Christians and Trump--two perspectives

[NorrinRadd]

I do think there needs to be some political consequence to Trump for suddenly running to the left on abortion. If we support him nonetheless, we've demonstrated that there is no incentive for Republicans to take pro-life positions since we'll vote for them either way anyway.

I don't think he ever really was Pro-Life. At least he hasn't really thought it through. He's said a few things that annoyed me. (Who was that lady who was running for office, and after losing said she should have taken Trump's advice and softened her Pro-Life rhetoric?) Most recent of course is the "Leave it to the States" crap.

But really, he's just following the blowhards before him. Anyone who huffs, "It's an innocent baby human!" and then whips around and falls all over himself to assure, "Exceptions for rape and incest!!!" is a phony. The Pro-Life movement -- the politicos, at least -- have always been disingenuous. "Rape and incest" to appeal to women, "States should decide" to appeal to the Federalists. If they *really* believed the unborn human is an actual baby, they wouldn't weasel that way. They'd be honest, and take the political losses.

[Ronson]

I don't think he ever really was Pro-Life. At least he hasn't really thought it through. He's said a few things that annoyed me. (Who was that lady who was running for office, and after losing said she should have taken Trump's advice and softened her Pro-Life rhetoric?) Most recent of course is the "Leave it to the States" crap.

But really, he's just following the blowhards before him. Anyone who huffs, "It's an innocent baby human!" and then whips around and falls all over himself to assure, "Exceptions for rape and incest!!!" is a phony. The Pro-Life movement -- the politicos, at least -- have always been disingenuous. "Rape and incest" to appeal to women, "States should decide" to appeal to the Federalists. If they *really* believed the unborn human is an actual baby, they wouldn't weasel that way. They'd be honest, and take the political losses.

If we decide to list all of Trump's failings, we could fill a book.

I'm satisfied with some movement on this issue, as opposed to none. The culmination of his SCOTUS appointments has assuredly saved lives.

[KingsGambit]

I don't think he ever really was Pro-Life. At least he hasn't really thought it through. He's said a few things that annoyed me. (Who was that lady who was running for office, and after losing said she should have taken Trump's advice and softened her Pro-Life rhetoric?) Most recent of course is the "Leave it to the States" crap.

But really, he's just following the blowhards before him. Anyone who huffs, "It's an innocent baby human!" and then whips around and falls all over himself to assure, "Exceptions for rape and incest!!!" is a phony. The Pro-Life movement -- the politicos, at least -- have always been disingenuous. "Rape and incest" to appeal to women, "States should decide" to appeal to the Federalists. If they *really* believed the unborn human is an actual baby, they wouldn't weasel that way. They'd be honest, and take the political losses.

The House Republican candidate in the district I moved out of last year was a nurse who was life-of-mother-exception-only and said that she would use her professional specialty to help other Republicans avoid crafting stupid legislation that would inadvertently ban things like treating ectopic pregnancies. She was destined to be a sacrificial lamb in that district, but I've never more enthusiastically voted for somebody for House.

[KingsGambit]

If we decide to list all of Trump's failings, we could fill a book.

I'm satisfied with some movement on this issue, as opposed to none. The culmination of his SCOTUS appointments has assuredly saved lives.

My argument is that the movement is likely to be undone anyway as Republican strategists learn that pro-life viewpoints are not that politically popular (such as Kari Lake going full out pro-choice in Arizona).

[Sparko]

That would require a Constitutional amendment much like the one limiting a president to two terms, so very unlikely to happen.

The problem is that folks seemingly want term limits for politicians who aren't in their state or district. They want them for those elsewhere, why they continue to reelect the person in their area.

I would be sort of happy with a forced retirement age of 65.