member
Watchman

Would it be difficult? I imagine it would. But then they would go through the trauma of getting an abortion, which does nothing to undo what happened. And however it was brought about, the life is still innocent and it still is murder. And how often does this scenario happen? I’m willing to guess pregnancy as the result of incest is extremely rare. In this country at least.

Lillie Belle
Member
Noble Member
Lillie Belle

WatchmanWatchman Unfortunately, pregnancy as a result of incest is not as rare as you think! I know of 3 separate families in which incest pregnancy happened in the small rural area I grew up in.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

Lillie BelleLillie Belle Wow! That’s heartbreaking.

Dr. Strangelove
Member
Famed Member
Dr. Strangelove

Lillie BelleLillie Belle I’ve never heard of a pregnancy from incest, although I have met a number of people whom I suspected were the result of inbreeding.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

WatchmanWatchman If it’s so rare then why be so bothered that it’s included in the law? You can say it doesn’t matter how few…if it only saves one life even, but the same argument can be made for the women that suffer the traumatic experience.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

Think of the horror a person must suffer being dismembered and literally having the life sucked out of them.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

AvatarDrkjk I get that, which is why it’s controversial. It’s a bad scenario either way. I couldn’t tell a woman she had to have her brother’s baby. I just couldn’t. I also wouldn’t be able to tell a woman that she must die to save the life of the baby.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

The former is necessary, if difficult. The latter isn’t necessary, since the object of the act is to save a human life (the mother’s) while at the same time, sadly and without intention, ending another.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

AvatarThomas-Aquinas I believe you’re saying you agree with an exception for saving the life of the mother?

It’s a tragedy and heartbreaking scenario regardless.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

It’s more fundamental than even that question. If one argues that life begins at conception, which is what science tell us, then it doesn’t matter how a human being is sired. People that make exceptions for rape and incest have an obligation to clarify how those human beings are less than human. Abortion isn’t about the mother, it’s about the most innocent and helpless people of our society.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

When I was a teen I was a pro-life, but I seriously entertained the “pro-choice” position because I was libertarian, and thought to myself that I couldn’t imagine myself telling a woman what to do. But looking back, my motivation wasn’t really libertarianism, but simply a lack of courage. I didn’t want to anger anyone, even though I knew with all human certainty that the life in the womb was a human being. I simply wasn’t honest with myself.

Sonofagip
Member
Active Member
Sonofagip

Agree. It makes no sense to say you believe in the sanctity of innocent life and then say it’s okay to abort a baby conceived in rape. The baby is still an innocent life.

toon
Member
Trusted Member
toon

Rape and incest account for a small amount of the total abortions performed. Why take the chance of losing the core battle because we ignore those concerns. If the major battle of stopping abortion is won it would be much easier to win their hearts.

ryan-o
Member
Noble Member
ryan-o

Bad things have happened to me and I was never given the impression that I could kill someone because of it. Certainly not someone who had no responsibility in the incident.

BlackR1
Member
Trusted Member
BlackR1

Reagan felt the same way, actually.

He was remorseful for signing the Bill in California and said given the chance, he WOULD NOT sign it again.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

How does two wrongs make a right?

Well see, we have to fight fire with fire. We have to become the leftists in order to beat the leftists. The ends justify the means and all the other progressive unprincipled claptrap that the right wing has learned to accept and celebrate under their orange jackass leader.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

You typed a lot of words and managed to say not a thing.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

Ha, much like those who use those words.

DinoDoc
Member
Active Member
DinoDoc

it shouldn’t be too surprising that he’s not down with the cause of completely wiping out abortion, as he used to be pro-choice.

Given his past, I wouldn’t be at all shocked if he’s paid for a few himself.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

AvatarDinoDoc I wouldn’t either but he has said his position on the issue has changed. As long as he’s continuing with an acceptable view I’m going to roll with it. In the end what matters is what he supports that gets passed into law.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

Ok Soop, you’re being a little unfair here and disingenuous in my opinion. Being against abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother is still pro-life. If you push those out you’re going to lose a huge portion of pro-life supporters. What’s next? If he says that he’s ok with up to 8 weeks it’s more proof that he’s not pro-life?

Going to the extremes isn’t going to win enough people over for a viable effort. You may have the moral high ground but you will lose.

DinoDoc
Member
Active Member
DinoDoc

That’s honestly why I believe the Alabama bill was idiotic.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

AvatarDinoDoc I agree.

Watchman
Member
Noble Member
Watchman

Kong, can you give me one medical scenario where it’s necessary to abort a baby to save a mother’s life?

DinoDoc
Member
Active Member
DinoDoc

Kong is making a political argument based on actual evidence of how the American public views the issue. Would you rather the a large and robust pro-life movement on the cusp of actually limiting abortion or a much smaller but ideologically pure one secure in its morals but unable to enact real change?

Watchman
Member
Noble Member
Watchman

I’m not sure I understand the question DinoDoc. I ask the question because there is no medial scenario I know of where it is first necessary to abort a baby to save a mother’s life. So that whole argument is invalid.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

Let’s see. Uterine cancer. Pretty much any lower abdominal or pelvic surgery. A dislodged placenta.

desireeodey
Member
Trusted Member
desireeodey

My sister was pregnant with my niece when she had an abnormal pap smear. Her doctor monitored her and after my niece was born, my sister took care if it. 16 years later, both are alive and well.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

And ectopic pregnancies. If these things are considered “life of the mother” exceptions, then they are MORALLY legitimate, which is all-important.

The reason why these acts are morally justifiable is because abortion isn’t intended in these cases –saving the life of the mother is. The death of the baby is the concomitant effect of an act intended to save a human life.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/double-effect/

DinoDoc
Member
Active Member
DinoDoc

Let’s try this again: From 2018 Gallup: Do you think Abortions should be legal under any circumstances, only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all cases?

Exceptions: 50%
Abortions for all: 29%
No Exceptions: 18%

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

Which view do you think has the best chance of actually limiting abortions? The larger one that appeals to more people or the smaller and ideologically consistent one?

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

Which exception(s)?

DinoDoc
Member
Active Member
DinoDoc

Rape, Incest, and Life of the Mother.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

WatchmanWatchman I think that is false. Women die during birth and many times doctors know beforehand.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

AvatarDinoDoc Exactly…and I thought it was a good question.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

If the law can pass in Alabama, why stop it? Do you really think incest and rape exceptions matter to the Supreme Court? They want to be able to kill any baby legally. Period.

So then, to hell with the Supreme Court. An unjust law is no law at all, and the States have every right to restrict abortion. Make the limp-wristed John Roberts enforce his damnable decision.

This issue is the same as Jim Crow and slavery in principle, but far more serious in degree.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

WatchmanWatchman I’m not a doctor so of course I can’t answer that. However, there are mothers that die during child birth and the doctors tell them so they can make the choice. It would take some massive courage for the mother to know before birth that she has a high chance of dying during birth and still go through with having the baby.

Michelle Lee
Member
Active Member
Michelle Lee

If a pregnancy endangers a mother’s life, they will usually do a C-Section to deliver it and try to save both mother and baby.

desireeodey
Member
Trusted Member
desireeodey

Especially right before the baby is delivered. There is no reason.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

When you say going to extremes you mean being intellectually honest?

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

AvatarDrkjk There’s a difference in being intellectually honest in what you believe and pushing a bill that has zero chance of passing. He didn’t just say he believes there should be no exceptions. He pretty much said that anyone that disagrees isn’t pro-life. That’s an extreme position that would lose a lot of people that would otherwise help passing more restrictive laws. It’s not a smart move.

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

So your position is pregnant women should have the absolute right to define that which is and which not a human being? Personally I find that repugnant and extreme.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

AvatarDrkjk I don’t really give a flying f*** if you think that’s repugnant and extreme because I never said that and it pisses me off that you’re putting words in my mouth.

Doing this kind of twist is like me telling you that you hate mothers and want them to die during birth and/or want to punish them for daring to allow their daddies or brothers to rape them. Don’t tell me what I believe!

Drkjk
Member
Active Member
Drkjk

Do be honest. You are pro-life but only for those lives you approve of.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

AvatarDrkjk I don’t need to have an opinion because you’re here to tell me what my own opinions are.

Sentinel
Member
Noble Member
Sentinel

“As most people know, and for those who would like to know, I am strongly Pro-Life, with the (two) exceptions – Rape, Incest…”

A significant flaw imo.

Ronbo
Member
Noble Member
Ronbo

The guy was and still is a Democrat. He’s been a Populist President. Every Conservative should be ecstatic with what we’ve gotten and be grateful. He could’ve been a milktoast RINO to appeal to the center but he chose to stand his ground on issues lifelong REPUBLICANS don’t even have the spine to do.
I’ll give him a pass for having an opinion on the “exceptions” on abortion as will many others. The guy has been more Republican than anyone could have expected. Too bad he’s also been so immature. That being said, he’s come a long way from his first two years. Hopefully, he can hold his Twitter peanut gallery pot shots during the Dem primary to mature attacks on policy and not memes.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

RonboRonbo Oh please. The guy could cross every check mark on the conservative list except for one and you’d still claim he’s a Democrat. I am so tired of hearing that baseless bullsh**. If you define a conservative by being perfect you’re going to have an extremely small list.

Tracy
Member
Noble Member
Tracy

Trump isn’t an ideologue so he has mixed signals on abortion based on what he thinks is popular with the voters.

But he is appointing constitutional, pro life judges. So no matter what he feels personally about it, let the constitution be followed and it will work itself out as a matter of human rights and liberty for the unborn.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

TracyTracy

Trump isn’t an ideologue so he has mixed signals on abortion based on what he thinks is popular with the voters

That may be true but we also have to consider that politicians have to look at what is plausible and what will stand. I personally don’t want a President that pushes a view that is supported by 5% of Americans. Going all out and banning all abortions period with no exceptions for rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother wouldn’t even make it past Republicans.

Tracy
Member
Noble Member
Tracy

That’s what I mean he isnt an idealogue.

My feelings on the matter are it’s a human life in the image of God and shouldn’t be under a death sentance for the circumstances of its conception.

But I know I am in a small minority.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

TracyTracy I get that but I couldn’t support a bill without those conditions. I can imagine that for the mother it’s an extremely bad situation. A serious question (that you might not be able to answer….understandably) is would you feel the same way if you got pregnant by your brother or dad who raped you? The thought of it makes me sick…the act.

Tracy
Member
Noble Member
Tracy

If I felt that what was done to me was reason to kill the baby then I would find a way to accomplish the same without there being a law to make it easier.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

TracyTracy Which would have the same outcome as if a licensed doctor did it except it would be a lot more dangerous.

Tracy
Member
Noble Member
Tracy

Just as dangerous for the baby either way.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

TracyTracy Although that is true I’d say it would be a whole lot more barbaric and painful to do it with a coat hanger. It’s not that I disagree with you, but rather I’m torn between two perspectives of suffering. The mother was already traumatized and being forced to have the child against her will I’m sure is no less traumatizing. This is one decision I would leave up to the mother.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

TracyTracy Trust me, my position isn’t easy to come by. I see people saying that the baby didn’t do anything wrong to be snuffed out. They’re right, but it’s a case of being torn between two very bad options.

Tracy
Member
Noble Member
Tracy

Yes its two terrible options. But when culture/law starts to recognize the innocent baby having civil rights as we all enjoy the choice becomes a bit more clear.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

TracyTracy Maybe for some, but I don’t believe you’ll ever get enough support for a law like that. I think it would be wiser to not lose the support of the people that want those exceptions.

Tracy
Member
Noble Member
Tracy

The process for that is elections, if the voters in Alabama think the law goes too far then candidates will run on changing it.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

TracyTracy Of course, but I was talking about it on a more general level, not specifically about Alabama. I doubt Alabama’s law will stand either.

Sonofagip
Member
Active Member
Sonofagip

TracyTracy The problem is he is undermining the Alabama law by saying that women should be able to get abortions for A, B, and C. He should have just said he is strongly pro-life and left it at that. Mike Pence gave a better pro-life response this week.

Tracy
Member
Noble Member
Tracy

The law is already signed, it’s going to court and what he thinks about it doesnt matter.

Sonofagip
Member
Active Member
Sonofagip

But it’s not helpful for him, Kevin McCarthy, and Ronna McDaniel to hint they disagree with the Alabama law. Trump is the head of the Republican Party so his opinion on the matter is important.

Tracy
Member
Noble Member
Tracy

I agree the brave Alabama governor and the lawmakers needed more support. But Trump listens too much to squishy GOP.

Back to Top of Comments