President Trump Signs Declaration Opposing Abortion, Supporting the “Preservation of Human Life”

President Trump Signs Declaration Opposing Abortion, Supporting the “Preservation of Human Life”

President Donald Trump’s administration continued to push back against global abortion advocacy this week with a declaration proclaiming that “the preservation of human life and the strengthening of family” are foundational to society.

The Independent reports United States leaders joined five other countries in signing the Geneva Consensus document Thursday.

The action sent a statement to the United Nations that the killing of unborn babies in abortions is not a “human right,” as the UN Declaration of Human Rights Claims, according to the report.

More at:


Last minute pre-election efforts. We will see more of these efforts everyday. He is desperate.


No. This will probably cost him more votes than it could possibly gain him. Prolife people are already for Trump and have been for a long time. Those who, like Obama, don’t want to someday face their daughter being “burdened by a baby” and might want her to kill their grandchild, are not going to favor this act by trump.

1 Like

The signatories of this document are Brazil, Egypt, Hungary, Indonesia, Uganda, United States. These are the six nations of the Geneva Consensus. I am trying to find a copy of the document, just to make sure it does not also commit the United States to a time share.


Why would he be desperate when he’s winning so far?

Early voting is not looking good for Biden, especially in states that “leaned dem” in polls.



Because I looked at one source and it showed my state showing 86% early voting.

1 Like

We see here a poll showing how voters plan to submit their ballots by each party affiliation. Most importantly, you should note that much more republicans plan to vote in person compared to democrats. Assuming some slight error, if we use these numbers as a model to predict how many more early ballots will be cast by democrats, we note that for a minimum level of Democrat participation, the early voting counts should be roughly 1.7 Democrat to 1 Republican. A best case scenario (which would assure a clear biden lead), would require early Dem ballots to be 3x those of early Republicans.

Now let’s look at what is actually happening:

While there is an expected Democrat lead in turnout, we don’t see nearly the higher number of Dem ballots that would be predicted by the earlier poll. Furthermore, in the Battleground states, the Democrat and Republican early votes are practically at a 1-1 ratio–implying an overwhelming Trump victory is very likely.
1 Like

the turnout for Democrats is greater
National: 13 point delta

Battlegrounds 1-1 not at all 7.3 point delta

Trump is indeed getting hilariously desperate, now today even bringing up Obama and Hillary again.

What’s 48.4/41.1?

Now keep in mind that the Democrat number is roughly 80% of Biden’s final votes in those states, while the Republican early number is less than 50%. Mathematically speaking, Biden is up a creek right now.

? Dont’ know what you mean

Let’s assume we have about 1000 early ballots returned. We can estimate that there would be about 484 Democrat ballots, 411 Republican, and the rest unaffiliated.

The ratio of this sample is roughly 1, and ultimately this is the number we wish to examine to determine who has a lead in this particular precinct. The problem is that from our earlier estimates, we should expect to see more like 550 Democrat ballots and 320 Republican out of these 1000 early votes. And that’s just to break even for the state–if you want to be more comfortable Biden will win a battleground state, you really need to see more like 700 Democrat/300 republican to offset differences in party affiliation, margin of error over multiple precincts, etc.

The fact that there are more Democrat Ballots right now is irrelevant. You need to hit that magic ratio of early Dem votes, and Biden is not getting anywhere near that level. If I were a democrat strategist, I would be very concerned now to say the least.

You have a lot of what ifs there.

Let us look at the real numbers


Assume all the democrat vote go toward Biden.
Assume all the Republican votes go toward Trump.

Even if all if the unaffiliated went toward Trump, the Democrat votes still carry 1 million more.

Now looking at Battleground numbers
Republicans would win those by 1 million if they picked up all of the unaffiliated.

If you want to boil away all the fat and grizzle?
The early voting stats mean absolutely nothing.
Just like the polling results of 2016 meant absolutely nothing.
The only thing that matters is when the very last electoral college vote is rendered. Yes or Yes?

For arguments sake let’s look at Registered Voters
Dems 10 M
Reps 5 M
Unaff 19 M

it is a 2:1 ratio Dem:Rep

I would still say it is meaningless.

Finally ratified Electoral Count is all that matters.

Early votes do actually mean quite a bit, because they are an excellent indicator of how that particular electoral seat will be decided. They are much more telling than polls, as once the ballots have already been cast, you have already eliminated much of the statistical noise and inaccuracies that plague the polling process.

The fact that there are many more registered Democrats than Republicans makes the difference even more dire–by all accounts, Dem ballots should easily be double those of returned Republicans.

My main point is that early voting is the first batch of data that we have available to predict the final outcome. You may choose to ignore this data, and can certainly argue that the results are not yet set in stone. However, as it stands, Biden does not look like he is doing well at all, so people should at least start to entertain the notion that 2020 is playing out in much the same way as 2016.

The guy I didn’t even think WAS “really pro-life” shames me again.

THREE prolife SCOTUS appointments was not enough … Trump adds this!

Yer a better pro-life man than I am sir. :exploding_head::smiley:!

While we’re on Executive Order overdrive … hows about’cha strike down anyone’s attempts to use the Dred Scott decision (never precisely reversed by the Supreme Courts since) … to try to own anyone these days :angry: … and make it applicable to all aspects of human trafficking today as well. :facepunch::boom: < not the communist fist.

He needs to go further if he wants to be believed, and become prolife with no exceptions. Right now if a woman says she was raped, whether she was or not, she can get an abortion. There are too many loop holes.
Signing declarations and talk is useless unless that walk is walked.

I think the real reason President Trump signed this declaration has less to do about the vote or desperation and more to do with the fact that October is “Respect Life” month and annually those organizations like the National Right to Life organizations work to get a presidential declaration.


One of the most disturbing bits of data that I’ve seen is that only about 60% of Catholics who attend Mass more than once per week plan on voting for President Trump. Why isn’t the number 80% to 90%?

If we don’t back perhaps the most actively pro-life and religion-friendly President in American history (given the powers he’s up against), I don’t think we’ll see another actively pro-life President in our lifetimes. Other politicians will figure that it’s not worth all the vicious and dishonest attacks directed at them, especially when the support isn’t there from pro-lifers.

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit