Pro-abortionists flail desperately as Trump administration keeps pro-life promises

By Dave Andrusko

A quasi-hysterical op-ed in The Hill—“ If Trump wants to end Roe v. Wade, we must fight for legal abortion” —reminds the more sober-minded that the last refuge of pro-abortion partisans is the insistence that pro-lifers want to prosecute women who have abortions.

Such is argument of Jill E. Adams, described as the executive director of the Center on Reproductive Rights and Justice at the University of California Berkeley Law School. The ironies just keep on coming.

No pro-life organization has ever advocated prosecuting women who abort. We are the ones who talk about win-win solutions; who have created a vast nationwide network of women-helping centers; who created entire ministries to help post-aborted women heal; who push for legislation to give a woman a moment to breathe before she makes a life and death decision; and who understand the truth of what the abortion industry flatly denies—that many, many women come under enormous pressure from boyfriends and family to abort “unplanned” pregnancies.

It is pro-abortionists who are eager to use the power of the state to force pro-life physicians to violate their consciences; to keep peaceful volunteers as far as possible from abortion-vulnerable women; to demand that women-helping centers advertise that women entering their care can go elsewhere for an abortion—and if they refuse to fine them out of business; and to siphon your tax dollars off to pay for abortions at home and abroad.

But Adams is right about one thing: Donald Trump is keeping promises he made to the pro-life community. Readers of NRL News Today already know what those accomplishments are, but there are many people who are not regular subscribers who come across NRL News Today on the Internet who don’t. What follows is a brief summary.

The highlight, of course, was the nomination and eventual confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, an admirer of the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Justice Gorsuch’s early opinions strongly suggest he is a worthy successor.

Then there is the new Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance Policy, which pro-life champion Rep. Chris Smith described as a “significant reiteration and expansion of President Ronald Reagan’s Mexico City Policy.” Smith added, “The new policy establishes pro-child safeguards—benign, humane conditions—on about $8.8 billion in annual global health assistance funding appropriated to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Departments of State and Defense.”

There are so many other examples I could cite. How about the inclusion of many pro-life people not only in the cabinet but also in key roles in government? One example of this came recently when the Trump administration refused to facilitate the abortions of undocumented minors. The outcome—whether illegal aliens can come to this country to abort—will be decided by the Supreme Court.

Moreover the Trump administration reversed a last-minute policy instituted by the Obama administration. Pub. Law No. 115-23 restored the previous authority of states, if they so choose, to direct Title X funds to the providers they deem suitable.

Of course as we have written numerous times, the Trump administration is also working diligently to restore and protect the moral and religious rights of conscience. This cannot be emphasized enough.

There is hopefully much more to come, including a law to protect pain-capable unborn children and addressing Planned Parenthood’s pipeline to the federal treasury.

As we begin 2018, it is essentially to remember that none of this would have happened if Hillary Clinton had become President.

If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at twitter.com/daveha. Your feedback is very important to improving National Right to Life News Today. Please send your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com.