Trump on Abortion: ‘The Laws Are Set and I Think We Have to Leave It That Way’

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump told CBS News this week following controversy over his remarks about abortion that “at this moment, the laws are set, and I think we have to leave it that way.”

Trump was interviewed on Friday for “Face the Nation” with John Dickerson, which is set to air on Sunday.

“What would you do to further restrict women’s access to abortion as president?” Dickerson asked.

“Well, look, I know where you’re going, and I just want to say, a question was asked to me and it was asked in a very hypothetical [way]. It said illegal,'” Trump said. “I’ve been told by some people that was an older line answer and that was an answer that was given on a, you know, basis of an older line from years ago on a very conservative basis.”

Trump was referring to an interview earlier this week with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, in which he was asked if he believed abortion should be criminalized.

“Do you believe in punishment for abortion—yes or no—as a principle?” Matthews inquired.

“The answer is there has to be some form of punishment,” Trump replied.

  • Connect with Christian News

“For the woman?” Matthews asked.

“Yeah, there has to be some form,” Trump stated.

“Ten cents, 10 years, what?” Matthews inquired in seeking to obtain specifics.

“That I don’t know,” Trump said.

Trump’s remarks received both support and opposition, with some applauding the idea and others denouncing it. He later released a statement of clarification, advising that he doesn’t believe the mother should be punished; only the abortionist.

Dickerson’s question was a follow-up to those remarks.

“I was asked hypothetically,” Trump told Dickerson. “The laws are set now on abortion and that’s the way they’re going to remain until they’re changed.”

“You had told Bloomberg in January that you believe abortion should be banned in some pregnancies,” Dickerson replied. “Where would you like to see a ban…?”

“Well first of all, I would’ve preferred states’ rights,” he added. “I think it would’ve been better if it were up to the states. But right now, the laws are set. And that’s the way the laws are.”

“But do you have a feeling on how they should change?” Dickerson asked. “There are a lot of laws you wan to change. You’ve talked about them—everything from libel to abortion. Anything you’d want to change on abortion?”

“At this moment, the laws are set. And I think we have to leave it that way,” Trump replied.

“Do you think it’s murder—abortion?” Dickerson then inquired.

“I have my opinions on it, but I’d rather not comment on it,” Trump replied.

“You said you were very pro-life,” Dickerson stated. “Pro-life means that abortion is murder.”

“I mean, I do have my opinions on it,” Trump replied. “I just don’t think it’s an appropriate forum.”

“But you don’t disagree with that proposition, that it’s murder?” Dickerson asked.

“No, I don’t disagree with it,” Trump said.

Following the release of footage from the interview and subsequent reports that Trump had seemingly walked back his remarks even further, his campaign released a statement asserting that what Trump really meant was that abortion laws need to stay the same until he is elected.

“Mr. Trump gave an accurate account of the law as it is today and made clear it must stay that way now—until he is president,” spokesperson Hope Hicks told reporters. “Then he will change the law through his judicial appointments and allow the states to protect the unborn.”

“There is nothing new or different here,” she contended.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • robertzaccour

    He’s right. As much as I’d like to say “Let’s change the law”, the supreme court says we can’t do that. Unless the supreme court changes the law, we’re going to have to deal with it as states. States need to defy this immoral law just like states have defied the law against marijuana. I’m not condoning marijuana. Personally I’m indifferent to it since I don’t smoke, but if states are going to stand up to bad laws like the marijuana ban, when are they going to do the same about the things that are really important? It takes only one state and others will follow.

    • Amos Moses

      The SCOTUS does not make law, they make rulings. They can be ignored if we choose to do so. They do not rule us, we rule them.

      We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. ~Abraham Lincoln

      • Paige Turner

        Sounds like you are supporting illegal activity.

        Ignoring laws has consequences.

        Looks like you’re OK with that too.

        Your Lincoln quote is out of context too.

        • Amos Moses

          No.

          • Paige Turner

            Here is your post:

            “The SCOTUS does not make law, they make rulings. They can be ignored if we choose to do so”

            You are proposing ignoring the law that SCOTUS upholds. That is illegal and has consequences.

            Yes.

          • Amos Moses

            No.

          • Paige Turner

            I bet that your password is “password”

          • Amos Moses

            No.

          • Paige Turner

            You cant spell “password” so thats redundant.

          • Amos Moses

            Actually it is……………..No.

          • Paige Turner

            Petulant

      • Jalapeno

        What exactly do you think the point of the SCOTUS decisions are then?

        As it stands now…any law that’s ruled unconstitutional by the decisions is invalid.

        So..do we just have whatever laws we want anyways?

        • Amos Moses

          If they are against common sense and We The People…………..it does not matter.

          • Jalapeno

            So.. Who decides which scotus decisions to ignore?

          • Amos Moses

            Ahhhhh………We The People…………………

          • Jalapeno

            And.. When the people inevitably disagree?

            Do you get to decide?

            Do we just take direct majority votes on whether or not a scotus decision adds up?

            Do we just ignore all of them unless otherwise noted?

          • Amos Moses

            If We The People decide we shall ignore their “ruling” they really have nothing to say about it. The make “rulings” they DO NOT Rule. We have a Congress, Senate, President, Governors and state legislators for that.

          • Jalapeno

            So.. Who decides what rulings we ignore?

            Do we vote directly?

            Do we just leave it up to the states anyways?

          • Amos Moses

            So is it or is it not ok if a pedophile 40 year old dates and has sex with a 12 year old if it is “legal”? Afterall, if it is not, then that is age discrimination and you are a pedophile-aphobe. SCOTUS could “rule” that it is just “Age Discrimination”.

            Or do you hold the view that all law is ok? That all SCOTUS “rulings” are good and ok and wonderful?

          • Jalapeno

            You didn’t answer the question.

          • Amos Moses

            Neither did you?

          • Jalapeno

            Your question was just dodging the very simple one I asked.

            You’re under the impression that we should just ignore any rulings that we find displeasing.

            So..who decides how that happens? Are we supposed to just vote on one? Let the states decide?

          • Amos Moses

            “Your question was just dodging the very simple one I asked.”

            So when the SCOTUS ruled slavery was ok and “legal”….. what….. We should sit down and shut up…. because they are right and we are wrong?

            That is not doging anything. It is a queastion designed to make you think about what you are saying.

            So what are you saying?

          • Jalapeno

            You are 100% dodging.

            You advocated ignoring any rulings that “we the people” don’t like.

            So..what happens if “we the people” don’t all agree?

            Do..we just start a war every time?

            But..since apparently you’re struggling with the concept..I guess i’ll make it a bit more simple for you and spell it out.

            You can’t just say “ignore the law if the country doesn’t like it” because A) that’s just leading to anarchy and 2) the country rarely agrees wholeheartedly on things like this.

            We have a system in place for a reason. You seem to think that it’s okay to ignore the system if you don’t like the results.

          • Amos Moses

            And you are not thinking about what you are saying…………………

          • Jalapeno

            I am.

            You’re advocating for the ability to ignore SCOTUS rulings that you don’t like, and I’m asking exactly how you expect that to happen.

          • Amos Moses

            Actually, it is within the power of We The People. Have you read the Declaration of Independence?

            “-That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.-“

          • Jalapeno

            Okay..so..if someone disagrees with a SCOTUS ruling, we’ll just start a civil war.

            Makes perfect sense.

          • Amos Moses

            You really did not read it or have ever read it……..not surprised. But is that a possibility….. yeah. We went to war over slavery and states rights…… so what is the problem? If you think that is not a possibility…. then you are delusional. The government CERTAINLY knows it is and is preparing for it.

          • Jalapeno

            Yes, I’m fully aware of what has happened in the past.

            Yet..you’re acting like the possibility of civil war means that we should be able to ignore whatever SCOTUS rulings we like.

          • Amos Moses

            If it is destructive to the ends We the People choose…………..sure. So what?

            Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. ~John F. Kennedy

          • Jalapeno

            See?

            Was that so hard?

            “I think that any time a few people disagree with a SCOTUS ruling, we should threaten war”.

          • Amos Moses

            And who said that? Because i certainly did not…………. That may be what you want to hear…

          • Jalapeno

            Well I just had to fill it in for you because you seemed to be unable to answer a direct question.

            So..as far as I can tell, that’s what you want…having “we the people” decide through violence whenever a decision is made that “we the people” disagree with.

          • Amos Moses

            No, actually, if you would read what was said, i made no reference to violent action, but to peacefully resist. You on the other hand, want to be a government sycophant and door mat.

            Well I just had to fill it in for you because you seemed to be unable to answer a direct question.

          • Jalapeno

            Sure sure, I’m sure all your “throwing off the governement” will go nice and peacefully.

            So is that your plan of action? If a few people don’t like a decision, they…go and stand in the state capital until the government starts enforcing the law that the SCOTUS just shot down?

            Do you plan on enforcing those laws yourself?

            You know, like..if the laws restricting marriage get invalidated, you just go and tell everyone that their same sex marriages are not accepted by the government, even if it’s not true?

            Do you plan on holding a vote so the majority can decide that those marriages are invalid?

          • Amos Moses

            Civil Disobedience……………………….

          • Jalapeno

            So..standing in the state capital and refusing to leave until you get your way?

            Protesting?

            ..Refusing to marry someone of the same sex?

          • Amos Moses

            American as apple pie. Try reading about the American revolution………………

          • Amos Moses

            “You know, like..if the laws restricting marriage get invalidated, you just go and tell everyone that their same sex marriages are not accepted by the government, even if it’s not true?”

            God has already said that they are invalid……….Government has no authority to change it.
            It was not “restricted”…….they had the exact same right as everyone else.

          • Jalapeno

            Okay..so whats your plan?

            Stand in the streets until the government stops protecting all the people that you don’t think should be married?

            Start a civil war?

          • Amos Moses

            “Stand in the streets until the government stops protecting all the people that you don’t think should be married?”

            It is not a marriage…………………… What is there to “protect”?

          • Jalapeno

            Regardless of your view of it, same sex marriages have the same protections as the ones with one male and one female.

            So..you seem to think that “we the people” can just ignore that if we don’t like it.

            Whats your plan?

            Are you going to stand in the streets until they can no longer file taxes jointly? Demand that every hospital treat them as if they aren’t a spouse?

          • Amos Moses

            “So..you seem to think that “we the people” can just ignore that if we don’t like it.”

            Yes, we can…….. why would you think it is otherwise.

            “Regardless of your view of it, same sex marriages have the same protections as the ones with one male and one female.”

            No, they do not………………they are not marriages….

            Do you believe in evolution?

          • Jalapeno

            Okay..so how do we ignore the fact that legally, those people are married?

            Notice..i’m not asking if YOU think they’re married. According to the government, they are.

            Did you want to go yell at the IRS until they stop letting them file jointly?

            Did you want to go to hospitals and make sure they don’t get any spousal protections?

          • Amos Moses

            So is it or is it not ok if a pedophile 40 year old dates and has sex with a 12 year old if it is “legal”? Afterall, if it is not, then that is age discrimination and you are a pedophile-aphobe. SCOTUS could “rule” that it is just “Age Discrimination”.

          • Amos Moses

            So lets say it is not homosexuals, lets say it is pedophiles……

            “Notice..i’m not asking if YOU think they’re married. According to the government, they are.

            Did you want to go yell at the IRS until they stop letting them file jointly?

            Did you want to go to hospitals and make sure they don’t get any spousal protections?”

            Answer your own questions if the spouse is 12 or younger girl and the other spouse is a 40 year old man.

          • Jalapeno

            How do you ignore it?

            You said that you think we should be able to ignore it.

            I’m not the one that said that we should be able to ignore the decisions..and I’m asking how you intend to go about doing so.

          • Amos Moses

            The Fed says that marijuana is a “dangerous narcotic with no medicinal value”, SCOTUS has affirmed they have the power to say that and prosecute, and yet Colorado, California, Alaska and several other states have said, basically, “We do not care what you say, we are going to allow it to be sold”, and are in fact IGNORING what they have to say.

            They are “going about doing it”. i do not understand your problem in understanding it.

          • Jalapeno

            How do you intend on ignoring this ruling that you’ve decided is wrong?

            You said that we can ignore rulings that go against our views.

            You obviously disagree with the ruling.

            So..what’s being done? How are people supposed to disobey the marriage ruling?

          • Amos Moses

            Civil Disobedience………………………

          • Jalapeno

            Are you expecting the state to just ignore those marriages?

            Are you going to tell this that you won’t pay taxes unless they stop filing jointly?

          • Amos Moses

            The IRS is not a government agency. What they do is their business. i do not care.

            “Are you expecting the state to just ignore those marriages?”

            Some states will, some won’t. Makes no difference. God does not.

          • Amos Moses

            The government can make all the “rulings” it wants, it cannot force their rulings on an uncooperative population if that population refuses to cooperate.

          • Jalapeno

            So..are you hoping that people refuse to cooperate

            You said that they aren’t married, but the government says they are. Are you listening because you realize that it’s an extension of the will of the people, or are you just going to stick your head in the and and pretend that they aren’t married?

            How are you ignoring the ruling?

          • Amos Moses

            “How are you ignoring the ruling?”

            Absolutely.

            “Are you listening because you realize that it’s an extension of the will of the people, or are you just going to stick your head in the and and pretend that they aren’t married?”

            Everyone agreeing to a lie, only makes them liars……….

          • Jalapeno

            How are you ignoring it?

            By pretending like they aren’t married?

            What about the fact that the government recognizes the marriage?

          • Amos Moses

            Not much pretending to it, they are not married. It is a lie. i do not buy their lie. If the “government buys the lie, the government is a liar.

          • Jalapeno

            So.. How are you deciding that the government needs to listen to the will of the people?

          • Amos Moses

            How are you deciding that it does not?

          • Jalapeno

            I’m not the one making the claim.

          • Amos Moses

            We the People……………

            is a claim.

          • Jalapeno

            Saying that you don’t need to adhere to the scotus is a claim.

          • Amos Moses

            Saying We the People are in charge of the government and can nullify any SCOTUS ruling by either new law or ignoring SCOTUS altogether is our right to self government. As many have done with marijuana laws.

          • Jalapeno

            Okay, so..you say that they were wrong to allow gay marriage.

            How do you intend to nullify it?

          • Amos Moses

            God has already nullified it……… it is null by the very definition of marriage. Man cannot redefine what God has defined. There is no right to marry anybody despite what man or any court of men says. There has never been any standard of “I get to marry who I love”.

            It is all a lie. If you choose to believe a lie…. then that is on you.

          • Jalapeno

            They get the exact same legal treatment as a couple with a man and a woman.

            The SCOTUS decided that they were legal.

            How do you intend to nullify it? Are you just going to acknowledge that it was the will of the people and that you don’t represent everyone else’s?

          • Amos Moses

            “They get the exact same legal treatment as a couple with a man and a woman.

            The SCOTUS decided that they were legal.”

            So what?

            “How do you intend to nullify it? ”

            i do not have to nullify that which is a fraud, a sham, a lie. It is self refuting.

          • Jalapeno

            So..you’re okay with the ruling they made?

          • Amos Moses

            No………..

          • Jalapeno

            It IS the ruling though.

            So..You’re okay with them getting to file taxes jointly and being legally considered the same as every other gay couple out there?

            You keep talking about how it’s a “lie”, but..the fact remains that they are legally equivalent. They are married.

          • ShemSilber

            You said it, Brother Amos. Even if all 7 billion people in the world call same-sex couples “married,” it still isn’t marriage by Scriptural standards. Then they say, “We don’t go by the Bible,” and, “Whaddaya think we have, a theocracy?” Well it’s too bad we don’t, because when the Master Yahushua (Lord Jesus) comes to rule from His throne in Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:1-4; Micah 4:1-4), that will be the only government that ever was FOR the people instead of the politicians who run the government. We will finally have NO evils on the earth, for He will clean them up and give us peace on earth. HalleluYAH, for our Messiah is powerful, second in command of the universe under our Father in the heavens, omein.

          • Amos Moses

            “Notice..i’m not asking if YOU think they’re married. According to the government, they are.”

            And of course, the government can’t be wrong……….ERROR…… They can and they ARE WRONG…………..

  • Josey

    Way to twist the man’s words Matthews and set a trap for him, it’s easy to see for anyone who can see or hear, go talk to Hillary about what she has been proven by past videos to be lying about…uggg these mainstream media make me ill with their attempts to brainwash ppl and if ppl can’t see this it’s because they don’t want to see it.

  • Jo Lux

    This – I might say ‘another’ – flip-flop proves Trump hasn’t given a serious thought on one of the most hotly debated important social issues of our country. He’s not fit to become our president.