Trump Unhinged: 'Punishment' For Women Who Abort

[Faun]

Hmmm... outlaw abortions and throw women in jail.

Now there's a winning platform to run on for a misogynist running against a woman for president of the United States.

They would also throw men in jail as well.

Or did you not think of that?

So?

Trump's dream is to outlaw abortion and throw women in jail. Do you even fathom why 70% of women have an unfavorable opinion of Trump?

Can you understand why he's going to get schlonged in an election against Hillary since most voters in presidential elections tend to be women?

So?

I've not taken a position as to rather or not it should be illegal or not.

Instead I've chosen to show the hypocricy of trying to make it illegal and then (cake and eat it too) attempting to say "but the woman would NOT face criminal liability"

That's not how our justice system works.

Any willing participant in any crime is criminally liable.

Now rape, incest or life of mother could be exceptions due to duress. But elective abortions? NOT A CHANCE.

No one cares what you think. You're inconsequential. On the other hand, Trump is running for president and making women his enemies. Not too bright. That's the point.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The only women that I have heard of being prosecuted prior to Roe Vs. Wade were some that self aborted intentionally, and even that was rare. In other words, the abortionist broke the law, not the woman who had the abortion. What Trump was saying is new and unprecedented. But, we democrats owe him for big time for saying it!

 

[JoeB131]

You realize that doesn't answer the question, right?

Both the hooker and the client are criminally liable.

You took my side without even realizing it.

Are you some kind of retard? How many people are arrested for prostitution? How many face severer punishments other than, "Oh, shit, don't tell my wife!"

Those charged with the crime dickhead.

And it happens quite often

But thanks for the response based on pure emotion. It was amusing

Except no one is charged with a crime in prostitution. Often the prostitutes do their thing right in front of the cops, and are ignored.

And this is sort of the problem with this topic. Before 1973, women were never charged with a crime or put on trial for having abortions. The "doctors" who performed them only were if they fucked up and injured the woman they were working on. And even then, they weren't charged with "murder".

So did they let you eat paint-chips as a child?

 

[JoeB131]

No, they don't. Condoms can be purchased at any pharmacy, for a few bucks. If blacks can afford straight malt liquor they can afford condoms.

Guys of any race don't care about contraception. THey usually leave that to the woman, dumbass.

 

[Pop23]

Hmmm... outlaw abortions and throw women in jail.

Now there's a winning platform to run on for a misogynist running against a woman for president of the United States.

They would also throw men in jail as well.

Or did you not think of that?

So?

Trump's dream is to outlaw abortion and throw women in jail. Do you even fathom why 70% of women have an unfavorable opinion of Trump?

Can you understand why he's going to get schlonged in an election against Hillary since most voters in presidential elections tend to be women?

So?

I've not taken a position as to rather or not it should be illegal or not.

Instead I've chosen to show the hypocricy of trying to make it illegal and then (cake and eat it too) attempting to say "but the woman would NOT face criminal liability"

That's not how our justice system works.

Any willing participant in any crime is criminally liable.

Now rape, incest or life of mother could be exceptions due to duress. But elective abortions? NOT A CHANCE.

No one cares what you think. You're inconsequential. On the other hand, Trump is running for president and making women his enemies. Not too bright. That's the point.

I didn't post opinion. I posted fact on how our judicial system works.

Prove me wrong.

Name another criminal offense in which those that willfully participate in the act are not held criminally liable.

 

[Pop23]

You realize that doesn't answer the question, right?

Both the hooker and the client are criminally liable.

You took my side without even realizing it.

Are you some kind of retard? How many people are arrested for prostitution? How many face severer punishments other than, "Oh, shit, don't tell my wife!"

Those charged with the crime dickhead.

And it happens quite often

But thanks for the response based on pure emotion. It was amusing

Except no one is charged with a crime in prostitution. Often the prostitutes do their thing right in front of the cops, and are ignored.

And this is sort of the problem with this topic. Before 1973, women were never charged with a crime or put on trial for having abortions. The "doctors" who performed them only were if they fucked up and injured the woman they were working on. And even then, they weren't charged with "murder".

So did they let you eat paint-chips as a child?

Eating paint chips leads to blindness, of which you are.

Prostitution sting nets 31 arrests

Hmmmm, both the prostitute and the johns were arrested

Google is your friend I suggest using it instead of relying on that pea sized brain

 

[deltex1]

If you read the transcript of Matthews interview, you can see neither participant was communicating effectively. It was one gotcha guy against another...then blown out of proportion by our moronic press corps.





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

 

[amrchaos]

Arresting women for having abortions is logically sound but polically untenable.

You have to go back to the reasons and emotions that lead a woman to have an abortion. Once you understands, you would realize arresting the woman is very unpopular. The prolife argument can be lost if they advocate arresting the woman.

 

[Pop23]

Arresting women for having abortions is logically sound but polically untenable.

You have to go back to the reasons and emotions that lead a woman to have an abortion. Once you understands, you would realize arresting the woman is very unpopular. The prolife argument can be lost if they advocate arresting the woman.

The argument is not valid. Because something is not popular is not the question.

Reality is that our judicial system holds those who willfully participates in a crime, criminally responsible.

 

[amrchaos]

Arresting women for having abortions is logically sound but polically untenable.

You have to go back to the reasons and emotions that lead a woman to have an abortion. Once you understands, you would realize arresting the woman is very unpopular. The prolife argument can be lost if they advocate arresting the woman.

The argument is not valid. Because something is not popular is not the question.

Reality is that our judicial system holds those who willfully participates in a crime, criminally responsible.

Yes. In a crime.
Now how do we decide which act is a crime? That is not always determined by logic. At least not in reality.

 

[Pop23]

Arresting women for having abortions is logically sound but polically untenable.

You have to go back to the reasons and emotions that lead a woman to have an abortion. Once you understands, you would realize arresting the woman is very unpopular. The prolife argument can be lost if they advocate arresting the woman.

The argument is not valid. Because something is not popular is not the question.

Reality is that our judicial system holds those who willfully participates in a crime, criminally responsible.

Yes. In a crime.
Now how do we decide which act is a crime? That is not always determined by logic. At least not in reality.

If, and the question contains the word if, the act of aborting a fetus is the crime, and those that willfully participate in the act are criminally liable.

 

[Faun]

Hmmm... outlaw abortions and throw women in jail.

Now there's a winning platform to run on for a misogynist running against a woman for president of the United States.

They would also throw men in jail as well.

Or did you not think of that?

So?

Trump's dream is to outlaw abortion and throw women in jail. Do you even fathom why 70% of women have an unfavorable opinion of Trump?

Can you understand why he's going to get schlonged in an election against Hillary since most voters in presidential elections tend to be women?

So?

I've not taken a position as to rather or not it should be illegal or not.

Instead I've chosen to show the hypocricy of trying to make it illegal and then (cake and eat it too) attempting to say "but the woman would NOT face criminal liability"

That's not how our justice system works.

Any willing participant in any crime is criminally liable.

Now rape, incest or life of mother could be exceptions due to duress. But elective abortions? NOT A CHANCE.

No one cares what you think. You're inconsequential. On the other hand, Trump is running for president and making women his enemies. Not too bright. That's the point.

I didn't post opinion. I posted fact on how our judicial system works.

Prove me wrong.

Name another criminal offense in which those that willfully participate in the act are not held criminally liable.

Holyfuckingshit!

First, you would have to quote me saying there are folks not being charged with breaking laws they are breaking.

But you can't because you're an idiot who doesn't understand you're fighting a strawman, and not anything I said, with that challenge.

 

[Pop23]

They would also throw men in jail as well.

Or did you not think of that?

So?

Trump's dream is to outlaw abortion and throw women in jail. Do you even fathom why 70% of women have an unfavorable opinion of Trump?

Can you understand why he's going to get schlonged in an election against Hillary since most voters in presidential elections tend to be women?

So?

I've not taken a position as to rather or not it should be illegal or not.

Instead I've chosen to show the hypocricy of trying to make it illegal and then (cake and eat it too) attempting to say "but the woman would NOT face criminal liability"

That's not how our justice system works.

Any willing participant in any crime is criminally liable.

Now rape, incest or life of mother could be exceptions due to duress. But elective abortions? NOT A CHANCE.

No one cares what you think. You're inconsequential. On the other hand, Trump is running for president and making women his enemies. Not too bright. That's the point.

I didn't post opinion. I posted fact on how our judicial system works.

Prove me wrong.

Name another criminal offense in which those that willfully participate in the act are not held criminally liable.

Holyfuckingshit!

First, you would have to quote me saying there are folks not being charged with breaking laws they are breaking.

But you can't because you're an idiot who doesn't understand you're fighting a strawman, and not anything I said, with that challenge.

You do understand the words you used correct?

Prolly not, so no one can help you.

Misogyny - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A law making abortion illegal puts more than women in jeopardy of criminal Liabilty.

Isn't it time for your nap?

 

[hangover]

So today Trump says the abortion laws should stay the way they are, which confirms his "pro-choice" stance. Will his supporters ever figure out he's playing them like a fiddle? Na!

 

[Faun]

So?

Trump's dream is to outlaw abortion and throw women in jail. Do you even fathom why 70% of women have an unfavorable opinion of Trump?

Can you understand why he's going to get schlonged in an election against Hillary since most voters in presidential elections tend to be women?

So?

I've not taken a position as to rather or not it should be illegal or not.

Instead I've chosen to show the hypocricy of trying to make it illegal and then (cake and eat it too) attempting to say "but the woman would NOT face criminal liability"

That's not how our justice system works.

Any willing participant in any crime is criminally liable.

Now rape, incest or life of mother could be exceptions due to duress. But elective abortions? NOT A CHANCE.

No one cares what you think. You're inconsequential. On the other hand, Trump is running for president and making women his enemies. Not too bright. That's the point.

I didn't post opinion. I posted fact on how our judicial system works.

Prove me wrong.

Name another criminal offense in which those that willfully participate in the act are not held criminally liable.

Holyfuckingshit!

First, you would have to quote me saying there are folks not being charged with breaking laws they are breaking.

But you can't because you're an idiot who doesn't understand you're fighting a strawman, and not anything I said, with that challenge.

You do understand the words you used correct?

Prolly not, so no one can help you.

Misogyny - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A law making abortion illegal puts more than women in jeopardy of criminal Liabilty.

Isn't it time for your nap?

Damn, you're so weak, you can't even beat your own strawman.

How come you didn't quote me saying there are crimes for which people are not charged?

 

[hazlnut]

APPLETON, Wis. — Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump said Wednesday that there “has to be some form of punishment” for abortion if it were banned in the U.S. — as he says it should be — and that punishment should fall on the woman.

Trump, who is currently struggling with women voters, was pressed on the issue of abortion during an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, set to air Wednesday evening.

Matthews asked whether abortion should be punished, and Trump initially skated around the issue. He said some Republicans would say it should be, and that he “would say it’s a very serious problem and it’s a problem we have to decide on.”

He then asked Matthews — but didn’t answer himself — “Are you going to, say, put them to jail?” and added he was anti-abortion and that “you have to ban” abortion.

“There has to be some form of punishment,” Trump said, adding “Yeah” when Matthews asked if he meant for the woman. The host asked if that punishment would be closer to 10 days or 10 years, and Trump said he didn’t know.

Trump indicated he would be far more lenient on the man who impregnated a woman who had an abortion — he said he did not think they would bear the same level of responsibility.

The Trump campaign quickly tried to walk back his comments afterward, saying the matter should be decided by the states. Later, Trump put out a statement that said his position was unchanged, but contradicted his past statements entirely:

If Congress were to pass legislation making abortion illegal and the federal courts upheld this legislation, or any state were permitted to ban abortion under state and federal law, the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman. The woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb. My position has not changed — like Ronald Reagan, I am pro-life with exceptions.​

More: TRUMP UNHINGED: 'PUNISHMENT' FOR WOMEN WHO ABORT

The video clearly shows that Trump can't even handle pressure from Chris Matthews - so how could he possibly handle pressure from world leaders like Putin? Trump likes to brag about being a world class negotiator - which he is clearly not. He chokes under pressure. Trump wants to force women back into dark alleys - and then also wants to punish them.

Republicans support a lifetime of abuse and poverty and incarceration over a simple medical procedure.

 

[Pop23]

So?

I've not taken a position as to rather or not it should be illegal or not.

Instead I've chosen to show the hypocricy of trying to make it illegal and then (cake and eat it too) attempting to say "but the woman would NOT face criminal liability"

That's not how our justice system works.

Any willing participant in any crime is criminally liable.

Now rape, incest or life of mother could be exceptions due to duress. But elective abortions? NOT A CHANCE.

No one cares what you think. You're inconsequential. On the other hand, Trump is running for president and making women his enemies. Not too bright. That's the point.

I didn't post opinion. I posted fact on how our judicial system works.

Prove me wrong.

Name another criminal offense in which those that willfully participate in the act are not held criminally liable.

Holyfuckingshit!

First, you would have to quote me saying there are folks not being charged with breaking laws they are breaking.

But you can't because you're an idiot who doesn't understand you're fighting a strawman, and not anything I said, with that challenge.

You do understand the words you used correct?

Prolly not, so no one can help you.

Misogyny - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A law making abortion illegal puts more than women in jeopardy of criminal Liabilty.

Isn't it time for your nap?

Damn, you're so weak, you can't even beat your own strawman.

How come you didn't quote me saying there are crimes for which people are not charged?

You didn't, because you couldn't. They don't exist, and you simply argue to see your own words.

So in that aspect, you are amazingly consistent

 

[Faun]

No one cares what you think. You're inconsequential. On the other hand, Trump is running for president and making women his enemies. Not too bright. That's the point.

I didn't post opinion. I posted fact on how our judicial system works.

Prove me wrong.

Name another criminal offense in which those that willfully participate in the act are not held criminally liable.

Holyfuckingshit!

First, you would have to quote me saying there are folks not being charged with breaking laws they are breaking.

But you can't because you're an idiot who doesn't understand you're fighting a strawman, and not anything I said, with that challenge.

You do understand the words you used correct?

Prolly not, so no one can help you.

Misogyny - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A law making abortion illegal puts more than women in jeopardy of criminal Liabilty.

Isn't it time for your nap?

Damn, you're so weak, you can't even beat your own strawman.

How come you didn't quote me saying there are crimes for which people are not charged?

You didn't, because you couldn't. They don't exist, and you simply argue to see your own words.

So in that aspect, you are amazingly consistent

Now why on Earth did you challenge me to cite a crime which is not prosecuted since you now realize I never made any such claim to begin with?

 

[OldLady]

Note: "If it were banned in America"......ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Then why did he totally walk it back? Hint: because he got a shitload of blowback - even from anti-abortion groups.

Who cares? It was a loaded question. But of course the left loons became unhinged over it...it's more BS

He can't even handle pressure from Chris Matthews - so just imagine him with Putin. Trump's a choker.

Matthews put him in a position where in order to answer the question, he was damned either way. Trump, for all his faults, tends not to equivocate and blather on without answering the question like most politicians do. So what is he supposed to say--if someone is theoretically breaking the law, that person should theoretically be punished, yes? Matthews was being a total asshole--I've never seen him before, but I'll sure make a mental note not to in the future, either. He reminds me of a defense attorney who used to try putting words in my mouth on the stand all the time.

He wasn't damned either way

All he needed to do was state that he did not think women who get abortions should be punished......not hard really

I can't think of any other crime anywhere that follows the logic that something is illegal but the person participating in it is not punished. Trump, knowing nothing about the Republican stance, got caught in that corner with Matthews putting words in his mouth. I might have guessed the same way, in an attempt to take laws to their logical conclusion. Of course, there is nothing logical about the abortion issue either way. I'm a pro-choicer and IF I were a Trump fan, I certainly wouldn't worry about him changing the laws. He's not interested in it one way or the other.

 

[JoeB131]

Eating paint chips leads to blindness, of which you are.

Prostitution sting nets 31 arrests

Hmmmm, both the prostitute and the johns were arrested

Google is your friend I suggest using it instead of relying on that pea sized brain

Guy, you had to go back SIX YEARS to find a case where someone bothered to arrest hookers.