Dramatically minimizing the pro-abortion impact of a “President Hillary Clinton”

By Dave Andrusko

Pro-life President Donald Trump
Photo by: Gage Skidmore

By almost all accounts, pro-life President Donald Trump will announce his nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy on Monday. Like many of you, I’ve read dozens of stories about the potential impact, ranging from not-so-much to (from the pro-abortion perspective) apocalyptic.

What we can be sure of is the President has made clear he intends to choose someone who does not believe that “interpreting” the Constitution offers a license to read into it his or her own policy preferences. That was among the cardinal sins of Justice Blackmun’s Roe v. Wade decision and his ludicrous invocations of penumbras and emanations.

I had not seen Rev. Thabiti Anyabwile’s op-ed (highly critical of President Trump) when it originally ran in the Washington Post. I was made aware of it when a letter to the editor argued that while a President Hillary Clinton’s “hypothetical Supreme Court nominees might have had strong positions favoring a woman’s right to choose her medical care in consultation with her family and her doctor, as president, Ms. Clinton probably would have reduced the rate and number of abortions in the country.”

For now, let’s ignore the self-serving myth of pro-abortionists that they don’t want more and more and more abortions. They will tell us they merely want more “access.”

What the letter writer did was snip a quote from Rev. Anyabwile’s column in half so it that it read “a President Hillary Clinton would have done nothing to curtail abortion” when, in fact, the sentence went on to say “and would very likely have done a great deal to expand policies protecting the practice.”

What a cheap shot. While single-issue pro-lifers would disagree with Rev. Thabiti Anyabwile’s conclusions, he was absolutely correct about the impact on abortion of a President Hillary Clinton.

Once in the White House, Hillary Clinton would have been empowered in her dreams of cultivating abortion on demand, in the United States and around the world, subsidized by your tax dollars and mine. Conscience rights would have been under attack from Day One. It would be difficult to exaggerate how all-encompassing the campaign to stifle opposition would have been.

As we have written many times, President Trump has amassed as sterling pro-life record in only 17 months with more to come. Compare that with what we would have experienced had Hillary Clinton ascended to the White House and you will understand why pro-lifers worked as hard as they did to elect Donald Trump.