"The issue remains one of Donald Trump’s biggest weaknesses in November, no matter how much he tries to flip-flop on his position. His most recent attempt was to say he would veto a national abortion ban.... A cynical read would be that the Trump campaign hopes these Melania excerpts will help them with moderate voters who are angry about
Dobbs and fear the former president will go even further to roll back our rights if he’s reelected. The women in his orbit have always been useful in softening his image: In a similar fashion to Ivanka Trump being painted as a 'moderating force' during the first Trump administration, the former First Lady’s memoir helps portray her as someone who will advocate for women’s rights from inside the White House...."
Yes, I would presume that Melania's seemingly independent voice is coordinated with the Trump campaign. Those who are imagining that she's antagonistic to Trump and intentionally undermining him are — I suspect, reading their mind while they read hers — projecting.
Posts
122 comments:
"His most recent attempt was to say he would veto a national abortion ban.... "
Most recent? Hasn't he been consistent on this?
The number of abortions has increased since Dobbs. So has the national debt and number of illegal aliens in the US.
win-win-win for the left.
(clap clap). The last horsey crosses the finish line. The problem for the Democrats is that the first Trump term is overwhelmingly better regarded than the Biden regime, with the exception of delusional partisans. People don't actually need a paper thin excuse to dismiss the increasingly spastic diatribes of Hollywood and the New York media, but it's nice that they have some.
no matter how much he tries to flip-flop on his position
I don't think he has flip-flopped. From the onset in 2015 I think most folks knew he wasn't a dyed in the wool social conservative, whether it was LGBT issues or abortion issues. But he has consistently supported appointing originalist judges. which is primarily what folks wanted.
The left, overwhelmed by their hatred of Trump, ignored the two most powerful advocates they could have had withing the Trump circle: Melania and Ivanka. Unable to think clearly while mourning the Hillary defeat they torpedoed any chance they had to meaningfully influence the Trump administration.
couples sometimes disagree. News at 11.
"I would presume that Melania's seemingly independent voice is coordinated with the Trump campaign."
Yeah, I have to agree, the supposed independence of women is largely bogus. Who do you coordinate your seemingly independent voice with?
Because Republicans know they are getting absolutely slaughtered on their position on abortion and women’s healthcare. They’re dragging the wives out so they don’t have to look like idiots backtracking their position. They can blame it on the wives. It’s still nothing but nonsense.
By what mechanism could a national abortion ban be enacted, and who would enforce it, particularly in states where it's legal? Or is this just a scare tactic to keep women on the reservation?
NY Magazine judgment is colored, blinkered by its religious beliefs, which it presumes should be the true alignment of everyone else.
As for Trump et al, it may be as simple as human rights, not rites, and the practical affirmation that demos-cracy dies in darkness, and we live in a liberal world. It may be a sincere belief in the 50 state laboratory/market to optimize outcomes.
That said, six weeks until planned parenthood becomes a criminally homicidal choice under legal statutes in all 50 states. #BLM
Young women like Andrea who grew up under Roe v Wade don't understand its controversy. That might explain her overly aggressive tone, which kills whatever point she is trying to make. Trump "took away" something that she thought was set in stone.
It is fun to watch Rich pretend that more than 60 million actual people will vote for Kamala Harris.
Melania's had a lot to say lately.
This could battlespace pred for a coordinated exposure of the would-be First Chad's history of violence.
"The issue remains one of Donald Trump’s biggest weaknesses"
Au contraire: Trump is for what most Americans are for: limited, rare abortions The Clinton Policy ... specifics decided by state not the federal government.
That's why he's winning.
"Most recent? Hasn't he been consistent on this?"
At the debate (the one with KH) he avoided answering the question. Said it was hypothetical and gave that as a reason not to answer.
It's an empathetic appeal to published fear tactics. In the worst case, women can abort their child in the first six weeks without judgment, labels, or legal carveouts. Women always have the right of self-defense through reconciliation. #BLM
He's been consistent since Day 1:
* States decide abortion laws ... not courts and certainly not our corrupt federal government.
* Abortions should be limited to the first 13 weeks. Plenty of time for any woman to get one.
* No prosecution if you have to go to another state to get your abortion.
Yes of course Melania is choosing this time to speak about her abortion stance now is to help Trump with the moderate women voters. I don’t think Melania dislikes Trump at all and has come forward publicly to help him several times. They are well matched, IMO.
Rich knows exactly how many votes for Kamala have already been printed up ready for delivery and it's a LOT more than 60 million.
Especially since her stance matches his. And most Americans. Except Planned Parenthood, which makes money selling baby organs.
"By what mechanism could a national abortion ban be enacted, and who would enforce it, particularly in states where it's legal?"
It would be a federal statute, enacted in the usual way, either a direct ban — purportedly under the commerce power — or a condition on spending — under the spending power.
It would be enforced by scaring the bejeezus out of doctors.
Sometimes you just never know how my right-wing friends like Achilles are going to react to things.
... and medical facility administrators.
"I don’t think Melania dislikes Trump at all...."
She might be sorry he's complicated their lives and exposed her to public scrutiny and criticism, but I think when he's around with his family he's quite lovable, kind, and a lot of fun.
He's away a lot, but I think she has plenty in life to enjoy when he's not around.
The debate is if Trump would support or veto a democratic poll supporting the performance of human rites, sequestration of the "burden" of evidence.
The same ruling that overturned Roe v Wade would apply in reverse, would it not?
Of course she coordinated this statement with the Trump Campaign- only morons don't understand this (like Bich yesterday). Even Inga knew this which makes Bich look even more stupid.
So Melania supports Kamala Harris now?
Melania's husband took women's healthcare rights away so he obviously couldn't have cared less what she thought about a woman's right to choose.
It's a little late to be bringing this up now unless she plans on endorsing Harris soon.
Trump is not strongly anti-abortion, but has to placate that lobby. The best strategy is to advocate for the states to decide. That is what he has been consistently proposing.
Many of us out there are moderately pro-choice. I have no problems with a ban on abortion after 12 weeks. I have very serious problems with the extremist position of many Democrats who believe that abortion at any time is OK.
However, the Democrats and the media want the argument to be no abortions at all versus abortions at any time.
Doctors have a principle and principal interest of conserving human life. This is at odds, misaligned with alleged medical staff with Pro-Choice religious sentiments of pride and profit.
I should also add that Trump's stance mirrors Dick Cheney. Who Kamala came out in gushing praise of today. You remember Dick Cheney. He faked up the Iraq war with the "weapons of mass destruction" lie so Halliburton could make billions off murdering brown people. He supports Kamala and she's been touring the country with the Cheney family memebers.
Happy war, Inga!
She's probably sorry she's now the target of a mob of murderous Democrats bent on assassinating anyone in the Trump family they can get their hands on.
The debate surrounding the performance of human rites, and carbon sequestration, mirrors the debate about the viability of sustaining slavery and Diversity of progressive past in a revolutionary war.
slaughtered is a good word for pro-abortionists.
Such a statute would be unconstitutional. Those powers not explicitly granted to the Federal government are reserved for the States.
The Supreme Court ruled that ONLY the states could take women's healthcare rights away.
Some Democrats are STILL trying to abort Donald Trump, and he's in his 234th trimester.
So in other words he has been consistent.
Bich said: Melania's husband took women's healthcare rights away"
Care to explain what health care Trump removed? Is abortion health care to you? BTW - the abortion pill is really risky to use. Is that Trump's fault too? Did Trump take away their birth control? or their tampons? I heard on Teh View and from Stephanopolis that Trump and Romney banned tampons.
Is this true?
Process and written words do not matter to people who want national abortion regimes.
They rely on result based decision making.
Bich lies again. Abortion is NOT healthcare. I am prochoice, but with limits like 14 weeks.
Both Biden and now Harris are making promises to bring back Roe vs Wade that they have no legitimate possibility of keeping.
Even NBC News agrees.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/joe-biden/biden-big-abortion-promise-fact-check-roe-v-wade-rcna146668
How many times will they get away with this scam?
This is the dishonest 80 IQ take.
Stupid people like Rich cannot discuss the topic honestly. This was always a state decision. Trump just did what most people understand as the right thing and returned the issue to States where it belongs. Trump took exactly zero rights away.
Democrats only solid remaining coalition member is the Harem Girl coalition.
Democrat men need to make sure they don't have to pay child support. Only the high class men like Emhoff can get away with beating women and using intimidation.
He has not flip-flopped: it is all in how the question is framed, and then how the media report on the question that was asked (they lie about it) and attribute Trump's response to that fabricated lie.
The pimp hand of government to be used in whatever way the regime needs to keep people in line.
@Yancey Ward — Of course Melania supports abortion rights.
So does Trump.
Unless he can get more votes being against abortion rights,
then he’s against them.
Until it makes him unpopular in the next election…
And so on.
And this book was clearly released as an attempt to deflect from the MAGA stance on abortion.
IANAL (and certainly not a Constitutional/USSC scholar) but it seems to me such a statute would probably push current Commerce Clause jurisprudence to its breaking point. I can see at least 5 and maybe even 7 votes to rule such a law unconstitutional while preserving Dobbs if at the same time the opinion trimmed back the authority of Congress to enact legislation under the Commerce Clause. It would at least pose a significant quandary (thinking of the sweating spaceman with one of two red buttons to push) for the usual block of three liberals.
"I would presume that Melania's seemingly independent voice is coordinated with the Trump campaign. "
That was my thoughts when I saw the sock-puppet changed its name.
There's a national ban on marijuana. How is that enforced in the states where it's legal?
I'm going to give a bit more agency and assume she knew the man she was marrying in terms of his public persona. I'm sure any loving wife would hate to see her husband stand in front of a crowd and potential assassin. He also had security before running for President. I think she had to know what she was getting in Donald J. Trump.
“That was my thoughts when I saw the sock-puppet changed its name.“
“The Rules Were CBS Wasn’t Going To Fact Check” — came in a close second. 🤣
Dixcus
Such a statute would be unconstitutional. Those powers not explicitly granted to the Federal government are reserved for the States.
In light of the court upholding the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act are you certain that an national abortion ban would be struck down, considering Dobbs found that there was no specifically protected right to abortion in the 14th amendment due process clause which presumably would extend to 5th amendment Federal due process claims?
Check your arithmetic. Someone 3+ months past his 78th birthday is in his 316th trimester.
Oops, 317th.
Projection, lying and killing the unborn are what Democrats do best.
“Except Planned Parenthood, which makes money selling baby organs.”
Speaking of “makes”, some of these PP ghouls MAKE the scene in Lamborghinis bought with “baby organ” money!
Political allies and political interests are like streetcars or buses in that you take them as far as you need to go and then you get off. For Blormf it's Right-to-Life™ voters and with the Democrat-Wreckers Party it's support for Israel. Who needs an umbrella any more when the sun is shining?
I think there is a difference between dodging a question to avoid upsetting potential voters and taking the opposite position on an issue to try and opportunistically gain support of new voters . Trump has before publicly said he would not support a national abortion ban and prefers to leave the issue to the states. While I suspect most folks on the right are supportive or at least fine with this position, ardent Pro-Life advocates are not. As far as I'm aware Trump has never publicly stated he would support a Federal abortion ban. I think he has also consistently been moderate about how he treats abortion politically. After the Dobbs decision he was noticeably quiet about it even though many fairly attribute that outcome to him and his judicial appointments particularly his steadfast support for Kavanaugh, who many assume a lesser Republican President would have waffled on.
Abortion is Healthcare like Pat Boone was an R&B singer.
Never go against a weevil when it comes to math…
“ The same ruling that overturned Roe v Wade would apply in reverse, would it not?”
Roe v Wade was built on sand. Built on penumbras and emanations of some sort of non-enumerated Privacy right. It wasn’t really that bad though, with its 3 trimester standard, moving from a woman’s interests being supreme, to that of the fetus’ rights being supreme. In any case, the justification through penumbras and emanations was, in the minds of many, an admission that they had just made the whole thing up out of thin air. The Supreme Court, last year, just called BS on that sort of legal reasoning. It’s just going to be hard for a later Court to reinstate federal preemption of state abortion laws, with a straight face.
Watched an interview with her recently. I got the impression that he is much warmer with his family. But then, the private Trump really appears to be warm (unlike the Crooked Hillary, Biden, or Harris private personas, that all appear to be cold and vicious).
We have a place at Trump International in Las Vegas. He popped in maybe 3 weeks ago, and I talked to someone who worked in the Trump store there (where you can buy all sorts of Trump label/emblem merchandise). He had popped in, right before closing, and talked to her for maybe 20 minutes when she was closing up. Just warm and interested in her and her life. He’s like GW Bush, in remembering names and things about the employees he meets there. While never having met him, he has reportedly (from hotel security) referred to my partner as the French looking woman who lives there. Whenever he sees her, he waves (she is sure that it is for her, but she would…). His older two boys seem to follow him there, but Ivanka seems to be more reserved.
I don't understand where the flip-flop is supposed to be. Trump said it should be returned to the states. Vetoing an federal ban would be consistent with that. People claiming that that is a flip flop are either stupid, lying or guilty of binary thinking, which I've been told is white supremacy.
Now I could maybe see Trump signing a law that says something like no federal money should be used to pay for an abortion after 12 weeks, to make up a number. The Democrat mind interprets "no federal money" as a ban.
Saw a dem campaign sign this morning imploring one to "save decency, vote democrat". Clearly ignoring nanygate.
The thing is, that the FJB/Harris Administration has been so horribly incompetent, that that’s all that they have going for them this election. We get both MT and AZ TV here, and that is the subject that the Dems hit, by far, the hardest. The Republican candidates are invariably tarred as threatening women’s healthcare choices by possibly considering a nationwide abortion ban (which would have the same Constitutional problems as a federal law overriding state abortion laws, so beloved by Democrats).
The thing is, is that for most of us in this country, abortion really isn’t an issue. Middle of the road abortion restrictions are just fine, while unlimited abortion and complete abortion bans are both seen as extreme. And that is the danger for Democrats - that they are pushing the extreme unlimited 9+ month abortion position so hard, and it’s probably not getting much traction. Yes, it’s getting the hard core feminists, like Inga, fired up. But it’s a small, niche, position, at odds with the preferences of a distinct majority in this country.
They are that bloodthirsty
The Republican Party has been awful on this issue. They are doing everything that I had thought Trump had taught us not to do, which is to prevaricate and run away. If you're pro life, state it boldly. Even if voters disagree with you, you'll look like a strong leader and get votes and respect. Ducking and diving makes you a coward, and nobody will vote for that.
When I was a Surgery resident at LA County in 1969 abortion was legal in California. I did a few when I was on GYN because the residents all hated doing them. Finally, the county hired some docs we called "mercenaries" and they did them. They were not respected.
More mind reading by stupid lefties.
Remember this was the way it started with Roe, and then we end up at the butchers Gosnell and Carhart, do not doubt me where they want to go
The mainstream Republican position on abortion is much closer to the mainstream position of the American people than is the Democratic position. I don't really know what Trump's position is other than the opinion of the president shouldn't matter because it's a state issue.
That said, abortion is a problem for Trump because the media has successfully portrayed the issue as Republicans no in all circumstances, even child rape, and the Democrats yes, but let's not get specific about what that "yes" means.
Democrats are warm and caring while Republicans are cold and doctrinaire, which, as rhardin correctly points out, is like catnip to women.
I was not happy to see Kari Lake go all in on the AZ legislature's ban. Stupid politics. It will put an extreme lefty in the Senate.
--- voters who are angry about Dobbs and fear the former president will go even further to roll back our rights if he’s reelected
Like he might pack the Supreme Court; eliminate the Electoral College; censor all hateful speech especially if he disagrees with it; ban guns and gun ownership; quarter soldiers in Nancy Pelosi's house; order the FBI to make pre-dawn raids on the houses of his political opponents; bring additional civil rights and hate-crime indictments against any of those opponents who are somehow found not guilty of the first crimes; but delay the prosecutions of those extra charges for years; get rid of jury trials in favor of judges he appointed; because he will make sure his judges impose fines of $500 million and up for the political opponents charged; and then, when he sees that is all good, he will ban the 19th Amendment.
Homicide statutes are legislated in state jurisdictions. At least one reason is the plasticity of science. Another reason is that demos-cracy can be aborted in darkness. Another reason is diverse moral and ethical religious beliefs. Some people just want a safety net to relieve forward-looking "burdens".
Dem ability to hallucinate outcomes while ignoring real life circumstances, is rather extraordinary
Some knuckleheads like Lindsay and Niki, make this ephemera plausible,
It would be a federal statute, enacted in the usual way, either a direct ban — purportedly under the commerce power — or a condition on spending — under the spending power.
It would be enforced by scaring the bejeezus out of doctors.
How is this working with regards to illegal aliens in states with sanctuary cites? Many of them (the states, not the illegals) having the bejeezus scared out of them by the feds for providing a safe harbor for them (the illegals, not the states)?
According to Critical Diversity Dogma, women are merely characters in a feminine gender bloc. Do women defer to the opinion of other women, of men?
"The issue remains one of Donald Trump’s biggest weaknesses in November, no matter how much he tries to flip-flop on his position...."
NY Magazine's projection is not limited to Melania. Trump has been consistent saying that he's glad to see the Federal Government out of it, glad to see the voters deciding the matter at the state level. The Progressive Leftist Media has been consistent accusing him of 'banning' it - as if he did it personally - because his addition of Justices to the US Supreme Court has tipped its balance towards conservatism, resulting in Roe vs Wade being overturned - a defensible ruling, with written judicial opinions laying out why, and dissents taken into consideration.
Since those two positions are in conflict, the Progressive Leftist Media accuses Trump of flip-flopping, in spite of the evidence. But even accusations like this are cold comfort when you're a crybaby that can't stand to lose, and you're furious that you've lost, especially because you've cheated well and expected to be declared 'winner'. They lie, and you don't hate them enough.
The liberals are flip-flopping with how to frame Trump in order to provide viable leverage to wage lust and abortion for profit and other selfiesh purposes.
Fast and Furious following the Holder, Whitmer, Pelosi et al script.
First Arizonans approve the abortion measure, then they vote to remove two state Supreme Court justices who voted to uphold the state's territorial-era — anti-abortion law. They pick Ruben Gallego over MAGA Kari Lake and take back the state Legislature. Job well done Arizona voters. Oh, and convict all the MAGA’s who were charged in the fake electors scheme.
This should be lights out for the Republican Party in Arizona. The Democrats have turned the tables on Republicans. Whereas twenty years ago the Republicans elected Bush by promising to protect marriage, now Democrats will elect Harris by promising to protect abortion rights. Alito must be pulling out his hair.
It's a CON dig deep it's supposed to garner the moderate vote.I don't care do you? This lady is also a grifter and with her.plagarized speeches and her birtherism they are two peas in a pod.Of house it's " look over here trick" for the gullible.They both are proven liars so isn't it interesting to drop this now.Cmon man use your head
with illegals voting - the fix is in. You should be happy.
I agree 100%. The Democrats are filled with hate on this issue. Republicans should respond with love and talk about loving children all the time. Love your baby, love your man, love your woman. Be pro-life! But way too many Republicans are ruled by fear and cannot speak the truth on this. Trump's fear on this issue is shameful and makes him look bad.
Iman
Abortion is Healthcare like Pat Boone was an R&B singer.
Oh yeah? Well, this may change your opinion.
Pat Boone covers Little Richards Tutti Frutti
Even though Melania came out in favor of abortion, that doesn't mean she's in favor of it in all circumstances. For the record, in Slovenia it's legal up to 10 weeks.
It would be a bad mistake for Republicans to attempt to nationalize the abortion issue and write a law for the entire country.
What pro-lifers should do is fight to legally recognize the humanity of unborn children, and to declare that an unborn baby is a person with a right to life.
This does not ban all abortions, because our Constitution is silent in regard to when life begins and when people die. But it would force states to be honest about their death statutes and their laws, and to be as fair as possible to the unborn.
Melania's husband took women's healthcare rights away so he obviously couldn't have cared less what she thought about a woman's right to choose.
He did? I missed that. Got a link?
Melanie is an empty nester now. Baron went back to NYC for college. So she wants to nurture young teen girls that get knocked up. It’s a woman thing.
Maybe Pat Boone is Johnny Rotten.
(disco vs punk at the links)
Oh , The humanity!
Washington Post:
"Melania Trump is the kind of woman who travels to a flood-ravaged state in a pair of black snakeskin stilettos. Heels this high are not practical. But Trump is not the kind of woman who has to be practical. "
It would be a federal statute, enacted in the usual way, either a direct ban — purportedly under the commerce power — or a condition on spending — under the spending power.
That would be like a federal attempt to regulate the slave trade. Instead of trying to increase its power vis-a-vis the states, Congress should do what the 14th Amendment gives them the authority to do -- make sure that states are not discriminating against unpopular minorities and classifying them as non-people.
Brave Republicans say that a person is a live human being.
Not-so-brave Republicans classify corporations as people and have no regard for the unborn.
Trump's campaign in 2024 is similar to Lincoln's campaign in 1860 -- he's trying his best to appeal to the mushy middling moderates of the middle.
Mary Todd's family owned slaves.
If Congress were to rely on the Commerce Clause, that regulation would only affect abortions that were done for money -- the billion dollar abortion industry. It would not affect pro bono abortions that were done for free.
Saint Croix said:
Maybe Pat Boone is Johnny Rotten.
(disco vs punk at the links)
10/4/24, 4:50 PM
""This song talks about the Los Angeles fetus disposal scandal when 16000 babies were found in a container in LA"
Yes, it's a pro-life song. What's your point?
It's not a good song, in my opinion, but I appreciate the balls of an artist to say what he thinks and feels openly and honestly. He didn't do that one for money.
Trump is pretty clear, leave legislation to the states and he would veto any national ban, which has two natura enemies the filibuster (couldn't get 60 Senate votes) and the Supreme Court (said it would take a CA).
Dems in TX are using Abortion as an issue for the US Senate Race, blaming Cruz. A US senator can't do anything more about state abortion laws than they can direct FEMA (another anti-Cruz talking point).
Radicals on both sides of the aisle in TX prevent any compromise. A heart cut of the legislature could probably pass a TX Cons Amendment (to be voted on by the citizens) to adopt a European level control. But the Dems are all in on no limits of any kind. The rad pro life Republicans are a minority but enough to keep the bill passing on R votes alone.
The current Governor was "elected" by vote fraud so obvious that everybody knows it. The Dims, of course, are pleased.
"Use your head." What head is that ? The empty one that holds up your hat ?
"no matter how much he tries to flip-flop on his position" claims, without evidence, Andrea González-Ramírez.
I wonder what Ms. González-Ramírez's position is on government censorship of misinformation.
Stupid poitics, as I said elsewhere.
unbold
Saint Croix ... if wheat grown on your own farm consumed on your own table after grinding the flour in your own mill and baking the bread in your own oven affects 'interstate commerce' in wheat, then anything is fair game (which I think is the Professor's point that the Commerce Clause would be used as a justification)
The Hyde Amendment was good law even under Roe. Nothing says that just because something is legal that the government has an obligation to pay for it.
So he is pro a 13 week abortion ban, Dixcus?
"I am friends with school shooters."
Only trumpers would believe anything this person says or writes right before trump getting beat up by women over abortion and womens rights and his partner says this ..Cmon man not all are drinking the cool aid...‘Do they think we’re stupid?’: Melania Trump backs abortion rights just before election
“It is pretty craven and pretty disgusting to see,” says Jessica Valenti on Melania Trump coming out in favor of abortion rights just weeks before the election—as her husband is trailing in the polls with women. Valenti is the author of “Abortion: Abortion: Our Bodies, Their Lies, and the Truths We Use to Win.”
That was in fact his most recent attempt to define his position. About a year ago. He's been consistent since. No flip-flop there. Sorry.
Lets have a response Ann.
$
Full Moon screaming to the world that he has no taste.
If you want to see disgusting, watch a baby suffer an abortion. For some reason that excites your side, instead of horrifying them that an innocent human being can be treated ghastly.
I think Lopez is a better citation. A doctor who did a pro bono abortion would be doing one from the healthcare perspective. I'm thinking of the "hard cases" in an emergency room. You couldn't charge the patient for the abortion -- thereby avoiding the federal criminal statute -- but you could provide needed healthcare.
If Roe had been a more honest opinion, it would have said something like this. Abortion for medical emergencies. But the authors of that opinion wanted to create a billion dollar abortion industry and run it from the unelected branch of the government. That's why Lochner could and should get thrown around when people talk about abortion, which involves contracts (obviously) and financial payments.
Anyway, I think the real pro-life move is to recognize the humanity of unborn children, not to try to regulate surgical procedures. That's why the pro-life movement is "pro-life" (recognizing the unborn's right to life) and not "anti-abortion" (opposed to a type of surgical practice). Using the commerce clause to stop abortion is to accept the pro-choice premise that babies aren't people. I reject that premise, utterly.
Balancing acts like this abortion kerfuffle always can be used by politicians.
Since Roe proclaimed the issue over the death sentence on innocents has upset good people on both sides. The argument goes on despite Roe’s pretense that it was settled.
The women want the only say as if the pre born human inside them is only a waste product. The very idea that there exist community standards that say pre born have protection from extermination has become a fight to the death. And inconveniencing mothers who want to kill their children deprives mothers of the powers of life and death that they see as political power.
The three new SCOTUS Justices are Trump’s legacy favoring innocent humans so Trump must die so that babies can die on an industrial scale.
Post a Comment