ANOTHER PROMISE: He wants to defund Planned Parenthood, even though none of the federal money they get None. Of. It goes to covering the cost of abortions. For poor women, especially, they can get pap smears and other help there without having to pay through the nose for medical assistance (and this is without regard, by PP, for whether or not a woman is pregnant).
A note here: I’m essentially pro-life. It is not my business how a woman wishes to handle her pregnancy, although I think - and will not be dishonest if they ask - that some women can and do suffer long-term consequences from abortion...especially now, as fetal imaging becomes clearer. I always add the caveat - remember, I only answer these kinds of questions if someone asks - that the science behind the existence of Post-Abortion Syndrome is controversial.
I'd prefer abortion to be legal, and for few women - because they avoided pregnancy, or because they got the help they needed while pregnant and legitimate aftercare - to get them because they have no reason to need them.
I am all FOR top notch sex-ed and access to effective contraceptives to lower the number of unexpected pregnancies. (In such cases as abortion is banned, that's no barrier to wealthier women who canget safe treatment while those with less money could end up in the hands of, not a professional at all, but rather a butcher like Kermit Gosnell (Wiki's just easier, here; the situation is described and cited all in one place: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell)
At one point, I applied to participate in a pro-life org, hoping to help people learn about contraceptives how to use them properly, where to get them, and so on so they can have full bodily autonomy without fear of pregnancy (even if abortion is legal; good contraceptive use helps prevent unwanted surprises.)
I also wanted to help those who were already pregnant to access resources that would make the process - especially if she has no support system - a lot friendlier, more humane, and overall more helpful: A safe route into housing and regular food. (Psst...whether she continues with the pregnancy or not. Stability at home is another positive attribute that can help to prevent unwanted pregnancy.)
I was severely underwhelmed by the set-up with the anti-abortion "clinic."
~ There was an underling current that pregnancy was a punishment when women are unmarried (never mind that women with kids sometimes get abortions as well). And if a woman were to die of a botched abortion, legal or illegal, the reaction invariably would be, They deserved it’ and from people who claim to care about life and whose religion allegedly preaches forgiveness.
~ There was very little in the way of resources beyond some baby clothes and diapers not exactly full service to a stressed out woman who is in the midst of deciding on abortion.
~ The org didn’t want me; turned me down flat following the interview (for a volunteer position). Why? They oppose any talk of contraceptives. Contraceptives have a good record of stopping both STIs and unwanted pregnancy. To encourage people not to use this is even more irresponsible, in my view, than telling people not to use their seat-belts while driving.
...and so back to Trump.
Among his campaign promises, these’s this little gem: “ will take care of women, and I have great respect for women, and I will take care of women.”
Let’s see his track record on that:
~~ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/04/donald-trump-teenage-rape-accusations-lawsuit-dropped (From the article: “This week she abruptly canceled a plan to speak publicly about the allegations, and another attorney, Lisa Bloom, cited numerous threats’ against her client.
~~ He has two divorces under his belt and has only been married to his current wife since 2005. He was married to his first wife 14 years, and to his second for approximately six years. He has been with his current wife 12 years. I wonder how long that will last.
Here’s an overview from the New Yorker. If you don’t trust that source, then you can choose one from among the thousands of other possible sources: http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trump-and-the-truth-the-sexual-assault-allegations
I could go on with this, but I want to address the rest of your statement before this thing turns into a novel.
ME: ” He has no filter between his mind and his mouth - a lack of discretion that could cause trouble during fragile talks
YOU: “ Better than PC where truths are hidden because they're uncomfortable truths like the fact that Iran is a violent nation that doesn't want peace and cannot be trusted under the latest deal
There is a world of difference between SJWs who want to police language, thereby limiting free speech, and those who think that belligerence is the necessary equivalent to speaking your mind (even if what you’re thinking is uncomplimentary, rude, and disrespectful enough to burn political and social bridges that are vital to US trade and security).
Quick question; I don’t expect you to answer it here, but I hope you think about it: When someone debates you on the internet, as is the case now, which conversations would you say are the more useful and educational flame wars, or a mostly civil back-and-forth? (You may answer that you don’t care what people online think of you. Fine and good, but from which exchange would you learn more? Which, if either, would give you pause to think, “Hey, my idea is still good but there are problems with it that make it untenable right now.”)
Go to your gut with this one: Do you honestly think that has ever been true of Trump?