One would think that after 43 years of Roe v. Wade that politicians would have this abortion thing down by now. Of course, I refer to Donald Trump’s infamous statement that women should receive some form of punishment if abortion was ever to be made illegal.
Let’s put this in perspective and context. First, we are talking about a hypothetical situation posited by Chris Matthews of all people…on MSNBC of all networks at that. Second, it was one of those obvious “gotcha” questions the Left likes to spring on unsuspecting “conservatives.”
Which brings me to my next point- Donald Trump is not a politician. However, that does not give him a free pass to make stupid comments such that he did. He made the comment because he is not conservative. He made the comment because he has no principles upon which he stands other than the bizarre thoughts that run through his head. Most importantly, he clearly misunderstands the pro-life movement and what it means to be “pro-life.” What else explains his statement and his four (count em…4) clarifications after the fact.
As a result, his responses seemed canned and spoon-fed as his campaign swung into damage control mode. For Trump to be accused of being “rehearsed” is, in Trump’s demented mind, worse than the stupid comment made in the first place.
One would think that politicians would have learned their lesson with Todd Akin. He, you remember, was running against Claire McCaskill, the incumbent Democratic Senator in Missouri. In response to some question on some obscure talk radio show he made the assertion that women have some unknown internal metabolic mechanism which prevents pregnancy as a result of rape.
Note to politicians, especially male politicians: just don’t say the word rape…it is kind of creepy. But, other than that, Akin was stupid. Everybody and their uncle in Missouri- the only audience he had to play to- knew that Akin was solidly pro-life. Instead of playing the role of armchair endocrinologist, he just should have said: “You know I am pro-life and always have been. My record speaks for itself. Now, can we please move on to things that the people are really concerned about, like jobs, the economy, health care and terrorism?”
To make matters worse, then Richard Mourdock in Indiana goes and doubles down on Akin and it costs the GOP a seat in the Senate. This defies basic political logic. It is political malpractice. This time with Trump, abortion was but a mere asterisk in the campaign. But, he managed to bring the subject front and center. The Trump apologies and walk-backs came faster than you can say “Melania.”
Pro-life groups were virtually universal in their condemnation of Trump’s original remarks. In fact, it has never been the belief or policy of the pro-life movement to have the woman face criminal charges for having an abortion, a point hammered into Trump’s thick skull.
But, how did the Left react to this universal condemnation? They viewed it as fake empathy for women. It was called “paternal” and “condescending.” They claimed it cast women in the role of victim and unable to make their own decisions. And this from a group that collectively casts women in the role of victim constantly when it comes to abortion, except they are maternal, not paternal apparently.
As for proof, look at how the pro-death lobby responded when Hillary Clinton used the “P” word to describe an unborn child. To them, using the word “person” undermines the cause for abortion rights… er, reproductive health. Better to describe it as a blob of undifferentiated cells, no different than your average algae growth in the nearest swamp. Diana Arellano speaking for Planned Parenthood Illinois said Clinton’s statement “further stigmatizes abortion. She calls a fetus an ‘unborn child’ and calls for late term restrictions.” Calling the unborn a “child” or “person” is officially forbidden among the pro-death lobby. Why? Because to do so would confer some sense of humanity on that “blob of cells.”
Once you confer humanity or personhood, all sorts of bad things happen to the death merchants. Silly legalities like homicide and those pesky constitutional rights start to enter the discussion. Hence, to them it is life (duh! what else can it be?), but it is not a person, although they leave the intermediary- human life- out of the equation because they lose the biological argument on that score also. Clinton’s slip of the tongue illustrates that the pro-death lobby cannot justify abortion other than it is their disregard for human life at a minimum and a person at a maximum.
To hear the Left speak, abortion is too restricted in the United States. They want the laws liberalized further to basically abortion on demand “regardless of ability to pay.” In 2012, the DNC dropped the phrase “legal, safe and rare” from their platform and added the aforementioned “regardless of ability to pay.” Their platform stated that it is a woman’s decision left to “her, her family, her doctor and her clergy.” Her clergy…really? If they can accuse the pro-life people of being paternal and showing fake empathy, then we can certainly paint them as being fake religious adherents. Regardless, their liberalization of abortion laws actually cuts family and clergy out of the picture. Why let a husband know? Why let your pastor know? Why let the pesky father know? It’s your decision, after all, not their’s. And isn’t that all that counts? You?