Trump Unhinged: 'Punishment' For Women Who Abort

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Conservative pundit Peggy Noonan in today's WSJ::

"""Mr. Trump is hurting himself, in real time and for the first time. We will likely see it, and soon, in the polls. Already his numbers in next week’s Wisconsin primary have fallen, and as for women—well, with women nationally Mr. Trump is currently more popular than cholera, but not by much."""

Trump’s Mess Has Become His Message
His supporters are getting embarrassed by his sheer dumb grossness.
Trump’s Mess Has Become His Message


Trump is as vile a misogynist as a stupid, mouth-breathing fuck can get. And Chris Matthews cornered his fat ass the other night and proved it.

 

[Valerie]

I bet Hillary wishes she could take this back

not really. hillary has no problem facing up to her political positions.

she understood the political culture back then required baby steps in common understanding of the issue.

with much pressure from the right wing, president clinton was the one to sign DOMA, which then provided the opportunity for SCOTUS to make an official ruling on the inevitable legal challenge... that's how progress is made!

the only voters hung-up on those old quotes are hillary haters who choose not to get it.

the rest of the rational world understands who is fighting for them against illegal discrimination.

Human Rights Campaign Endorses Hillary Clinton for President

 

[NYcarbineer]

If he said nothing wrong -- why'd he walk it back?

Because the 'PC Police' and his dumbass advisors are telling him he will lose votes if he doesn't.

So he's beginning to put on the uniform of a standard issue politician.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

This is too easy ... name something Trump said he ever took back while believing he was right for saying....

He doesn't. He even brags about how he doesn't.

Sorry, I don't follow Trump around with a notepad, and I don't care about any other time as this thread is not about any of THOSE other times.

No, you just have your head up his trousers, no notepad necessary.
And I want to correct you on something else: You said I was spinning the abortion/jail time thing. Nope, I wasn't. BUT YOU WERE.

"""MATTHEWS: Can we go back to matters of the law and running for president because matters of the law, what I’m talking about, and this is the difficult situation you’ve placed yourself in.

By saying you’re pro-life, you mean you want to ban abortion. How do you ban abortion without some kind of sanction? Then you get in that very tricky question of a sanction, a fine on human life, which you call murder?

TRUMP: It will have to be determined.

MATTHEWS: A fine, imprisonment for a young woman who finds herself pregnant?

TRUMP: It will have to be determined."""""

In Context: Transcript of Donald Trump on punishing women for abortion

 

[Valerie]

btw lol @ idiots who cry about "trick questions" on a presidential platform ^

 

[playtime]

"If" abortion was illegal than the states would have to determine what the consequences are for breaking the law. The probable punishment for abortion doctors is that they would lose their medical license, which of course, wouldn't matter to them because anyone who can work a vacuum cleaner can perform an abortion.

This is as ignorant as it is ridiculous and wrong.

The issue isn’t ‘abortion,’ the issue is the right to privacy, the right of citizens to make personal decisions absent unwarranted interference by the state, and placing limits on the authority of the states in defense of individual liberty.

In the context of the right to privacy, therefore, the states may not compel a woman to give birth against her will through force of law – where the right to privacy concerns other issues besides ‘abortion,’ and in order to ‘ban’ abortion, privacy rights jurisprudence in its entirety must be destroyed, increasing the size and authority of government at the expense of individual liberty.

‘Abortion’ is not a ‘standalone’ issue, it’s but one aspect of the overall doctrine of the right to privacy, a doctrine that will no longer exist if ‘abortion’ were ‘banned.’

Sounds like a certain 2nd amendment argument that's often comes from the right. Interesting how things flip flop on this issue

Except that the Second Amendment is actually in the Constitution, but the "right to privacy" is not. I've checked, it's not in there.

is that why 'the state' can conduct search & seizures without a warrant? is that why a medical doctor is not compelled to disclose information or face prosecution?

Another one for you. Is that why married couples are not compelled to testify against one another in a court of law?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

The reason why is under the law, a married couple is considered one person unless they choose not to be. And a person is protected from self incrimination through disclosure.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let us go forth and elect a real MONSTER:

Hillary Clinton Supports Unlimited Abortions Up to Birth, No Limits Even in the 9th Month

All she said was she didn't want the government interfering with abortion medical necessity.

 

[Slade3200]

Marc, how many different ways do people have to answer your question. I know you're really not this stupid - I have faith in you.

You want to know that if abortions are outlawed - made illegal - should women who break the law by having them be punished.

Let me see if I can put it in a way you can understand this:

YES
Si'
Oui
Ja
Sim
Ken
Sea
Jes
Hai
Ndiyo
Gee
Haa'n
Oo
Shi
Baleh Arah
Na'am
A-yo
Ja
Hanji
Ho
A'no
Igen
Da
Evet
Avanu
Uh-Huh

ANYONE who intentionally breaks a law should be punished for breaking the law. It's not rocket science.

And YES that includes hypothetical women who hypothetically intentionally break hypothetical laws such as the hypothetical law hypothetically banning hypothetical abortions - in this hypothetical case these hypothetical women who hypothetically break the hypothetical law should hypothetically be hypothetically punished.

I know enforcing ALL existing law was / is too complicated for Obama to understand, but I thought most liberals could grasp the concept. Maybe I was wrong....

Wonderful!! After asking the question 15 times you are the first to give a direct answer... You win! Let's see if you can do another... What would you like to see the punishment be for all involved in an abortion if it was illegal? Should it be the same as our current murder charge? Why or why not?

 

[playtime]

If he said nothing wrong -- why'd he walk it back?

Because the 'PC Police' and his dumbass advisors are telling him he will lose votes if he doesn't.

oh, so NOW he's concerned??????????????? he just simply isn't as quick on his feet as he thought he was. he got busted.

 

[easyt65]

Wonderful!! After asking the question 15 times you are the first to give a direct answer... You win! Let's see if you can do another... What would you like to see the punishment be for all involved in an abortion if it was illegal? Should it be the same as our current murder charge? Why or why not?

Like Marc, you obviously haven't bothered to pay attention or read all the posts. I have REPEATEDLY answered those questions. Before I do so again I want to see the same liberals accusing those of dodging THEIR questions answer the questions I have asked, the ones THEY continue to dodge:

Should all existing laws be enforced?
Should people who intentionally break existing laws be punished?
Are elected politicians Constitutionally above / exempt from the laws they pass?
Should they be equally held accountable for violating the same laws that apply to us?

 

[Slade3200]

Back to the MAIN point of this thread:

Trump did nothing wrong, IMO, by giving his opinion that the perpetrator of a crime - who breaks existing law - in this country should be punished in some way. As pointed out, a judge could make that punishment 'rehab', counseling, etc.

EVERY existing law should be enforced, however, and those who break the law should be 'punished' in some way.

I agree with you, he talked about enforcing a law. I don't agree with the pro life position but if he does then he should believe in enforcing the law. What confuses me is the slew of conservative pro lifers that came out against his statement. They sound hypocritical to me

 

[playtime]

Try dealing with reality for once. Trump was wrong for saying that.

REALITY, dear Faun, is that it is YOUR opinion that Trump was wrong in stating he believes anyone who breaks the law should be punished for doing so. It SEEMS, therefore, that YOU believe that people who break the law should only be punished when Liberals / people LIKE and / or AGREE with the law. Based on that, you probably have no problem with Obama refusing to enforce all existing immigration law, that you had no problem declaring he would not enforce the DOMA because HE did not agree with it.

what bullshit. then why did he explicitly say that the man INVOLVED would NOT get punished, because 'emotions are different'? he was clearly making the distinct case for punishment lies with the female.

hmmmm.... interesting how he felt about late term abortion; & probably still does. he's just playing for his poorly educated supporters.

 

[playtime]

Try dealing with reality for once. Trump was wrong for saying that.

REALITY, dear Faun, is that it is YOUR opinion that Trump was wrong in stating he believes anyone who breaks the law should be punished for doing so. It SEEMS, therefore, that YOU believe that people who break the law should only be punished when Liberals / people LIKE and / or AGREE with the law. Based on that, you probably have no problem with Obama refusing to enforce all existing immigration law, that you had no problem declaring he would not enforce the DOMA because HE did not agree with it.

This is too easy ... name something Trump said he ever took back while believing he was right for saying....

He doesn't. He even brags about how he doesn't.

I bet Hillary wishes she could take this back

I didn't hear her say that gays should ever be punished.

 

[Slade3200]

If he said nothing wrong -- why'd he walk it back?

Because the 'PC Police' and his dumbass advisors are telling him he will lose votes if he doesn't.

True but Trump is supposed to be that no BS candidate that speaks his mind and tells it like it is. I agree with you that his walk back was an epic... Playing politics

 

[easyt65]

playtime, IF (will never happen) abortions are banned and a woman has one any way, it is the woman breaking the law. If the man FORCES her (somehow) to have an abortion then I can see him being punished as well. If he pays for illegal abortion, punish him. But in such a ridiculous scenario (abortions completely outlawed), if the woman has the abortion on her own she is the one breaking the law.

Don't like it? Understood...

 

[easyt65]

True but Trump is supposed to be that no BS candidate that speaks his mind and tells it like it is. I agree with you that his walk back was an epic... Playing politics

Yeah, and politicians are supposed to represent the people, and Obama was supposed to be the great Uniter, end...and...and....

Anyone wanting to get into the mix, spend millions/billions for a $500,000 (is it?) a year job, and be willing to engage in this mud-slinging, knock-down drag-out circus is 'not' everything they seem to be / say they are.

Welcome to Political Theater where they ALL are 'Grubers', hoping the American people are truly a stupid as they think we are.

 

[Slade3200]

I hate to tell the Trump bashers who think that Chris Mathews might have scored an orgasm against him this but if something happens to be illegal then their are legal consequences for violating that particular law. I don't see anything wrong with what he said because IF abortion was illegal then women who break that law have to be punished. As far as I know He didn't say he was going to punish women who were performing legal abortions or attempt to sick the IRS on them like Obama has done for the tea party. Trump is treating women who got abortions much nicer than Obama has ever treated the tea party so I am not worried about it.

We actually don't punish all involuntary deaths caused by others the same. We have three different murder charges with different penalties depending on the crime. We also have many different kind of manslaughter charges so if a woman gets an illegal abortion she doesn't necessarily have to get the electric chair or treat it like a murder.

The differing degree of murrder charges are based on intent and state of mind, from premeditation to accidental. If you believe abortion is illegal then it would be a first degree premeditated murder and should be punished as so. I think common sense tells you that it's different. perhaps we can stop the murder talk from the pro lifers and engage in a more accurate realistic conversation?

 

[playtime]

playtime, IF (will never happen) abortions are banned and a woman has one any way, it is the woman breaking the law. If the man FORCES her (somehow) to have an abortion then I can see him being punished as well. If he pays for illegal abortion, punish him. But in such a ridiculous scenario (abortions completely outlawed), if the woman has the abortion on her own she is the one breaking the law.

Don't like it? Understood...

If he is fully compliant in assisting (not forcing) she have one. He doesn't have to pay a dime, but accompanies her... he DOESN'T accompany her but knows ahead of time that it will happen...

then he is as culpable as her. Yet Trump said HE would not get punished. That IS what he said.

Don't like it? Understood....

 

[Slade3200]

playtime, IF (will never happen) abortions are banned and a woman has one any way, it is the woman breaking the law. If the man FORCES her (somehow) to have an abortion then I can see him being punished as well. If he pays for illegal abortion, punish him. But in such a ridiculous scenario (abortions completely outlawed), if the woman has the abortion on her own she is the one breaking the law.

Don't like it? Understood...

I agree with you again however I don't think the situation is all that unrealistic. We have pro life candidates running for president who will be electing multiple SC justices. All running on the right support a pro life agenda so asking how they would handle that agenda is not a wild hypothetical.

 

[Slade3200]

Wonderful!! After asking the question 15 times you are the first to give a direct answer... You win! Let's see if you can do another... What would you like to see the punishment be for all involved in an abortion if it was illegal? Should it be the same as our current murder charge? Why or why not?

Like Marc, you obviously haven't bothered to pay attention or read all the posts. I have REPEATEDLY answered those questions. Before I do so again I want to see the same liberals accusing those of dodging THEIR questions answer the questions I have asked, the ones THEY continue to dodge:

Should all existing laws be enforced?
Should people who intentionally break existing laws be punished?
Are elected politicians Constitutionally above / exempt from the laws they pass?
Should they be equally held accountable for violating the same laws that apply to us?

Yes I saw after I replied that you did answer the question, you are the only one that has so thank you. I would ask, if you say abortion is murder then why not charge 1st degree murder charge for the crime? Why only 6 months?

Per your questions:
Yes laws should be enforced however there are many on the books that need reform, like sneezing on the sidewalk because it scares the horses... Ultimately it is up the the police to enforce in a way that protects the citizens. Our law makers should be doing a better job making sure our laws reflect the needs of our communities.

If a law is broken there should be an associated punishment, again it is somewhat at the discresion of our police and judges... The immigration issue is a whole different can of worms so I'll leave that alone for this discussion

Elected officials are not above the law and should be punished. Many in our government hold very high responsibility positions that fall out of the scope of what normal people have. They do have some protections regarding negligence, mistakes or poor judgement actions. Beyond that any intentional criminal act should have consequence