Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Proper Nomenclature

Home
Catholic
A Trump victory threatens the pro-life cause

A Trump victory threatens the pro-life cause

Last updated on: October 20, 2016 at 5:33 pm by Keith Michael Estrada

A Trump victory threatens the pro-life cause 2016-10-20T17:33:10-07:00 Keith Michael Estrada

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Donald Trump, president and chief executive of Trump Organization Inc. and 2016 Republican presidential candidate, speaks during a rally at Grand River Center in Dubuque, Iowa, U.S., on Tuesday, Aug. 25, 2015. Photographer: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg via Getty Images [Fair use: news, reporting, commentary.]

The Washington Post published a strong piece today by Charles Camosy, an associate professor at Fordham University, that warns of the dangers a Trump victory would present the pro-life movement.

The “Culture Wars” have long reinforced a binary discourse when it comes to examining U.S. abortion policy since Roe v. Wade.

Over the last several decades, however, a new embrace of sensitive, diverse, and prudent discussion has brought an atypical collection of people together – including women, youth, non-Christians, and minorities – in order to promote a culture of life.

In “What could stop antiabortion momentum? Trump winning,” Camosy warns that if Trump

is elected president, our opponents on abortion will be able to rightly point out that the antiabortion movement is led by a misogynist, racist, narcissist who is blinded by his own privilege.

Several groups continue to support Trump’s bid for office, believing that as president he would appoint justices in favor of reversing Roe v. Wade. Against this reasoning Camosy writes,

Antiabortion activists have hitched their wagon to the Republican Party for decades with precisely this in mind, but it hasn’t turned out very well for us. Republican presidents not only appointed five of the six justices who voted in favor of the original decision in Roe v. Wade, but they appointed the key justices who made sure the essential holding of Roe remained the law of the land: Sandra Day O’Connor (Ronald Reagan), David Souter (George H.W. Bush) and Anthony M. Kennedy (Reagan).

Furthermore, there is little reason to believe Trump is serious about appointing judges who would overturn Roe given the chance. After all, before his well-timed conversion, Trump was “pro-choice in every respect,” including when it came to partial-birth abortion.

Even during this very election cycle he claimed his abortion-rights-supporting sister would make a great Supreme Court justice. He took five different abortion positions in three days on his way to figuring out contemporary, women-centered antiabortion values. His has consistently refused to say that he wants Roe. v. Wade overturned.

This was on full display Wednesday night during the debate. The moderator, Chris Wallace, asked him three different times if he personally wanted Roe v. Wade to be overturned. Each time Trump refused to answer the question, and the first two times he mentioned that doing so would simply return the issue “back to the states.” Even when he finally insisted that Roe would be “automatically” overturned if he became president, he didn’t seem particularly enthusiastic about the prospect.

Camosy ends his piece in noting where the cause would stand if the matter were to go “back to the states”; hint: those vulnerable would remain vulnerable, and the structural preference for the commodification of human life would remain strong.

Interestingly enough, supporters of Trump should realize that Camosy doesn’t mention Hillary Clinton once, nor should one be under the impression that the Fordham associate professor is encouraging voters to opt for Clinton over Trump in this piece.

Perhaps it’s time, again, for us to reconsider supporting a non-Clinton, non-Trump option for the sake of promoting justice for all.

Read Camosy’s entire piece here.

Until next time,

Keith Michael Estrada

Keith Michael Estrada

Pro-Life

Pro-lifea

Previous Post

October 19, 2016

Meditating on Saint Joseph with Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz.

Next Post

October 20, 2016 Watch the Bourgeoisie Live: Clinton, Trump Attend Alfred E. Smith Dinner (Playback available)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Benedict XVI Canada Capital Punishment Capitalism Care for Creation Catholic Committee of Appalachia Catholic News Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Tradition - Art Catholic Worker Catholic Worker Inspirations CST in 140 Characters or Less Diocese of San Diego Faithful Citizenship Father Frank Pavone Chronicles Fathers, Mothers, Saints, and Doctors Francis Guest Posts Gun Violence Humor, Parody, and/or Satire Interfaith Dialogue John Eudes John Paul II Marriage and Family Migration New Evangelization News Not a formal post. Our Lady of Guadalupe Paul VI Popes Pro-Life Racial Justice Releases Religious Freedom Repeat/Repost Saints Socialism Thomas Aquinas Uncategorized

Select a Month March 2020 July 2019 June 2018 May 2018 March 2018 December 2017 October 2017 September 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 April 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does "seek first the kingdom of God" mean?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Put God first Ignore God Worry about clothing Seek revenge