The media are always going after Donald Trump these days, but one of the latest topics is an interesting one because it actually goes way beyond what is being discussed.

When Trump was being interviewed by Chris Matthews, he was pressed on what he would do to make abortion illegal.  Trump initially tried to dodge the question, but Matthews was relentless.

I don’t think abortion is on Trump’s agenda at all.  He is probably just playing the pro-life position so that he can somewhat fit in with the Republicans, even though he has deviated on other issues.  We can doubt whether anything would change with regards to abortion even if a hardcore social conservative (Cruz?) were to win the presidency.  With Trump, there is almost no chance that anything would change.

Still, Matthews kept pressing Trump to respond on what penalties there would be.  Trump finally said that a woman who gets an abortion would be punished in some way.  That is what Matthews wanted him to say.  It was his “gotcha” moment.

Trump was unprepared.  He should have been prepared for such a question.  He later backtracked after the interview and said that it would just be the doctors who would be penalized.

I don’t mind the “hardball” questions from Matthews except that he is a total hypocrite.  He wouldn’t ask these questions of Hillary Clinton, or anything remotely as hard.  Actually, Hillary Clinton probably doesn’t do any interviews where she doesn’t already know the questions, or at least where she doesn’t feel comfortable with the person interviewing.  You won’t ever catch Hillary Clinton in an interview on Fox News.

Trump is essentially forced to do many interviews.  The media is constantly lambasting him.  He has no other choice but to take his message directly to the people.  If he didn’t do interviews often, he would be a sitting duck.

With that said, Matthews’ question and Trump’s response really go way beyond abortion.  It actually reveals the total nature of the state.

Why doesn’t Chris Matthews ask Trump or any other candidate what they would do to punish someone who doesn’t pay their required taxes?  Why not ask what the penalty should be for not paying a parking ticket or a late fee for a library book?

For someone who doesn’t pay their taxes, they will eventually receive something telling them to pay, probably along with a penalty and interest.  If the person refuses to pay, then they will eventually get a notice to appear in court.  If the person doesn’t show up for court, then armed men with guns will go to the person’s house and break down the door.  They will take him to jail.  If he refuses to go to jail, he will likely be shot.

This could even happen with an unpaid parking ticket or a late fee for a library book.  That is the nature of the state.  It ultimately rests on the use of violence.

If Trump or anyone else is going to make abortion illegal, then force would have to be used at some point if the illegality of it meant anything.  This isn’t an argument for or against the legalization of abortion.  It is just the simple truth.  I understand that some people view abortion as the taking of a human life, therefore they believe it would be justified to use some kind of force as a form of defensive force.

At least with abortion, an argument can be made for defensive force, if you consider it defending the unborn fetus.  But with most other government laws, it is not defensive force.  Really, anything that requires forced taxation is the initiation of force by the state.

I wish Chris Matthews, or any other so-called journalist, would ask these candidates what they would do to punish someone who doesn’t pay their income tax, or who refuses to abide by Obamacare, or who quits their job with the military, or who buys certain drugs without a prescription.  I would like to see follow-up questions leading up to the ultimate conclusion, which is the use of guns.  At some point, the state will use guns to enforce the laws, or else the laws are meaningless.

Most people probably didn’t think through Trump’s comments on abortion this much.  But if you look deep enough, it is a great lesson on libertarianism.