I fully agree with you on the 14th Amendment and have argued the same way. I'm exceedingly concerned about Trump and Vance's stance on the abortion pill. And why would Vance argue in favor of a 15-week abortion ban if he had any real convictions about the lives of the unborn? I don't trust them to do what's right—they're going to do what's politically expedient.
I'm not overly concerned about the argument in favor of the 15 week ban, in that I think what he's hoping to do is move the law toward something normies will agree is "reasonable" and then come back for more later. I get the logic even if I don't agree with the position.
The abortion pill is a disaster. That's going to need FDA action, most likely, though overturning Chevron helps (a lot). I think Trump and Vance are giving up far too much on that.
And as I said, I'm opposed to the platform changes. I don't think the intent is quite what some are thinking. I do think it's a mistake.
Honestly, I think it's just pragmatism. What's going to earn them the most votes? And this will do it. It isn't rooted in conviction and neither of them are going to lose sleep over the millions of babies being killed. And now that the platform has opened the doors to sodomites and and other morally bankrupt people, I think its fair to say that God's judgment is upon the RNC.
I'm not especially disagreeing, particularly in the short term. But I don't think they lack convictions on this. I think they lack conviction that making a strong verbal stand on which they can't deliver (such as the prior platform) helps more than winning this election and appointing more judges like the ones who overturned Roe.
Note once again: I disagree with that. Reagan would have too. He never shrank from saying the hard thing, because he knew that persuasion is frequently a long game and shrinking back from core truths means you never arrive at the destination you seek.
Even so, my guess is that Trump's logic looks more like Obama's on gay marriage, which he ran against every single time he sought public office.
And I did say "more" like, because unlike Obama claiming to oppose gay marriage, Trump has NOT said he's pro-abortion. He's just said it's a state issue now.
I cannot stress how dangerous I think this is, not least in that I think it's a potentially election-losing mistake. But the fact that they left in the 14th Amendment language is very telling as to their real beliefs. They most certainly didn't have to pick that as the part of the old platform they kept.
I'm just losing my patience for it. America deserves God's wrath. I can't fathom that He looks down and is pleased with America. Once the floodgates of homosexuality is opened, the only conclusion is to burn it all up. -Jude
Over on Facebook, my friend Aman Verjee asks what I would do now: keep working for a constitutional amendment or fight state by state. My response:
I personally would restore the platform planks we had in 2016 and 2020.
Practically, I would pass as much good legislation on the state level as possible, in as many states as we can. Our six week ban here in Florida is a good start, and defeating the Democrats' effort to amend our state constitution to create an absolute abortion right is essential.
But I think two things are essential:
1. Personhood amendments, explicitly defining the unborn child as a person in as many state constitutions as possible, which would instantly ban abortion in those states. Doing this forces a Supreme Court battle and potentially extends that logic nationwide. (No, I don't think that last bit will happen soon, but we can start laying the groundwork now.)
2. We MUST start passing state laws banning the abortion pill, on grounds that could justify a federal lawsuit. Overturning Chevron helps with that, though the Supremacy Clause is still out there. Nevertheless, I think it would be hard for this Supreme Court to put abortion rights -- which they agree are not in the Constitution -- or the FDA's regulatory power -- which they just nuked in Loper Bright -- ahead of a state constitutional extension of fundamental rights.
Finally, I think that we will lose on some of these initiatives. We should do what the Democrats would do and come right back to them the morning after. It's what the old abolitionists would have done.
I'll always marvel that, of all people, it was Trump who made the end of Roe happen. Had you told just about anyone that a decade ago, in 2014, that he would be the next president and appoint 3 Supreme Court justices, and thereby consign Roe v. Wade to the dustbin of history, they would have told you that you belonged in a psychiatric ward. If ever there was an example in U.S. politics that God can and does work in strange, mysterious ways, it's that. And the spiritual significance of that can't be overstated.
I concur with your assessment about the unborn and 14th amendment and the pressing need to persuade people on the issue. What is likely to be much harder than that though is convincing Americans to abandon one of the main drivers of abortion: a highly dysfunctional sexual ethic. I could be wrong, but from where I sit there are presently far too many "sexual atheists" even in the church, alas, to make a truly consistent pro-life view inwardly compelling. Barring another great awakening, the free love ethos of the sexual revolution continues to be baked into so much of culture that it'll be like trying to make the case with one foot on the brake with the other on the gas pedal. Nothing is impossible with God, of course.
Thank you Rod. It was a huge fight and victory to get the 14th Amendment in the platform, several months worth of work. I'm disappointed so many have seemed to skip that.
Great article Rod. I don't disagree with your thoughts but it will be a long-drawn out battle with likely no permanent solution, or victory. Ultimately this strategy, a top down approach, should be employed as a secondary one. The primary approach, which is consistently reliable, is to change hearts one at a time, from the bottom up. Sure, it sounds like a slow process, but it's the approach Jesus and the disciples used, and we know how that turned out.
Inside-out heart transformation will always be superior to a top-down approach which demands that people bend their will to the will of a government they don't respect or trust. This has been the primary strategy of political activists. Can you imagine if tens of millions of prolifers committed the same passion and resources that they have committed over the last several decades to political activism to instead winning the hearts of their neighbors by loving them? I have to believe that millions of lives that were lost to abortion might have been saved, as the hearts of their mothers were transformed to love the little life inside them.
As the Book of Judges should have shown us, until Christ returns, there are no permanent solutions. We must constantly pick up the sword and the trowel.
I fully agree with you on the 14th Amendment and have argued the same way. I'm exceedingly concerned about Trump and Vance's stance on the abortion pill. And why would Vance argue in favor of a 15-week abortion ban if he had any real convictions about the lives of the unborn? I don't trust them to do what's right—they're going to do what's politically expedient.
I'm not overly concerned about the argument in favor of the 15 week ban, in that I think what he's hoping to do is move the law toward something normies will agree is "reasonable" and then come back for more later. I get the logic even if I don't agree with the position.
The abortion pill is a disaster. That's going to need FDA action, most likely, though overturning Chevron helps (a lot). I think Trump and Vance are giving up far too much on that.
And as I said, I'm opposed to the platform changes. I don't think the intent is quite what some are thinking. I do think it's a mistake.
Honestly, I think it's just pragmatism. What's going to earn them the most votes? And this will do it. It isn't rooted in conviction and neither of them are going to lose sleep over the millions of babies being killed. And now that the platform has opened the doors to sodomites and and other morally bankrupt people, I think its fair to say that God's judgment is upon the RNC.
I'm not especially disagreeing, particularly in the short term. But I don't think they lack convictions on this. I think they lack conviction that making a strong verbal stand on which they can't deliver (such as the prior platform) helps more than winning this election and appointing more judges like the ones who overturned Roe.
Note once again: I disagree with that. Reagan would have too. He never shrank from saying the hard thing, because he knew that persuasion is frequently a long game and shrinking back from core truths means you never arrive at the destination you seek.
Even so, my guess is that Trump's logic looks more like Obama's on gay marriage, which he ran against every single time he sought public office.
And I did say "more" like, because unlike Obama claiming to oppose gay marriage, Trump has NOT said he's pro-abortion. He's just said it's a state issue now.
I cannot stress how dangerous I think this is, not least in that I think it's a potentially election-losing mistake. But the fact that they left in the 14th Amendment language is very telling as to their real beliefs. They most certainly didn't have to pick that as the part of the old platform they kept.
I'm just losing my patience for it. America deserves God's wrath. I can't fathom that He looks down and is pleased with America. Once the floodgates of homosexuality is opened, the only conclusion is to burn it all up. -Jude
You are not wrong. But Amos 5:18-20, and Amos 7:1-6.
This is a rebuke to unbelieving Israel. That day will certainly be horrific for them and all unbelievers not covered in the blood of Christ.
Over on Facebook, my friend Aman Verjee asks what I would do now: keep working for a constitutional amendment or fight state by state. My response:
I personally would restore the platform planks we had in 2016 and 2020.
Practically, I would pass as much good legislation on the state level as possible, in as many states as we can. Our six week ban here in Florida is a good start, and defeating the Democrats' effort to amend our state constitution to create an absolute abortion right is essential.
But I think two things are essential:
1. Personhood amendments, explicitly defining the unborn child as a person in as many state constitutions as possible, which would instantly ban abortion in those states. Doing this forces a Supreme Court battle and potentially extends that logic nationwide. (No, I don't think that last bit will happen soon, but we can start laying the groundwork now.)
2. We MUST start passing state laws banning the abortion pill, on grounds that could justify a federal lawsuit. Overturning Chevron helps with that, though the Supremacy Clause is still out there. Nevertheless, I think it would be hard for this Supreme Court to put abortion rights -- which they agree are not in the Constitution -- or the FDA's regulatory power -- which they just nuked in Loper Bright -- ahead of a state constitutional extension of fundamental rights.
Finally, I think that we will lose on some of these initiatives. We should do what the Democrats would do and come right back to them the morning after. It's what the old abolitionists would have done.
Amen and amen. Thank you, dear brother for your faithfulness.
I'll always marvel that, of all people, it was Trump who made the end of Roe happen. Had you told just about anyone that a decade ago, in 2014, that he would be the next president and appoint 3 Supreme Court justices, and thereby consign Roe v. Wade to the dustbin of history, they would have told you that you belonged in a psychiatric ward. If ever there was an example in U.S. politics that God can and does work in strange, mysterious ways, it's that. And the spiritual significance of that can't be overstated.
I concur with your assessment about the unborn and 14th amendment and the pressing need to persuade people on the issue. What is likely to be much harder than that though is convincing Americans to abandon one of the main drivers of abortion: a highly dysfunctional sexual ethic. I could be wrong, but from where I sit there are presently far too many "sexual atheists" even in the church, alas, to make a truly consistent pro-life view inwardly compelling. Barring another great awakening, the free love ethos of the sexual revolution continues to be baked into so much of culture that it'll be like trying to make the case with one foot on the brake with the other on the gas pedal. Nothing is impossible with God, of course.
Strongly agree.
Thank you Rod. It was a huge fight and victory to get the 14th Amendment in the platform, several months worth of work. I'm disappointed so many have seemed to skip that.
All involved in that are heroes.
Great article Rod. I don't disagree with your thoughts but it will be a long-drawn out battle with likely no permanent solution, or victory. Ultimately this strategy, a top down approach, should be employed as a secondary one. The primary approach, which is consistently reliable, is to change hearts one at a time, from the bottom up. Sure, it sounds like a slow process, but it's the approach Jesus and the disciples used, and we know how that turned out.
Inside-out heart transformation will always be superior to a top-down approach which demands that people bend their will to the will of a government they don't respect or trust. This has been the primary strategy of political activists. Can you imagine if tens of millions of prolifers committed the same passion and resources that they have committed over the last several decades to political activism to instead winning the hearts of their neighbors by loving them? I have to believe that millions of lives that were lost to abortion might have been saved, as the hearts of their mothers were transformed to love the little life inside them.
Love never fails. (I Corinthians 13:8)
As the Book of Judges should have shown us, until Christ returns, there are no permanent solutions. We must constantly pick up the sword and the trowel.