Conservative commentator Gina Loudon dedicated her WorldNetDaily column yesterday to defending Donald Trump’s recent comment that, if abortion is recriminalized, women who have illegal abortions should face “some form of punishment.”
Trump’s campaign, taking heat from the anti-abortion movement for blowing up its PR strategy, attempted to retract the candidate’s comments shortly after he made them. Two days later, Trump suggested that he didn’t actually want to change the current abortion laws at all, a position that his campaign also ended up retracting.
Loudon, however, was just fine with Trump’s initial suggestion that “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who have abortions, hailing the candidate for upending the debate on an important issue just as he did “when discussing illegal immigration.”
Loudon, defending Trump’s remarks, compared punishing a woman for having an abortion to prosecuting a person who “hires a contractor to kill someone.”
“Conservatives herald ‘the rule of law’ when discussing illegal immigration, but why do the rules suddenly change when we are talking about the killing of an unborn child?” she asked.
“His view was consistent with many things conservatives say,” Loudon continued. “He just didn’t know this was the unspeakable – kind of like saying we should stop illegal immigration was the unspeakable before Trump dared to say otherwise.”
Indeed, Loudon noted that Trump is simply saying what many people in the anti-abortion believe but refuse to say publicly: “Is there a pro-lifer out there that doesn’t think that in a perfect world — where we agreed abortion was, for example, illegal after the first trimester – that the woman could, if working with full knowledge, be held accountable for her complicity in the abortion? Shouldn’t this, like any law that is broken, be considered in a case-by-case manner?”
Abortion rights opponents who criticize Trump, Loudon argued, have decided to “jump on the gender identity ‘women are always victims’ bandwagon” rather than argue that women should be held accountable through prosecutions, making Trump “even more pro-life than the [sic] some of the pro-life groups out there.”
Donald Trump has no high-paid consultants around him telling him what he can and can’t say, even on the liberal’s favorite conservative-killing topic of abortion. They talk all about the woman’s right to choose as if women are so frail and helpless they shouldn’t bear any of the personal responsibility conservatives talk about in other political realms.
Trump knew this: If a person hires a contractor to kill someone, under the law, both the person hiring the contracted killer and the killer are held accountable. In his non-political mind, why would he think any differently?
Conservatives herald “the rule of law” when discussing illegal immigration, but why do the rules suddenly change when we are talking about the killing of an unborn child?
If you kill a pregnant woman, and her baby dies as a result, in most states that is a double homicide.
Donald Trump is new to political campaigns. He has not been formally trained on the political answer to every politically loaded question, like where one stands on abortion.
He has not spent hours in front of a mirror with consultants drilling his words, body language and intonation on every topic. If he had, rest assured, the consultants would have started with abortion. This is the single most un-discussable, off-limits, never-mention topic in all of politics.
When pressed by Chris Matthews, Trump said women who abort their unborn babies should perhaps receive some form of punishment if indeed the abortion in question was banned and, therefore, breaking the law. Trump said he hadn’t thought of what the punishment should be, but you could tell that he hadn’t seen the memo from the GOP consultants that said you aren’t supposed to discuss the personal responsibility of women in this scenario.
His view was consistent with many things conservatives say. He just didn’t know this was the unspeakable – kind of like saying we should stop illegal immigration was the unspeakable before Trump dared to say otherwise.
Is there a pro-lifer out there that doesn’t think that in a perfect world – where we agreed abortion was, for example, illegal after the first trimester – that the woman could, if working with full knowledge, be held accountable for her complicity in the abortion? Shouldn’t this, like any law that is broken, be considered in a case-by-case manner?
When Trump took on the issue of illegal immigration, he ignored conventional wisdom and said that people who broke the law and came here illegally should be punished. The silent majority surprisingly cheered.
Trump came to his position on illegal immigration by using logic and defying political correctness.
After his comments in the MSNBC town hall, Donald Trump has arguably become the most pro-life candidate in the race for president. He is now even more pro-life than the [sic] some of the pro-life groups out there.
I wish I didn’t have to come to Donald Trump’s defense, but to jump on the gender identity “women are always victims” bandwagon against him over this issue would be intellectually dishonest of me. It’s time for authenticity in politics. If conservatives want to talk about the power of women, the rule of law and personal responsibility, gray areas in abortion cannot be glossed over.
Mr. Trump said what he thought. Pro-lifers won’t win in this country until they are courageous enough to admit that not all women who chose to abort their babies are victims. Furthermore, Mr. Trump has vowed to appoint a pro-life Supreme Court justice, as has Sen. Ted Cruz.