UPDATE: 8/29 - Lila Rose granted an interview with Politico today where she said she would not vote for Trump or Harris if the election were held today. This negates some of my points (she had not said this explicitly up until that moment). I strongly disagree with her logic of abstaining from voting in an election where every vote might keep actual communism from making abortion the law of the land.
I can only hope this is a bluff to force the man who wrote "The Art of the Deal" to make a stronger statement for life ahead of the election, but if Trump calls that bluff, untold number of pro-lifers who follow Lila and her allies might actually change their votes, which could potentially cost the election and give the abortion cult unlimited baby murder.
In that case, the critics might be proven right.
This being said, my argument about the rush to comment on things and throw people under the bus still stands, as does my two major points about how you should treat Lila's advice.
Soli Deo Gloria.
I've seen the comments. They are a clown show.
If you missed it, Lila Rose, the Catholic founder of the pro-life organization Live Action, posted this on X on Monday:
It's clear that Trump and Vance are attempting to garner support among center-left women, and they have politically expedient reasons for doing so:
The Democrats are saying Trump will ban abortion to scare women into turning out en masse at the polls, so Trump and Vance are attempting to dampen that by capitulating on their stance for life.
Whether or not you think that political strategy is wise, Lila Rose - as the director of a pro-life, Christian organization aimed at ending abortion - warned that this shift will alienate the pro-life base.
But because the terminally online mob tends to interpret things without wisdom or context, that observation was taken as "I won't vote for Trump."
These criticisms then moved into malicious accusation territory. All of a sudden, Lila Rose wasn't merely a traitor, she was actually a criminal. Take this post as an example:
She WANTS the babies to DIE, don't you see? She's just like the race-grifters on the Left! She's doing Satan's work!
Let's pull back from the madness for some analysis, shall we?
I know most people don't like reading these days, but prepare for some thoughts.
There are two principles at play in this crud show that are true at once.
Your vote is not sacred and you should vote for Donald Trump in order to achieve the most possible good at this moment of time.
Donald Trump has bounced back to his default 1990s-Democrat position on abortion and should be called out by those defending life.
I have to address the first point thoroughly, because otherwise I'll have clowns in the comments saying I'm also casting a vote for Comrade Kamala and communism.
There are many handwringing puritans out there in America who are worried that they will not have a clean conscience when they stand before God because they marked a little box at their local voting station.
Despite what David French told you, voting is not your sacred duty, nor is it a sacrament. God did not implement it - we are playing by rules and traditions made by men.
In matters of politics, you should seek virtue, which means carefully obeying God's commands. But voting is not a matter between you, a politician, and God. It is a messy tug-of-war with hundreds of millions of people involved.
As Pastor Douglas Wilson of Moscow, Idaho, wrote this Monday:
Suppose you were a wise hermit living on the mountain, and down below you in the valley there was a small kingdom. The way their constitutional affairs were organized, whenever the throne was vacant, they would bring five eligible candidates up to see you, and you (like Samuel at Jesse's house) would select the man. Now in such a circumstance, you really would be obligated to pick the man who feared God, loved truth, and hated covetousness (Ex. 18: 21). The choice is up to you, and so you need to pick the good man and not the bad man.
But our situation is not like this at all. We are actually playing blob tag with about 160 million other people, and we are doing so over quite rocky terrain.
The problem arises when an individual voter thinks that what he is doing is the identical thing that the hermit on the mountain is doing. He is one rain drop who is making himself feel fully responsible for the flood. But this places a false construction on the whole business.
Wilson rightly says that the cynics (who refuse to vote because they think it doesn't matter) and the perfectionists (the young abolitionists who want all or nothing, and the old, sweet churchgoers who think Trump too ungentlemanly) are both in error.
This is not a choice between the lesser of two evils, but doing the best possible good with our EXTREMELY limited means and VERY minute influence on world affairs.
This is not a case of 'let us do evil that good may result.' Rather it is an instance of doing as much limited good as we can, so that more good might come from it. What is that limited good? If Harris is elected, there will be no evangelicals in the White House, or anywhere near it. David French might be allowed to come to a dinner a time or two to be given his crust, until they are done with him, but that will be pretty much it. If Trump is elected, the place will be crawling with believers. And at the end of the day, personnel is policy.
So yes, the comment section is correct in saying that Trump is the moral choice, even with his many (MANY) flaws.
But the comment section started a flamethrower war over something Lila DIDN'T say.
Where in that post does Lila say that given this particular choice in November of the Year of Our Lord 2024, that she won't vote Trump?
As someone who isn't immediately prone to rage-comment, I saw that and thought, "Huh, she seems to be making a warning about the general observation that your supporters will stop trusting you if you go squishy on things that matter to them."
She actually clarified what she meant in a followup video. See if she says anywhere that we should hand the election to Kamala by withholding votes for Trump:
Lila wants Trump to take a stand for life.
That's not called voter suppression, my friends, that's called voter encouragement.
I also listened to Lila's entire podcast episode on this subject.
She clearly states that Live Action does not promote particular candidates as a registered non-profit and laid out a long argument saying "election data shows pro-life works."
Lila is not using her platform to tell people how to vote: She is using her role as a leading pro-life activist to hold a politician's feet to the fire (that's kind of the main job of activists). In fact, God expects us, but especially those with the audience and means and calling, to hold our leaders to account.
Though we don't have a king and America is not under the Mosaic law, God outlines his demands of leaders in verses such as Deuteronomy 17:14-20.
Appoint a king from your brothers. You are not to set a foreigner over you, or one who is not of your people ... When he is seated on his royal throne, he is to write a copy of this instruction for himself on a scroll in the presence of the Levitical priests. It is to remain with him, and he is to read from it all the days of his life, so that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, to observe all the words of this instruction, and to do these statutes. Then his heart will not be exalted above his countrymen, he will not turn from this command to the right or the left, and he and his sons will continue reigning many years in Israel.
It is good and just for Christian pastors, activists, and other social leaders to remind those in government about God's laws.
'They have built the high places of Baal in Ben Hinnom Valley to sacrifice their sons and daughters in the fire to Molech — something I had not commanded them. I had never entertained the thought that they do this detestable act causing Judah to sin!' - Jeremiah 32:35
And,
'For it was you [God] who created my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother's womb. I will praise you because I have been remarkably and wondrously made. Your works are wondrous, and I know this very well.
My bones were not hidden from you when I was made in secret, when I was formed in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw me when I was formless; all my days were written in your book and planned before a single one of them began.' - Psalm 139:13-16
And,
'Rescue those being taken off to death and save those stumbling toward slaughter.' - Proverbs 24:11
And,
Jesus: 'Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to fall away — it would be better for him if a heavy millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.' - Mark 9:42
If that is the punishment for misleading a child, imagine the punishment for slaughtering one!
And yet the comment section, as funny as it sometimes can be, showed its usual level of discernment.
Even worse, people are continuing to claim that Live Action is grifting its donors without evidence. I worked for a Christian foundation that gave away $60 million a year - I know full well that bureaucratic bloat/waste affects ministries and non-profits. But to level such accusations, without evidence, in a bid to discredit someone for the perception of not bending the knee to a particular political movement is ghastly.
