Donald Trump Becomes First U.S. President to Speak at March for Life

[Cathoholic]

To everyone here at CAF.

Happy National Sanctity of Human Life Day!

Donald Trump to Become First U.S. President to Speak at March for Life​

AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana

DR. SUSAN BERRY

22 Jan 2020 Breitbart News

Donald Trump will become the first president in U.S. history to speak at the March for Life on Friday on the National Mall. . . .

. . . Trump earlier proclaimed January 22 – the anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade – to be “National Sanctity of Human Life Day,” a day when the nation “proudly and strongly reaffirms our commitment to protect the precious gift of life at every stage, from conception to natural death.”

The president said in his proclamation:

Every person — the born and unborn, the poor, the downcast, the disabled, the infirm, and the elderly — has inherent value. Although each journey is different, no life is without worth or is inconsequential; the rights of all people must be defended. On National Sanctity of Human Life Day, our Nation proudly and strongly reaffirms our commitment to protect the precious gift of life at every stage, from conception to natural death. . . . .

Donald Trump to Become First U.S. President to Speak at March for Life

Donald Trump will become the first president in U.S. history to speak at the March for Life on Friday on the National Mall.

www.breitbart.com

 

[KMC]

Interesting a president who has supported prolife positions is being attacked for speaking at a prolife rally. His positions can certainly be improved on a number of fronts, but his speaking at the event is a good thing. No Democrat will ever speak at the event, as they stake out the position that the unborn have no value. Curious if those critical of Trump have ever been critical of the Dems unwavering support for abortion up to birth

 

[Horton]

It doesn’t appear so from what I have seen. This is a historic moment in the Pro-life movement and yet some will denigrate President Trump. . . .

 

[Ridgerunner]

I think it matters, notwithstanding that he isn’t perfectly prolife. Despite the incessant denigration of him by the abortion party and its media, some people will listen to him and realize that despite what all the “famous” people with the media’s ear say in favor of abortion, the president of the U.S. actually speaks out against it. It matters.

 

[redal]

Praying he walks the walk after talking the talk.

 

[drcube]

the president of the U.S. actually speaks out against it. It matters.

I hope the President speaks out against relations outside of the marital bonds since six out of seven abortions in the US are performed on women that aren’t married.

 

[Trader]

I think it matters, especially after Vice President Pence spoke at the March for Life last year.

The Party of Death will probably want to impeach him for this, too.

I hope President Trump’s conversion on life issues is sincere.

 

[Pat_Albertson]

Finally! Decades, we had to wait decades for this . . . decades for a simple speech, a simple speech from a sitting President!!!

 

[vz71]

I hope the President speaks out against relations outside of the marital bonds since six out of seven abortions in the US are performed on women that aren’t married.

I recall Dan Quayle doing so. Given how well it stirred the media up, Trump just might.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I hope the President speaks out against relations outside of the marital bonds since six out of seven abortions in the US are performed on women that aren’t married.

Worldwide, as we have discussed before, most abortions are by married women. So there’s no cause/effect relationship established.

But I think no matter what Trump says today, the left will condemn him for it and for anything else they can think of. After all, he’s going to be attacking the core of their platform.

 

[dvdjs]

Trump and the March for Life

Will Trumpism corrupt the pro-life movement, too?

thebulwark.com

Pro-lifers should not attach themselves to a man like this.
Trumpism has corrupted every ideology and institution it has come into contact with. There is no reason to think that the pro-life movement will be excepted.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

That will be exciting for at least some of the people there, as there were a ton of Trump supporters in attendance wearing Trump hats and yelling Trump Trump Trump last year when I attended.

I hope it does not cause any kind of logistical or security nightmare for other people. Praying for all involved.

 

[vz71]

and yet some will denigrate President Trump. . . .

Indeed.
We will likely see people crawling out of the woodwork to proclaim we should not support Trump in his support of the pro life movement.

Only the pure should be welcomed to support the pro life cause. All other support should be rejected.

 

[drcube]

Worldwide, as we have discussed before, most abortions are by married women. So there’s no cause/effect relationship established.

We are talking about the United States, not the world. And, in the United States, six out of every seven abortions are performed on unmarried women, hence there is most certainly a cause/effect relationship.

But I think no matter what Trump says today, the left will condemn him for it and for anything else they can think of. After all, he’s going to be attacking the core of their platform.

Yes, it is an excellent way to bring attention to the issue and distract from the ongoing impeachment hearings.

I recall Dan Quayle doing so. Given how well it stirred the media up, Trump just might.

I don’t recall Dan Quayle doing that. It would be great if our leaders would talk on the importance of only have sexual relations within the marital bond.

 

[Jeanne_S]

What a ridiculous article.The vile hatred of the left for our president is so irrational.These comments support that.Why do you post these thingsDVDS.? Do you really believe all this nonsense?

 

[dvdjs]

What a ridiculous article

I thought that its points were well made.

The vile hatred of the left …

This article is clearly form a pro-life conservative writing for a conservative publication. But neither he, nor the publication are Trump votaries.

Why do you post these things …/. Do you really believe all this …

As i above. I posted this because I think that the points were well made.
I have made similar points on a number of threads before prior to this article.
Perhaps you could advance the discussion by quote points in the article that you disagree with.

 

[Jeanne_S]

The paragraph you highlighted at the end of your post ,for starters.
The writer exposed his /her biases against Trump in these few sentences.He taints everything he touches more or less,really?
I’ll concede this author isn’t a leftie,I’ll also concede there is a faction within the Republican Party that despise Trump equally as much.
What purpose does it serve to denegtrate his position and actions re abortion,if not to seek yet another opportunity to bash him?
He has done more for the unborn than any president in recent history ,what he may or may not personally believe isn’t up to any of us to question.He
His actions matter more to me.

 

[dvdjs]

The paragraph you highlighted at the end of your post ,for starters.
The writer exposed his /her biases

The writes speaks from observation. “Trumpism has corrupted every ideology and institution it has come into contact with.” The question is: What will be the impact of Trump’ adopting this issue and the pro-life cause being associate with, or perhaps identified with Trump? Will the short term, limited gains be undermined by a longer term effects stemming from revulsion to Trump? Will soft support for the pro-life cause be consolidated or dimishihed when a polarizing figure like Trump’ makes this his issue?

What purpose does it serve

You miht like to read more of the article. The purpose is to serve the pro-life cause.

 

[F_Marturana]

I don’t recall Dan Quayle doing that. It would be great if our leaders would talk on the importance of only have sexual relations within the marital bond.

There was the incident where he commented on the character Murphy Brown being pregnant without being married.

Bearing babies irresponsibly is, simply, wrong. Failing to support children one has fathered is wrong. We must be unequivocal about this. It doesn’t help matters when prime-time TV has Murphy Brown — a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid professional woman — mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another ‘life-style choice,’” Quayle said.

What does it meant to bear a child irresponsibly? Aren’t children blessings, and we want them to be born?

 

[Jeanne_S]

I have read the entire article.To imply that the pro life movement will be tainyed by Trump in and of itself is a unwarranted comment ,especially when the writer goes on to say everything he touches as been tainted.Seriously,why doesn’t she state any examples.? This is just more negative emoting by those who cannot stomachs Trump.