Trump. Either the greatest or worst thing to happen to America since sliced white bread, depending on your perspective. Love him or fear him, we think there’s something Americans should consider before casting their vote later this year – how his platform aligns with religious politics.

Often we hear that people feel they don’t have the time or the ability to become politically aware, much less active. We wrote this series with those kinds of readers in mind. It is written in the style of an analysis of mainstream media coverage of Trump’s campaign spliced with articles about a few certain other topics. Specifically, we want to illustrate the interrelationship between Trump’s brand of politics, religion, and current global trends and events in order to show how they are all strictly and intimately connected – and also how we can use our own knowledge and collective voice to play the game back if enough of us know the rules.

We will try to illustrate how easy it is to understand all of the seemingly unrelated pieces of the world we live in when you understand how everything is connected in the Bigger Picture. Most people don’t expect the common denominator to be sexuality. Hopefully this piece will shed some light on the reality of that notion.

Finally, we would like to offer our readers a chance to check for themselves. At the end of this series, given all of the information presented, we will publish our #question4Trump – our way of demonstrating that our understanding of global politics, based on an understanding of human sexuality, is good enough to be able to ‘use the system to change the system’. If, after reading the series, you understand and agree with all of the pieces, we invite you to join us in tweeting the question to Trump until we get an answer.

It is our hope that, if enough people start to understand politics well enough to be able to influence them, we CAN change this world but, we have to do it TOGETHER. We hope you’ll join us.


#Trump, We Know How You Can #MakeAmericaGreatAgain

Donald Trump has said a lot of outrageous things during his much longer than 15 minutes in the spotlight. Some things he says are downright scary, some things are ideas that you’re scared you love. It can’t be denied, he has done very well thus far – and that’s scary too.

It’s scary because none of the outrageous things he says actually seem like they would make life better for everyone on the whole, he only cavalierly promotes the political correction of ideas that were previously kept in the shadows of conscious desire with good reason.

He went from calling illegal Mexicans in the USA murdering, drug peddling, rapists to his promise of, and success in, winning the Latino vote. Now he has crowds chanting in response to his promise to build a wall along the American-Mexican border; ‘Who’s going to pay for the wall?’, he asks. ‘The Mexicans!’, the crowd screams.

It’s scary enough to make you consider offering to pay for the wall in order to avoid learning how he planned to make you pay for it. And it would put more barriers between him and yourself and the people of your country, which couldn’t hurt.

The point we’re trying to make is, it is important to listen to what he says because he is the kind of guy who says what he means and means what he says. He says he wants to #MakeAmericaGreatAgain and we have an idea about something avant-garde he actually could do to achieve that goal.  We hope you’ll join us in asking him to do it.

Before we tell you our idea, let’s take a look at some of the things Donald Trump has said, it will help put everything into the context of the Bigger Picture.

#Trump on #Abortion

With everything going on in Poland about abortion and a Catholic takeover of their democratically elected government, the keen political observer surely picked up on the clear signal that was Trump’s remarks on the hot-button religious issue of abortion.

Although, to no one’s discredit, it was hard to pin down exactly which of his remarks he was standing by as his final answer. The Washington Post published a great summary of his journey to the current politically acceptable pro-life stance.

The thing that got it all started was the infamous moment in an interview with Chris Matthews when Trump patiently explained that, while it was true that a pro-life stance and a ban on abortion would lead to an increase in women seeking illegal abortions, if abortion were banned, the woman would have to be punished for seeking out the procedure. You can find a transcript at the link above, excerpt follows (emphasis added):

MATTHEWS: How do you ban abortion? How do you actually do it?

TRUMP: You know you’ll go back to a position like where they had where people perhaps will go to illegal places.


TRUMP: But you have to ban it. I’m against—

MATTHEWS: Yeah you ban it but they go to someone who flunked out of medical school and-

TRUMP: Are you Catholic?

MATTHEWS: Yes, I think I-I-I

TRUMP: And how do you feel about the Catholic church’s position?

MATTHEWS: I accept the teaching authority of my church on moral issues.

TRUMP: I know, but do you know what their position on abortion is?

MATTHEWS: Yes, I do.

TRUMP: And do you concur with that position?

MATTHEWS: I concur with their moral position but legally I want to get to the question—

TRUMP: No but let me ask you. What do you say about—

MATTHEWS: It’s not funny.

TRUMP: It’s really not funny. What do you say about your church? They’re very very strict.

MATTHEWS: The churches make their moral judgments, but you’re running for President of the United States to become Chief Executive of the United States. Do you believe in punishment for abortion, yes or no, as a principle?

TRUMP: The answer is there has to be some form of punishment.

MATTHEWS: For the woman?


MATTHEWS: 10 cents, 10 years, what?

TRUMP: I don’t know. That I don’t know.

Shortly after the interview, Trump’s campaign released the following statement:

If Congress were to pass legislation making abortion illegal and the federal courts upheld this legislation, or any state were permitted to ban abortion under state and federal law, the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman. The woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb. My position has not changed – like Ronald Reagan, I am pro-life with exceptions.

This is in line with the official pro-life movement’s position. Also, note his reference to Ronald Reagan, it’s an interesting coincidence (?) that may become more meaningful by the end of this series.

The next day however, his position was clarified yet again when he offered the reason behind why he said what he 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.”

This was reframed by his campaign as:

“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, …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.” (emphasis added)

Is collusion between the church and the state at a state level any less reprehensible than when it occurs at a federal level? Or is it even more dangerous because it means the federal government has either permitted or facilitated its occurrence?

“Trump also said that he believes Roe v. Wade was incorrectly decided, saying that the opinion could be “unpassed” with the right judges on the Supreme Court. He was careful not to indicate that he would be able to change that as president, clarifying that the court’s current ideological orientation does not favor such a dramatic change.”

“It’s been very strongly decided, but it can be changed. Things are put there and they’re passed, but they can be unpassed with time. But it’s going to take time because you have a lot of judges to go,” he said. (Washington Post)

Summary: Trump’s first, instinctive answer is that women should face criminal charges, ‘be punished’, for seeking an abortion in places where it is banned by the state – a legal freedom/responsibility (remember, freedom is responsibility) which he would delegate to the state-level governments to enact. His personal position on the matter is not expected to be represented by his words as his answers seem to come from a bank of stock ‘lines’ that are given depending on the audience.

If elected President, he understands exactly how he would go about navigating constitutional, legislative, and legal loopholes (one of his specialties) in order to overturn or change monumental secular cornerstones.

For more context on the reason why the issue of abortion is so politically important, please check out our other articles on the topic, specifically about the current situation in Poland:

Abortion in Poland and Other Catholic Countries

Poland Polarized: A Leviathan Gripped by Fear of the Catholic Church

Pieczyński: Get Off Your Knees! The Call to End the Reign of Terror of the Catholic Church

Thanks for reading! We invite you to leave your thoughts in the comment section below, we’d love to hear what you think!

Join us next time for more analysis of Trump – on terrorism, refugees, and Muslims.

Much love,