What Trumps Abortion?

August 4th, 2016 Posted by Susan's Musings 21 comments

Wow! That was my reaction when I checked a week ago Friday morning to see if anyone had left a comment on the Musing I wrote about Ted Cruz’ speech at the Republican convention. There were more views to my page by 9 a.m. than I usually get within 24 hours. A few hours later, my husband mentioned that Facebook was going wild with comments about my words. So it continued. People were agreeing, politely disagreeing, grateful for and wildly upset by my words. What is my take-away and why am I going to stir the cauldron by continuing the debate as well as introducing the topic of Trump and abortion?

What I learned from the response to my Musing and from the conversation around our Shabbat table on Friday night when our guests happened to be involved, intelligent and articulate conservatives, was how passionately people feel about this race. What is different about the passion in this race versus past election cycles is that the divide is within the Republican/conservative side, not a function of Republican/conservatives vs.  Democrat/liberals. I was not a Romney fan which made me miserable leading up to the 2012 election, but I didn’t think that those who loved him were unprincipled or destroying my country. I voted for him and never once questioned whether I should vote for his opponent.

Since I’m willing to state that over 90% of those reading my Musing and/or our ministry’s Facebook page are people with whom I share values and a love for our country, it is awe-inspiring that there is a wide range of opinions and a willingness to discuss and listen to different views. When I write a political column, it is often as a way of putting my own thoughts in order. I value intelligent feedback because it hones and shapes those thoughts. Most of the comments I received, on all sides of the issue, were thoughtful. For this reason, I’m going to continue laying out my thinking. I am not a prophet and I am not the smartest or most knowledgeable voter. I can certainly be wrong. My thoughts on this election are a work in progress. As of now I am steadily moving towards the view that not only do I need to vote for Donald Trump, no matter how much I wish there was a better choice, but I need to do what I can to see that he wins. At the same time, I carefully consider what others are saying, including those who say that they have vowed never to support someone who is ‘pro-choice.’

Years back, Dr. James Dobson told my husband and me, as I’m sure he’s told many others, of his commitment to never vote for someone who supported abortion. However important other issues were, abortion was his, ‘line in the sand,’ issue. A number of commenters to my Musings reflected the same idea as a reason that they cannot vote for Donald Trump. When I heard Dr. Dobson, his words made a great deal of sense to me. I’m not sure they are still able to be writ in stone. What happens if, as is the case this year, one party and candidate stand for activism on abortion while it is unclear where the other candidate stands, thought his party’s views are clear?

I’d like to play through the scenario we have.

Hillary Clinton stands for a pro-abortion stance on steroids. Her record suggests that she will use government  power to punish those who disagree with her and to brainwash any youth whose schooling she can touch. Abortion is only one of the anti-Godly social messages she will do her best to promote.

Donald Trump’s views on abortion and other social issues are murky. However, at worst, they aren’t major issues on his agenda. Whatever his personal beliefs are, there is no reason to suspect that he will use his political capital or the hammer of government to force them on America. Furthermore, because social issues such as abortion don’t roil his gut, he will be open to listening to social conservatives and evangelical supporters. (One of the reasons I think Cruz was ego-driven rather than principled is that if Trump is president it is important that he feels beholden to religious Jews and Christians. Cruz could have had an opening to speak to a President Trump. He no longer does.)

If one candidate represents negative X on the social values scale while the second is negative X to the nth degree, would it really salve my conscience to proclaim that I will vote for neither one? Can I pat myself on the back if the result of my principled stand is that more fetuses are aborted, more elderly and ill people are murdered through physician-assisted suicide and teenage suicides increase as young people are indoctrinated from pre-school to be obsessed with gender confusion and sexual immorality?

Third-party and write-in votes

I have not always voted for the Republican candidate for president. In some elections, I have voted for a third-party candidate and once I left the presidential box blank. This time is different. Each time I chose an option other than voting for one of the prime candidates, my vote was not going to make a difference. Due to the state I lived in, the result was foreordained. I had the luxury of using my vote to try and send a message to the Republican leadership of how dissatisfied I was with the choice they were offering. (Had millions of others done the same and had the leadership taken their collective head out of the sand and recognized the just and passionate discontent of so many Republicans, I don’t believe Donald Trump would have been the candidate this year.)

I don’t believe the option of sending a message by not voting for either Hillary or Trump exists this time around. In my opinion, every state is in play. This election cycle does not have a historical precedent. That means that each of us must think of ourselves as the deciding vote.  Whether we vote for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump or whether we vote for a write-in or a third party candidate or we leave that box blank, we must be willing to live with the idea that we might be responsible for electing whomever wins the race.

The personal choice that I see myself as having is this: I can vote for Hillary and feel like a traitor to my country and beliefs. I can vote for a third-party candidate or write-in and feel like a coward. I can vote for Trump and feel besmirched. Right now, I am planning to choose #3. You may have a completely different calculation. I am not suggesting that if you do, you are either a traitor or a coward; that reckoning only works for my own thinking for myself. In my opinion, with full knowledge that God can step into history and override human choices, the natural result of a Democrat victory will be the demise of the Constitution. I don’t believe that freedom of speech, religion or 2nd Amendment rights will be anything other than meaningless words four years down the road.

This election is an agonizing one for many of us. Actually, the one point of view I struggle to respect is that of anyone who is convinced that either candidate is a great choice. In this election, voters’ largesse of spirit and mutual respect are needed in a greater way than other elections have demanded.

As it gets more uncomfortable to speak with people with whom we disagree politically,
let’s use Bible study as a bridge and as a means to test our views to see how they ally with Scripture.
I encourage you to listen to and share this 2 audio CD Set.

Tower of Power

21 comments

I am going to start with a tale of two precinct chairmen. I am the first one. I have never been a precinct chair preferring to help rather than lead. That attitude was due primarily to very difficult life events that made it seem impossible to take on too much responsibility in civic affairs. Also, I live in Texas and conservatives have slowly but surely gotten stronger and stronger in this state. As that strength increased so did the temptation to “become proud”. King Uzziah learned that lesson the hard way. As my concern increased, so did my involvement. Last May I served in the Texas State Convention as a delegate and a member of the State Rules Committee for my district. It is unusual to do that without ever being a precinct chair. Although Texas did elect delegates to national that were committed to Ted Cruz, we also elected delegates committed to Trump; not as many, but we did it. By that time, Trump was presumptive nominee. I felt that Trump would probably secure the nomination. I did two things. I prayed for someone, anyone, to save us from Trump and I came home and immediately filled out an application to become appointed precinct chair to fill the vacancy in my precinct. My prayers for an alternative to Trump have not been answered – yet. Through a parliamentary procedure, I was added to the list of new precinct chairs voted on and approved by the Executive Committee, which in Harris County has a potential of about 900 members. Not every precinct is filled so the total attending that day was a little over 200 hundred. I swore an oath to do my best “so help me God.” I will need God’s help. Nevertheless, his help will come as I move forward into the Red Sea. I have taken action immediately. In my view I have hit the ground walking. I need to be running, but walking is the best I can do at the moment. Now we get to the other precinct chair. The moment Trump secured the nomination, he quit – publicly. It was all over facebook, the local news came and interviewed him, and there are “opinions” flying around the grassroots organizations in Harris County. I totally understand how he feels. I truly can’t in honesty fault the guy when I am as unhappy as he is about Trump. Nevertheless, his response is not helping. I am not sure my response is going to help either. The best I can muster is a clenched teeth determination to keep conservatives in local positions. My county is the county whose Republican District Attorney indicted Daleiden and Merritt. We also had a couple of nasty primary fights. You do not have to be a king to get proud. However, I am fast approaching a line. I am about to refuse to “unite to win” when that means supporting a man whose ego is 10 thousand times bigger than the ego of Ted Cruz. It was not Ted’s ego on display at the national convention, it was Trump’s. It was not Ted that lied, it was Trump. When I heard what other’s were saying about what Ted said I had qualms. Then I read that part of his speech that others have been criticizing. I did not hear what you heard Susan. That does not mean you are wrong. We are standing in different places which gives us different perspectives. I will not wear Trump buttons or bumper stickers or yard signs. Instead, I will promote the local races and encourage more citizen involvement and provide good educational materials on issues. I will also pray that our system is still functioning four years from now. Last, but not least, I will work very hard to make Trump a one term president.

Thank you for jumping in and getting into the trenches. You are right that local elections are of the utmost importance. We have awful choices facing us and the potential consequences are literally life and death for individuals and our country. One of my goals is to remaining united with those who share my values even if our conclusions differ. Thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt.

Peter says:

Having been a big supporter of Americans for Prosperity (essentially, the Koch brothers) during the 2012 election cycle, I waited to see what stand they would take vis-à-vis the Republican nominee as the primary season was wrapping up. Now that the dust has settled, AFP is taking virtually the identical stand to that of Gerry Vander-Lyn. AFP is using its enormous ground-game (perhaps the #1 largest conservative ground-game in the U.S.) to support down-ticket (only) conservatives. There has been no mention (not one peep) about support for the top of the ticket.
The consequences of four more years of being ruled by the Washington cartel (as Ted Cruz has characterized it) will devastate this nation. Last weekend, my wife and I took James’s advice and “spent $10” each to see the D’Souza film Hillary’s America. The film does an outstanding job of explaining the history of our current two party system. For those who are among the uninitiated (which may be the overwhelming majority of Americans), learning the history of the Democrat party will be a shocker.
“Conservatives never seem to appreciate fully that issues are never the issue where the left is concerned. For the left [Democrats], whatever serves their need for power is right, whatever frustrates it is wrong.”
– David Horowitz, from the book Progressive Racism (2016), pg. 270
Just last week, a three-judge court in North Carolina ruled that the Voter ID law passed by the NC legislature several years ago (which goes into full effect this November) had been written with racist motives and was therefore a violation of the U.S. Constitution. All three of these judges are Obama appointees. The timing of the ruling is designed to thwart any efforts to appeal it prior to November 8, 2016. All of this in spite of the fact that a study performed in NC after the 2012 election proved that many thousands of votes were cast in NC by people who no longer reside in NC. Since their names were still on the books, however, the Democrats took that list and sent people to these precincts to cast votes by misrepresenting their true identity. The Voter ID law would prevent this variety of voter fraud. As a consequence of having had a Democrat president for the past seven and a half years, the fix is in.
Unlike conservatives, Democrats don’t care about principles. This is to their political advantage. If they can bribe enough of the electorate, and commit enough fraud, they know they can win. Meanwhile, they will use conservatism’s principled nature against conservatives to divide their opposition. Divide and conquer – the age old proven strategy.
“Anyone above a toddler knows that good intentions don’t always lead to good results, thus the aphorism that says “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”. Wise people know that insisting on perfection leads to misery. We are saved by the crucial idea of a moral hierarchy that provides structure to ensure that we do the best we can within the limitations we have.”
– Rabbi Daniel Lapin, from Ask the Rabbi (May 2016)
Donald Trump has limitations. He’s imperfect – just like the rest of us are. The never-Trumpers may want to consider this statistic:
Among white voters, turnout dropped from 67.2% in 2004 [Geo. Bush v. John Kerry] to 63.1% in 2012 when Obama beat Romney by 5 million votes.
So here we are. We’re 90-odd days out from an election that will likely determine how long the American experiment was able to survive, and we conservatives are arguing among ourselves whether or not to support the Republican nominee, the candidate that received more primary votes than any other in U.S. history. Meanwhile, the Ruling Class (Washington Cartel, MSM, world-wide left, et al.) are working overtime to see their Alinskyite divide-and-conquer strategy succeed. Lord, help us.

Lynn Perrizo says:

Susan, great Musing and Gerry I love what you said. Let’s keep praying for a president that will be willing to be used by God whether they know it or not.

I have been listening to a series of podcasts about American presidents and it does remind me that God sometimes uses people in ways we don’t expect. We should be storming Heaven with prayers.

Peter, your comment is long but I hope people read it. I really “get” those who want to sit this election out. It churns my stomach to think of voting for Trump. But, as I wrote, I think that is what I have to do. Though, this year more than any other, I think that decisions will be made at the last minute.

James says:

Your choices are spot on, right on the money. We are stuck with a choice like Frank Stockton’s story ‘The Lady or the Tiger.’ Whether a candidate supports or denies abortion is certainly an acid test and perhaps a worthy one. However what I heard yesterday was so unsettling, it dwarfs mere abortion. I could not believe it.
Here it comes: an impassioned local talk show host (and a knowledgeable one) reported yesterday evening that Hillary announced that Democrats would increase taxation of the middle class. And for what purpose? For the next stage of stem cell science: to support research featuring the recombination of human and animal DNA! The Progressives have already blurred the boundaries between human and animals, seeking to give animals ‘human rights.’ The Rabbi has warned us where that will lead. And now can it be that they would merge our genetic legacy with that of animals? Sure, we would love to regrow a lost limb like a chameleon or run like a gazelle, or…or…or…
But if this project is true, it is a slap in the face of God. Genetic engineering and recombination even in the vegetable world has already unleashed forces beyond its control and unintended consequences out of reckoning. With minds twisted by too much science, where does it end? The Progressives in the end would reduce us to animals? That ‘Island of Dr. Moreau’ (H.G. Wells) dystopia is probably what will happen. Be careful what you ask for, for you just might get it.

Nancy says:

Sacrifice is probably both the hardest and most noble gesture that any of us would ever be called to do.
Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. – John 13:15
For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. – Romans 5:7
Nowhere in all wisdom is there a call for anybody to kill themselves. Except for when harm threatens life and liberty, nowhere in all wisdom is there a call to allow anybody to kill others for peace’ sake. And, of all the wisdom in all the candidates from which we now have to choose, which one would see circumstances in which there is any other exception? That is the one I hope to never see in any position to dictate any rules of engagement, let alone ‘serve’ as commander-in-chief. Not again.
I can’t say for certain whether either candidate would be willing to lay down his or her life for anyone (although it would certainly qualify them to be a great friend). But it seems that there is at least one of them that is willing to sacrifice others’ lives in lieu of risking waking up with baggy eyes. Again, to me, that amounts to a Capital Hillabeans.
Of all the indiscretions, and we do have so many by which to choose from both candidates, that is the one that I just can’t reconcile, no matter how I look at it. Especially considering that it is within one’s power to do what one is called upon, repeatedly, to do. How much more is the transgression in refusing it, given that consideration? I mean, at least abortive mothers don’t have to deal with the repeated cries for help from their babies, ringing incessantly from their phones, on their conscience.
Regrettably, it is not in my power to vote, and so I am moved to envy, perhaps it is even scorn, yes, scorn if it were not trumped by my conviction that every voter is afforded the freedom, those that take the privilege for granted, or fraudulently. I say scorn especially if yours is an intelligent vote that is crucial to offsetting those votes based on ignorant bias such as gender or skin color (as if that only occurs on one side). But then, my opinion really doesn’t matter, or at least really doesn’t count. Lucky for who? Not me, I’m afraid, but that doesn’t change how much the outcome does matter to me. It matters greatly, no matter how insignificant, that there is a difference, somewhere! And so I can only offer my prayer for a country I love nevertheless.
As Rosh Hashanah 5777 is coming upon us, I can’t help noting that this adds up to 26. Although I may be just grasping for air, here’s to hoping that adds up to something highly significant.

Nancy says:

Divide and conquer – the age old proven strategy.
Interestingly, my husband just mentioned this strategy, and I think his comment it is worth noting here.
Divide and conquer was General Custer’s strategy.

Whether or not what you heard was accurate, there is no question that one side of the political aisle wants to end differences between men and women and people and animals. All of those are scary.

One of the “can’t vote for Hillary” ideas for me is remembering how contemptuous she was to the military when she was First Lady. I admit I trust her more with the nuclear button, but less with caring about the lives of our troops.

Alice says:

To me, how a person treats an underling or someone over whom one has permanent or temporary power is very much an indication of character. There have been many reports over the years, as well as a book that came out this year, written by an ex-Secret Service agent who was one of those who protected her, depicts her as being dictatorial and even vicious toward those who were expected to lay down their lives, if necessary, to protect her. That, combined with her stance on abortion (and my strong suspicion that if, God Forbid, she becomes President, she will cancel tax exemption for any church/denomination that refuses to take her party line on abortion. Her evil character and history of corruption completely disqualifies this woman as far as I’m concerned.

In a weird opposing symmetry, Clinton’s words are good while her actions are deplorable while Trump’s words are deplorable while his actions (in terms of how he treats employees, etc.) are good.

James says:

Divide and conquer, destroy one’s opponent and spread rampant disinformation is also the Communist strategy and the Alinskyite strategy (Not to mention the arch-Nazi Josef Goebbels: ‘a lie oft repeated becomes accepted as truth’).

James says:

Local elections are indeed of utmost importance. Our local (conservative Republican) County Commissioner made a decision involving MILLIONS of dollars, perhaps BILLIONS, without enlisting his constituents’ knowledge, approval or support. When his decision resulted in a monstrous increase in tax and further regulatory restrictions for affected property owners in the County, he was perceived as the instigator of another unilateral deal in a smoke-filled back room. The taxpayers summarily booted him out of office, however to elect WHOM? A newcomer registered as a Democrat in California. Electing a California socialist out of pure spite just might be a leap from the frying pan straight into the FIRE. Indeed, watch your local elections!

Lori says:

I will not be voting for Trump. When I walk into the voting booth, I’ll be casting a vote for Pence and for the Supreme Court justices appointed by the blank / Pence ticket. ; )

Well, that’s one way to think of it.

Lora says:

Thank you for your courageous words. You have been wrestling in public with the very issues I wrestle in my mind and heart. I appreciate the way your musings help clarify the air for me.

I really appreciate these words, Lora, because I am truly finding this election cycle agonizing.

Nancy says:

Although I’m not aware of how it all ended here for Alinsky (my research on him only went as far as Wikipedia), how it ended, here, for the rest that were mentioned is comparative of how it ended for Goliath. As to the probability of how it ends there for each of these, I see that Alinsky does set himself apart from these others in that he did actually hope that he would go to hell.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.This is a required field!

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>