Zorn HuffPo: “Roe rage”, “rhetorical lather”, and “not giving up the ghost”
UPDATE, 11/7, 6:40a: FYI, I’ve been inundated with hate mail as my column has reached the liberal blogosphere, although none of it comes as a surprise. The volume is just impossible for me to keep up with at the moment. (On the other hand, I’ve been inundated with emails in agreement from pro-lifers, which I can’t keep up with either.) Will try to address the haters tomorrow morning.
Liberal sparring partner, Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune, entitled his post about my column today, “Roe rage,” adding…
Stanek and her fellow anti-abortion activists are fooling themselves if they don’t realize Tuesday’s returns have reminded them, yet again, that an immovable majority of Americans, many of them Christians, want the law to butt out on what they see as basically a personal, private medical decision.
Actually, it is Eric and his followers who are fooling themselves if they think Obama won on the abortion issue. They haven’t read the post-election analyses, which showed Obama’s victory was all about a typical desire for yes, “change,” after one party’s long presidential tenure, and, more so, the economy. McCain was winning until the Wall St. collapse.
Had McCain won, I doubt Eric would be attributing it to the abortion issue. He’d be crying about racism or extremist lies or “stupid conservatives voting for stupid Palin” or other such nonsense today.
And Seth Walls at Huffington Post also took note of my column:
Though some conservatives are making conciliatory noises about Barack Obama now that the election is over, Jill Stanek is not among them.
Seth, in noting my continued “smear” that Obama protected infanticide as IL state senator, noted Obama’s “Fight the smears” website is apparently disabled. It’s no longer needed, they think.
And no, I’m “not giving up the ghost” and never will. I see dead people.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
The Huffington Post is one of the most offensive web sites I have ever seen, not just on the abortion issue. As far left as it could go.
Not surprising the left is writing garbage like that. And I totally agree the abortion issue is NOT why Obama will be the next president.
How much of Obama’s contributions were even legal? I’m sure there was lots of foreign money that went into his campaign, among other things.
We cant forget ACORN either. Having said that, I think Obama would “win” anyway, but its no landslide.
Intellectual giants that they are – they can’t refute the evidence so they resort to simply telling you to shut up.
Pathetic.
“Fight the smears” website is apparently disabled.
Of course, any evidence of the truth must be erased.
Thank you for your dedicated efforts. Thank you for continuing the noble effort to simply tell the truth. Thank you for the love and compassion that clearly motivates you.
Obama is still embroiled in a fresh FBI investigation regarding mortgage and bank fraud on his residence. The election didn’t declare the case closed. His crooked partner is still taling and trying to get favorable sentencing. Have we ever had a newbie for presient have scandels before innauguration? I suspect silencing is a style of a fascist agenda.
I see dead people.
Jill, you counting your money again? ; )
If the south had won the civil war, would slavery have been right? If killing the unborn is wrong, is it’s rightness or wrongness determined by popular vote?
I don’t think Zorn is referring to an Obama win. He’s talking about the abortion-related ballot questions right before this quote.
Uh, yeah, all the abortion restriction ballot measures going down in flames totally contradicts what Zorn is saying and supports your point.
Wow, deluded much?
As someone else pointed out, Zorn was referring to ballot measures, not the Obama win.
I do think you are correct (to an extent) that the Obama win didn’t have a lot to do with abortion, although I think that for a lot of women voters that was definitely part of it. He was just the better candidate with the better campaign, and that’s why he won.
Right is right, wrong is wrong. For the pro abortionist this issue is not about life and death it is about selfishness. Regardless of the circumstances of the pregnancy there are two lives involved and many people are there to help out. Pro abortionists will respond with all kinds of excuses and reasons but they are all misguided. We are not obligated to argue and fight with these people just to be a strong witness in our own lives and to pray.
Yes, Jeff, it’s so selfish of us to want you to mind your own business.
No, Sigh-anide, it’s selfish of you to kill your child because it inconveniences you.
If the south had won the civil war, would slavery have been right?
According to who, XPPC? Heck, there are people now who’d be for slavery.
…..
If killing the unborn is wrong, is it’s rightness or wrongness determined by popular vote?
You’re talking about different things. If you mean majority opinion, then yes, there is often one. That’s different from you saying “wrong,” though, and of course there is the degree to which going against the wishes of the pregnant woman is wrong.
Jeff: Pro abortionists will respond with all kinds of excuses and reasons but they are all misguided.
If you know somebody that is actually “pro-abortion,” then they are just as anti-choice as you.
Agreed that they’d need “reasons,” etc., because who’s going to want them to be able to tell pregnant women what to do?
Meanwhile, Pro-Choicers are for leaving it up to the woman, and she doesn’t need to clear things with you. She doesn’t need “excuses” – it’s not up to you, it’s up to her.
i just hope the red states
dont desire to return to the history pre 1960
Ok, no name-calling…
@Jon – your comment about how pregnancy and childbirth is a mere “inconvenience” just proves that you have absolutely no business making anyone else’s health-related decisions for them.
Actually Zorn is speaking how he feels and not facts. Obviously blacks voted for Obama. The other huge group that voted for Obama was single moms. 70% of them did. Some voted for Obama because he promises more welfare. some of course are black also. closer to 60% of hispanics voted for obama.
Why did single moms vote for Obama? Some voted against Gov Palin. she has money, never experienced a child support battle, has fine husband, never aborted and never would. I understand 1/3 of child bearing age women have had an abortion. A lot do not identify with a Christian mom/wife. Feminism effects single moms. It says husbands are not necessary and are actually a problem. Apparently some older and married Hillary voters switched but almost all single moms did not. Many talk against abortion but still see it as the option of last resort if they get pregnant by accident. Single moms have more poverty. That also helps them not identify with Mom, wife Gov Palin. Even the clothes. Gov Paslin appeared fine. Single moms make tough decisions between eyeglasses and Nikes for the boys. Most single moms are not career professionals. that helps them NOT identify with a governor. Understanding culture and demographics makes it difficult to pick someone to please every one. Even in youth, far less than 70% went with Obama. Obama got a lot of people to be set up and feel like they were voting aginst Pres bush. This female group was voting Against Gov Palin. They were not voting for Hair plug Robinette Biden.
“many of them Christians, want the law to butt out on what they see as basically a personal, private medical decision.”
————————————
Zorn is as deluded as he is ignorant…even Obama doesn’t want to acknowledge he supports infanticide…I seem to remember he stated “if it’s too unbelievable(?)that he supports infanticide, it probably is”
Obama went on a “Change” platform that conservatives/ moderates can relate to…not on an extreme left wing agenda.
Only those sides deep into pro-life/ pro-abort issues know the truth about Obama…and Zorn is saying Obama won due to his abortion stance?
DANG..abortion was only mentioned once in the debate and Obama so twisted his stance that people thought he was pro-life.
While the abortion issue is and perhaps forever will be a topic never to be agreed upon, there are fundamentals of our constitution that must never waiver. Having said that, the seperation of church and state is the hot button for me. If “Pastors” and “Church Leaders” are going to become prime movers in political issues such as abortion and gay marrage, then they should not be allowed to maintain their “tax free church” status and become a political advocacy group subject to taxes.
How about Obama just won the race… Bush won two terms in a row..with slimmer margins in one race and one not even getting the popular vote…
Alot of folks voted for a Democrat because their are many other issues that they believe are sinful.. and in everyones right, we have a democracy…
Abortion is tragic.. not providing healthcare for folks is tragic.. the death penalty is tragic…war is tragic…
and I do not know any folks that were fooled to believe that Obama was pro-life.. that is crap..
people voted for him because in the past 8 yrs we have had one of the worst presidents in history. Not to mention, along with the poor choice of Sarah Palin, the campaign was just not smart.. and not run well…
A bit off topic, but the Democrats won the Oregon senate seat.
I sure hope Coleman holds on.
Personally– from the scientific side.. (I am a bioethicist)… I am one that doesn’t agree with you with the conception part… So– honestly in early conception, I don’t think you have a foot to stand on… Of course, the farther along in pregnancy, is s different story…
For manyyears now the polls have been conclusive. A majoiry of Americans favor choice. No one will veer force you to have an abortion. But don’t force your moral choices on them.
For many years now the polls have been conclusive. A majority of Americans favor choice. No one will ever force you to have an abortion. But don’t force your moral choices on them.
it’s not up to you, it’s up to her.
The only time it was up to her was before another human life was created. Then it’s hands off a separate and fellow human. The result of not following that natural law is the now endorsement of infanticide. Pretty soon they’ll have to put out for larger trash containers at the “facilities” of “health”.
Joanne-
The MN SOS is a Democrat and will be watched closely. There have been inconsistencies with the registered voter list that, when discovered, caused a disproportionate reaction. For more info:
http://www.minnesotamajority.org/
???,
“But don’t force your moral choices on them.”
Don’t force your belief that we shouldn’t force our moral choices on others on us.
You all can whine about Obama until you’re blue in the face, but change has arrived. The rest of us are sitting back, smiling and watching your backwards conservative “values” fall to the wayside. Your fantasies of a 1950’s America are over. Deal with it. Either help us move America to a progressive direction or shut up and step aside.
Spreading lies about President Obama will get you only ridicule and marginalization.
Ok, Anonymous, what are we lying about? We hate what?
Dismembering a baby, that is real nice, all in the name of rights.
Not calling 911 when the mom asked you to becsause you now wants help for her baby. Remember baby Rowan.
http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2008/10/born-alive-and-aftermath.html
Leaving a baby to DIE in the dirty storage closet because he was not wanted.
You really don’t think these things happen? Inform yourself instead of name calling. Or are you 7 years old and name calling is your best defense.
Doug said-If you know somebody that is actually “pro-abortion,” then they are just as anti-choice as you.
Pro abortion defines it accurately. Could you be pro choice about slavery or rape or racism? “If you don’t like slavery just don’t own one”. It seems you don’t think that abortion is at the same level as these other issues but I do.
Don’t force your belief that we shouldn’t force our moral choices on others on us.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at November 6, 2008 2:24 PM
Don’t force your belief that we shouldn’t force our belief that you shouldn’t force your moral choices on others on us!
Your turn!
??? said-No one will ever force you to have an abortion
How do you know this? Look deeper into the issue and how abortion has played out in other societies. The pro abortion side is now connecting it with population control. Population control is a huge part of the pro abortion world. How may I ask would you control population without forcing abortion like they do in China?
Sigh,
The point is that your statement was self-refuting.
If you consider yourself to be a good American, you need to respect and support our new president, regardless of your own beliefs. Tens of millions of Americans have done that for the last eight years, and now it’s your turn.
If you can’t support our country and the decision of your fellow Americans, I suggest you relocate to another country that’s more in line with your beliefs. North Korea, possibly.
Hey lady, I read your article and applaud you for your beliefs and willingness to stand up for them. I just want you to know that I strongly disagree with you.
You seem to have a lot of energy, how about helping out with the many thousands of kids in the state foster care systems whom were born to parents who either didn’t care for or couldn’t take care of them.
“help us move America to a progressive direction”
———————————————
..and which direction is that? In order to have a progressive direction, one should have a goal first to progress to.
If your view of “progress” is an America without morals, where faith and values are all “relative” to one’s own views… where one can do whatever he/she/ IT pleases..even kill the most vulnerable and undesirables….then you won’t need our help.
I wonder why you diss the generation/values of the 50’s ? Do you know the nickname they gave to that generation?? The GREATEST generation…look it up as to why.
Actually, it is Eric and his followers who are fooling themselves if they think Obama won on the abortion issue.
LOL. Nice sidestep, but Eric Zorn’s blog was about the abortion bans that voters rejected, not just Obama’s win. If you don’t think the failure of the CO and SD abortion bans had anything to do with the abortion issue, you’re kidding yourself.
“Hey lady, I read your article and applaud you for your beliefs and willingness to stand up for them. I just want you to know that I strongly disagree with you.
You seem to have a lot of energy, how about helping out with the many thousands of kids in the state foster care systems whom were born to parents who either didn’t care for or couldn’t take care of them.
Posted by: kg178 at November 6, 2008 2:51 PM”
Uhhh, dude, the lady has a name. ;)
And to answer your question, why don’t you…help out that is.
“If you consider yourself to be a good American, you need to respect and support our new president, regardless of your own beliefs. Tens of millions of Americans have done that for the last eight years, and now it’s your turn.”
Romare,
The left-wing respected President Bush?
Doug: “If you know somebody that is actually ‘pro-abortion,’ then they are just as anti-choice as you…meanwhile, Pro-Choicers are for leaving it up to the woman, and she doesn’t need to clear things with you.”
“Pro-choicers are for leaving rape up to the potential rapist. They don’t want to FORCE anyone to rape; they just want to leave it up to the individual.”
How’s that sound?
So much foolishness…
For the pro abortionist this issue is not about life and death it is about selfishness.
Actually it’s about liberty.
The only time it was up to her was before another human life was created.
Right: it’s up to her until birth. Before birth, it’s her body and she can do what she wants with it.
How do you know this? Look deeper into the issue and how abortion has played out in other societies. The pro abortion side is now connecting it with population control. Population control is a huge part of the pro abortion world. How may I ask would you control population without forcing abortion like they do in China?
Roe v. Wade prevents anything like China from happening here. Roe v. Wade puts pregnancy in women’s hands, not the government.
“The only time it was up to her was before another human life was created.”
reality: “Right: it’s up to her until birth.”
The human life is created — according to actual science, “reality” — at the moment of fertilization.
Posted by: reality at November 6, 2008 3:05 PM-Roe v. Wade prevents anything like China from happening here. Roe v. Wade puts pregnancy in women’s hands, not the government.
Actually I don’t think Roe v Wade puts restrictions on what the government can do. If it does you should give the information. Why does the pro abortion side connect population control and abortion?
I do have a question for you, do you care about children who are born and are abused and/or killed? Do you think that everyone who has kids should have them? What is your opinion of the Casey Anthony case in Florida?
What most Americans want is for the law to butt out on personal, private medical decisions. Government and Relgion are to be separated—aren’t you a lover of the constitution? Most conservatives are. So, why don’t you ever want to follow the constitution!
Unless you are going to be one to carry every baby to term, go through the labor and raise that child for the next 18 years it is not your place EVER to tell someone else what to do about THEIR pregnancy! I am disabled and if, Lord forbid, I was ever attacked and became pregnant as a result I would have to have a termination because I cannot carry a baby to term–we both would die. Should I die over a decision that wasn’t even mine to begin with? You would probably say yes; I don’t even know why I’m asking.
Jill, as a pro-lifer how many children have you adopted? Or how many foster children do you have? And not from other countries—from THIS one! If you’re so big on every baby that is conceived given a chance at life I guess you are ready to take care of them all. And just so you know, the highest statistic of people who have abortions are young white women, mostly teenagers, who don’t want their parents to know. I guess they don’t want to be sent away like their parents and grandparents generations did in the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s. All of those white children were given up for adoption. While adoption has been great for childless couples it has also caused distress, emotional issues and broken hearts of the adoptees.
Jeff, you say “Could you be pro choice about slavery or rape or racism? “If you don’t like slavery just don’t own one”. It seems you don’t think that abortion is at the same level as these other issues but I do.” I don’t know how you equate slavery, racism or rape (RAPE??? really???) to abortion (why not throw in murder, kidnapping, lying, accidents….) Slavery and racism affect large groups of people, not just individuals. Abortion is a highly personal and private decision. But, of course you are a man and have absolutely NO idea about having a baby–I don’t care if you have children or not. As far as I know, unless you have had a sex change, you don not know what it’s like to be a woman and you have absolutely NO rights to make decisions for women. PERIOD!
You also say “Regardless of the circumstances of the pregnancy there are two lives involved and many people are there to help out.” Oh, wow, I didn’t know. Can I send my cousin Lisa over there for some help and how about the homeless woman living under the bridge? They are both single and need help with having and raising their children. The homeless woman had a home when she conceived her child but due to home foreclosures is now homeless and living in a shelter. Who is helping her? Where are you? I am assuming you are one of the many because you wouldn’t preach it if you didn’t practice it, right? How many hours do you work at your local pregnancy center? That’s so admirable of you, Jeff! (Oh and how many children have you adopted, Jeff? Wow, your pro-life stance just keeps getting better!)
Doug and *sigh* I am with both of you. You along with Amy are the only voices of reason I see on this board.
And Jill, you shouldn’t knock Huffington Post—I’m sure you’re getting much more traffic due to Seth’s column.
All I can say is God bless and one day He will help you realize He is the judge of all—not you on your little soap box!
Posted by: Wendy at November 6, 2008 3:28 PM
Slavery and racism affect large groups of people, not just individuals
Abortion has killed 48 million in this country alone. I’d say that is a large group of people. Your just making excuses.
“Doug and *sigh* I am with both of you. You along with Amy are the only voices of reason I see on this board.”
Wendy, there were more of us before, but we got worn out. Thanks for taking up the cause.
Ah, Jeff but you never answered my questions–have you adopted millions? Are you ready to clothe, feed and take care of millions? What hours do you have your local maternity clinic? Are you avoiding answering my question?
I’m not making excuses–it’s just a difference of opinion. You live to judge and I just live and know that God takes care of all. If God hadn’t planned for those 48 million to be there with Him they wouldn’t be. We don’t have to like what is—-it just is. All we can do is and this is quoting you “We are not obligated to argue and fight with these people just to be a strong witness in our own lives and to pray.”
You have yet to mention your own story and why you feel the way you do. THAT, my friend, is witnessing, not just wagging your finger at someone, judging them like you and Jill like to do. You two are the very reason why people turn away from things of a spiritual nature. What decisions a pregnant woman makes is between her and her God.
Oh and you never said what I should do if the situation I mentioned ever happened—would you want me to die?
Wow Wendy. I think you hit every question-begging argument in favor of abortion in the book.
Hal, we obviously need a new meeting place. lol I can see why you guys get tired. This is the first and last day I will give Jill anymore traffic. She does not deserve it—I have no respect for people with no tolerance. And it’s very obvious that Jeff and Jill have NO tolerance. Good luck to those who continue to fight on!
“I have no respect for people with no tolerance.”
That’s not very tolerant of you.
Hey Bobby, to each his own. I see you haven’t answered any questions either. Hmmmm…..well, God bless!
I didn’t say I couldn’t tolerate them—I just don’t respect them; they obviously, in words at least, don’t respect others. But they are still my Christian brothers and sisters so you deal with it, pray for them and move on!
Wendy,the reason I’m not answering your question is because it is not a question it is a statement. You know one person can’t feed and clothe millions, but will you accept the fact that pro life organizations have clothed and fed millions.
I will tell you some things about me but my story does not determine what is fact. I am adopted and grateful my parents did not abort. I have worked with many young people in very difficult situations including pregnancy and post abortive situations. I have volunteered with neglected children from very tough homes. Yes I think they should be allowed to live as much as you or I. They should not be punished because of their circumstance at the BEGINNING of their life.
As for your question about whether you should abort in a particular situation, I would say I don’t know. That situation is debatable and yes personal but very, very rare.
What you have to keep in mind is that I know the fetus is a human being and will defend that human life as I would defend any other human life.
I’ve adopted 0 children, Wendy. So what is the syllogism that you’ll conclude then?
If person A has not adopted any children, then abortion is morally permissible.
Person A has not adopted any children.
Therefore, abortion is morally permissible.
Do you see how an argument based on “how many children have you adopted” is nothing more than an ad hominum argument? It doesn’t address any argument put forth by a pro-lifer, all it does it say that abortion should be morally permissible based on the person who is making the argument. And if what we are saying is true, that abortion indeed kills an innocent human being, how does the number of children I have adopted effect whether or not abortion kills a person? Now we get into the idea that there are all sorts of children that need homes and that are unwanted already so they should have priority before we start talking about abortion. But this begs the question. If abortion is murder, then no matter how many starving, homeless children there are, an abortion is STILL MURDER, which is of course the question that needs to be addressed.
So your post above is full of these kinds of arguments that simply beg the question and which don’t really address anything. So think about why Jeff not being a woman has no basis whatsoever on the morality of abortion, amongst other things. God love you.
Wendy,
Also I don’t mean to be condescending. You are a human being made in the image and likeness of God, and in particular, my sister in Christ. It’s just that so many people come to the issue of abortion without considering the claim of pro-lifers that abortion is murder. If it is, then no amount of “what about poverty, what about this living condition, etc” can justify murder, right? But we often lose sight of that and get emotional. I don’t want you to leave Jill’s blog. Stick around. Let’s really try and listen to each other (and I PROMISE to listen better to you). OK? Let’s try and understand each other. God love you, Wendy.
If God hadn’t planned for those 48 million to be there with Him they wouldn’t be.
But God DID plan on those 48 million to be there but WE didn’t accept that plan. We aborted His plan and we didn’t trust in God, the Almighty.
Oh and you never said what I should do if the situation I mentioned ever happened—would you want me to die?
Posted by: Wendy at November 6, 2008 3:48 PM
No we would hope you wouldn’t die. But we can’t kill the child deliberately so that you can live. If the unborn baby dies as a result of treating you that’s different. And as Jeff stated your situation is very rare. Maternal mortality is usually from an unexpected event – that is an unexpected complication from the pregnancy or childbirth.
Wendy: “Ah, Jeff but you never answered my questions–have you adopted millions? Are you ready to clothe, feed and take care of millions? What hours do you have your local maternity clinic? Are you avoiding answering my question?”
I’ve been answering your piss-poor question for over a decade now. Are you against people abusing their wives/husbands/children, Wendy? If so, to how many abuse victims have you opened your door? Because, according to your argument, if you’ve never let an abuse victim move into your home, you have no right to criticize domestic abuse.
How much you doth protest the comparison to rape and slavery. In all of these cases, one person’s perceived “right” blatantly and horrifically infringes upon the right of another human being. Kind of like, well…
Sorry, one last thing Wendy. Obviously, we are all still quite emotional (I know I am) over the events of the last few days. Sometimes I let that get the better of me and argue based on those emotions, which goes like [feel–>argue], rather than [feel–> think–> argue]. So again, my apologies for inhospitably. Please understand :)
You are right, we are not a Christian nation, and we never were:
Take note of Article 11.
You are right, we are not a Christian nation, and we never were, “in any sense”:
Take note of Article 11.
Fair point, Eric, but one doesn’t need to be Christian in order to have a problem with killing either unborn or born children.
Bobby: you are the nicest person on these BB’s. I don’t think you were being inhospitable. You pointed out in a logical male-brain way some points that need to be considered. I think many who rationalize abortion are the ones who use the emotional arguments. For example, it’s always the hard case that is brought up (death of the mother for example. Ok. Fine. There are 1.5 Million hard cases per year in America?)
Be at peace and stop beating yourself up. Please.
‘Hal, we obviously need a new meeting place. lol I can see why you guys get tired. This is the first and last day I will give Jill anymore traffic. She does not deserve it—I have no respect for people with no tolerance. And it’s very obvious that Jeff and Jill have NO tolerance. Good luck to those who continue to fight on!’
Posted by: Wendy at November 6, 2008 3:58 PM
Hal,
Wendy is quite a feisty lady. She does not seem to be your type.
She is more like I would imagine your alter ego to be.
I am willing to endure her, but I choose not to tolerate her.
yor bro ken
Listen everyone, this is my last full post.
This is my belief: there is no way another person has the right to tell you what to do with your own body that has no connection to someone else. Yes, the baby is a “someone else” but I’m talking about third parties. God gave that pregnancy to that one woman and it is her decision and her decision alone as to what to do about it. She is the one who will answer to God. We simply cannot play God because we think we should.
Patricia, you say “But God DID plan on those 48 million to be there but WE didn’t accept that plan. We aborted His plan and we didn’t trust in God, the Almighty.”
He knows everything in advance—when tragedy will strike and when someone makes the wrong decision. Personally I don’t know if I could ever have an abortion, it would depend upon my medical condition but I refuse to take away someone else’s choice. There is a reason why God gave humans free will. For them to learn lessons and grow. He already knows what is going to happen in the lives of the women that do decide to have an abortion and if that woman will make different life decisions based on the choice she made. Each case is so individual (as you were saying about the “rare” cases, which really aren’t that rare but I’m not going into statistics–you can do your own research)you can’t lump all decisions to have a termination into one. To me, it’s just not right.
Bobby, I appreciate the concillitory words you spoke and I am not angry with you or anyone here. Viewpoints like you, Jeff, Patricia and bmmg just make me sad. Thank you for the invitation to stay but it is best if today is my only day here. It is more helpful being in situations where the other person is at least open to what each other is saying so a real dialogue can take place and not tit for tat. I am so over that!
This country may have been founded by people that considered themselves “christian” but if they were, killing off most of the natives of the country was a funny way of showing it. I never have considered our country “Christian”, especially since we are supposed to be a melting pot of people and just in case you didn’t get the memo, not everyone is Christian. And there have been very few “Christian” Presidents. Bush claimed to be one and let’s just say I refute that claim based on his actions. As a country, keeping government and religion in two different pockets is the only way to be inclusive. If your faith tells you to be loyal to government than so be it but forcing that belief on others is not what the Constitution is based on.
Oh and bmmg, yes, I have housed abused women and worked at abuse shelters. I’ve also done counseling of unwed mothers and encouraged those to make the best decisions for their life circumstances. See, for people who live in your world, a poor African American girl from off the streets would never win. If she has an abortion, she’s a baby killer, if she keeps the baby but can’t afford to take care of it and uses welfare she’s abusing the system and “shouldn’t have babies if she can’t afford them” and if she gives up her child for adoption she is more than likely committing that child to 18 years in the system because adoptions for African American kids from America are a very small percentage.
No murder is never right but it all depends upon when you see life beginning. For me, it’s not at the moment of conception. Sorry but that is how I feel.
Bobby, thank you for being gracious and I wish you all the best. You are the only one here who really held a conversation with me and for that I am grateful and you gave me things to think about, as I hope I have for you. May God bless you — I will check in to see if you reply.
Everyone else, God bless and if you want to reply feel free!
kbhvc,
Thanks! I like being feisty! : )
Oh and Patricia,
1.5 million is alot. Not what I call rare….
Ah, Patricia, I reread your post and let me say, I am not trying to rationalize my point. I feel how I feel. It is not up to me to “rationalize” it; you can do that on your own if you feel it’s necessary. I don’t have to defend my thoughts and feelings—it is my right to speak them, just as it’s your right to do so with yours. Isn’t that supposed to be the beauty of this country? You say pro-choice people give emotional arguements—is that saying pro-lifers don’t? I just don’t understand why we can’t have different viewpoints about it and let people live their lives. It never has made sense to me and it never will. Humans can be so foolish. I know God just shakes His head at us. You can protest abortions all you want but it won’t make them go away just like protesting murder or rape will make that go away. In fact, most people against abortion are for guns. You want to preserve life but you live for the right to have a weapon that takes it away. Right. Again, we can be so foolish!
And Bobby, she’s right, you are the nicest person on this board! : ) Have a good night!
I remember when my wife and I lived in Kansas and the Rev. Phelps, his family and members of his church used to picket with signs like, “God Hates Fags” and “Queers Go to Hell”. It really used to bother me because we’d go out with our church with pro-life signs and I used to wonder, “What in the world do people think of us?”, “Are we changing ANYBODY’S mind by picketing?”, and “Are were saving any souls by doing this?”.
I want to remind everyone that Norma McCorvey (the famous “Roe” of “Roe v. Wade”) didn’t come to Christ until she was “befriended” by Flip Benham. Flip originally screamed at her that she was responsible for killing 33 million kids but he didn’t just write her off as another Hitler. He spent the time getting to know her and sharing with her.
One reason that McCain did so poorly election night is due to all the negative campaigning. I live in western Pennsylvania and every single day and night there were negative ads, robocalls and literature warning us about Obama. People become desensitized to negativity and the messages of pro-life advocates become marginalized.
Obama, on the other hand, manages to demonstrate a calmness and reasonableness that contrasts sharply with McCain’s anger, frustration and fear mongering. Our pro-life voices tend to sound shrill and angry, just like McCain’s, and people just get turned off by that.
We need to INSPIRE people to accept a pro-life position, not just innundate them with the evils of abortion. Demonizing those who don’t believe as we do has no positive impact and doesn’t help advance a pro-life agenda.
I loved the work of C. Everett Koop, former Surgeon General of the US, and Dr. Francis Schaeffer. They managed to present the pro-life argument with authority, grace and modesty.
The pro-life movement will achieve nothing but notoriety by outrageous acts and statements. Calling the president-elect a BARBARIAN achieves nothing and shows a disrespect and lack of humility unworthy of the label “Christian”.
I remember when my wife and I lived in Kansas and the Rev. Phelps, his family and members of his church used to picket with signs like, “God Hates Fags” and “Queers Go to Hell”. It really used to bother me because we’d go out with our church with pro-life signs and I used to wonder, “What in the world do people think of us?”, “Are we changing ANYBODY’S mind by picketing?”, and “Are were saving any souls by doing this?”.
I want to remind everyone that Norma McCorvey (the famous “Roe” of “Roe v. Wade”) didn’t come to Christ until she was “befriended” by Flip Benham. Flip originally screamed at her that she was responsible for killing 33 million kids but he didn’t just write her off as another Hitler. He spent the time getting to know her and sharing with her.
One reason that McCain did so poorly election night is due to all the negative campaigning. I live in western Pennsylvania and every single day and night there were negative ads, robocalls and literature warning us about Obama. People become desensitized to negativity and the messages of pro-life advocates become marginalized.
Obama, on the other hand, manages to demonstrate a calmness and reasonableness that contrasts sharply with McCain’s anger, frustration and fear mongering. Our pro-life voices tend to sound shrill and angry, just like McCain’s, and people just get turned off by that.
We need to INSPIRE people to accept a pro-life position, not just innundate them with the evils of abortion. Demonizing those who don’t believe as we do has no positive impact and doesn’t help advance a pro-life agenda.
I loved the work of C. Everett Koop, former Surgeon General of the US, and Dr. Francis Schaeffer. They managed to present the pro-life argument with authority, grace and modesty.
The pro-life movement will achieve nothing but notoriety by outrageous acts and statements. Calling the president-elect a BARBARIAN achieves nothing and shows a disrespect and lack of humility unworthy of the label “Christian”.
*stands up and applauds*
I”m sorry you think that Bobby is the only one here worth conversing with. What kind of open attitude is that Wendy?
I refuse to take away someone else’s choice. There is a reason why God gave humans free will. For them to learn lessons and grow.
This line is unfathomable. What you are saying is that God allows abortions so that people will grow? I think you have alot of misinformed theology Wendy.
I just don’t understand why we can’t have different viewpoints about it and let people live their lives. It never has made sense to me and it never will.
This position is untenable. You mean to tell me you would actually apply this to other facets of your life experience. IF you saw a man abusing a small child would you just let this man “live his life” and walk by? If you saw a woman being raped, would you just let the rapist continue and “live his life” and walk by? If you saw a disabled man being pushed into traffic by a woman would you just let her “live her life” and walk by? Would you really do this Wendy? Because that is what you are telling us prolifers. That we should just forget about a whole class of citizens and let them die so that people can just live their lives. We can’t do that.
Wendy,
You may exercise your free speech, but we are not obligated to even listen. If we choose to listen then we may choose to contend with what you say. Just because you say it does not make it so. Not all opinions are equal. Your statements may be parsed. Words mean things. We use dictionaries to define their meanings. Though not all dictionaries are in perfect agreement, they are usually close enough for horseshoes and hand grenades.
Sometimes guns actually save lives without even being fired. Most people, even mean nasty people, do want to avoid being shot.
That is why they generally avoid potential victims whom they have reason to believe might be armed.
But if you have principled objection to firearms, then call for a pizza delivery when you some one is attempting to break into your home. Their response time is usually quicker than the police, and the pizza delivery guy will probably be unarmed. But you should give the pizza guy a tip.
yor bro ken
Wendy I apologize for not italicizing the rest of your comments. I’m trying to help my daughter study Vivaldi notes.
CaryChristian: if a baby has no right to be born and no right to life, all the housing, good education, and so forth mean nothing to him/her if they are laying in pieces on the surgical cloth in the abortuary.
Patricia, I did not say Bobby was the only one worth conversing with–he’s just the only one I would because although he feels differently from me, he expressed the desire for both of us to listen and try to understand what the other is saying. Unlike you, who reads whatever meaning you want into my words. I am not even going to bother going through what you’ve said; you’ve already made up your mind about me. You’re whole attitude is attacking (and by the way, no I am not studying theology and never said I had)
Kbhvac, I never said that my feeling something meant it was right. It’s just how I feel. Yes, actually all opinions are created equal but we can diagree on that point as we do everything else. I do hear what you are saying and I understand what you mean about protection. I believe differently due to things Iv’e experiences is all. I will say, you are totally right about the pizza guy, compared to the police! : )
Sorry that last post was mine. It didn’t take my name!
Wendy: “This is my belief: there is no way another person has the right to tell you what to do with your own body that has no connection to someone else. Yes, the baby is a ‘someone else’ but I’m talking about third parties.”
A baby is a “someone else” but not a “third party”? What does that mean?
“Viewpoints like you, Jeff, Patricia and bmmg just make me sad.”
Right back atcha.
“This country may have been founded by people that considered themselves ‘christian’ but if they were, killing off most of the natives of the country was a funny way of showing it.”
Why, yes, that would be a horrible way of showing it. Killing off millions of people because they’re all of a similar group. Kind of like, well…
“And there have been very few ‘Christian’ Presidents. Bush claimed to be one and let’s just say I refute that claim based on his actions.”
Thought we weren’t supposed to question anyone’s religious loyalties…
“As a country, keeping government and religion in two different pockets is the only way to be inclusive. If your faith tells you to be loyal to government than so be it but forcing that belief on others is not what the Constitution is based on.”
That’s fine, separating religion and government. But what does that have to do with the secular humanity of the unborn child?
“Oh and bmmg, yes, I have housed abused women and worked at abuse shelters.”
Okay, but just women?
“I’ve also done counseling of unwed mothers and encouraged those to make the best decisions for their life circumstances. See, for people who live in your world, a poor African American girl from off the streets would never win. If she has an abortion, she’s a baby killer, if she keeps the baby but can’t afford to take care of it and uses welfare she’s abusing the system and ‘shouldn’t have babies if she can’t afford them’ and if she gives up her child for adoption she is more than likely committing that child to 18 years in the system because adoptions for African American kids from America are a very small percentage.”
We can try to fix the latter two societal bigotries against parents and their children without encouraging the former.
And my question remains: if someone has never lifted a finger to help an abused woman, man, or child, then is that person then disallowed from speaking out against abuse?
Posted by: Anonymous at November 6, 2008 6:40 PM
All opinions are NOT equal. I can go down to Jasper, Texas and round up a bunch KKK types in their hoods and robes who will have an honest opinion that people with more pigmentation than them are less equal than them.
Their right to express that opinion may be equal, but the opinion itself bespeaks ignorance and there fore has little or no value because it is demonstrably false even though they may sincerely ‘feel’ it is true.
Give some sort of logical rational basis for the statement that all opinions are equal.
yor bro ken
Women have gone on to do remarkable things that have had abortions, including the woman who started Roe vs. Wade. God touched her life–you don’t know what He has done for others that may be blessing more people right now having gone through such a horrible experience. If God forgives us, we should be able to forgive each other. I would think the goal of pro-lifers would be to create an environment where abortion wasn’t necessary. Make sure kids have the sex education they need (about sex, STD’s, pregnancy and most important ABSTINENCE), have the support for women who have an unplanned pregnancy and no way to support themselves and the baby (education, places to live, money for diapers and food), promote healthy households with healthy couples (people who are loving and nurturing). If more of this existed, I believe the rate of abortions would lower. And that is the goal, isn’t it? To make abortions not necessary? You can’t just preach pro-life, you have to walk the walk.
Posted by: bmmg39 at November 6, 2008 6:47 PM
‘And my question remains: if someone has never lifted a finger to help an abused woman, man, or child, then is that person then disallowed from speaking out against abuse?’
No. In this country, we do not ‘earn’ the right to speak. We posses that right by our very existence. We might have to fight to keep the right. Plenty, who came before did.
yor bro ken
bmmg,
I agree to diagree with you. I refuse to do the tit for tat thing. I already atated that. I would try to explain the statements you;ve misunderstood but it would take too long and I have other things to do tonight. If you rally want to hear my reasoning, I’ll send you my email. Thanks for sharing, though. I really appreciate that you took the time to read and respond to my post. You made a few good points and I thank you for being part of the “debate”. : )
kbvhac,
“Give some sort of logical rational basis for the statement that all opinions are equal.”
I don’t have the time or the energy so just like with bmmg, I will agree to disagree with you.
Thanks to you too for sharing. I know I’m a stranger on this board so I thank you for even reading my posts! : )
Wendy, I’m not going for the petty, tit-for-tat thing; my question is sincere. You made the assertion that people shouldn’t have an opinion against abortion unless they’re willing to adopt all these unborn children. I was merely carrying that over to other issues.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 6, 2008 6:40 PM
Patricia, I did not say Bobby was the only one worth conversing with–he’s just the only one I would because although he feels differently from me, he expressed the desire for both of us to listen and try to understand what the other is saying. Unlike you, who reads whatever meaning you want into my words. I am not even going to bother going through what you’ve said; you’ve already made up your mind about me. You’re whole attitude is attacking (and by the way, no I am not studying theology and never said I had)
Just because Bobby said it does not make it so. (Based on my knowledge of Bobby, I believe it to be true.)
Just because no one else ‘expressed the desire for both of us to listen and try to understand what the other is saying’, does not necessarily mean they will not.
Belly up to the bar of ‘ideas’ and expect to be challenged. Do not be surprised or offended if someone dismantles an opinion you have become fond of. And be prepared, though it should not happen, someone may attack you personally, instead of your opinion. This is an imperfect world and web site full of imperfect people.
Now, speak and we will listen.
yor bro ken
Gotcha, bmmg, thanks for clarifying. That is not what I asserted. I asked if YOU had adopted. And it wasn”t about you having an opinion about it, it’s about you wanting to take away someone’s rights. You can have whatever opinion about it you want. Just as I can. But I stated this all before–I’m tired of repeating things.
Wendy I did not attack you. I asked you to apply your thinking to other life situations and you get MAD at me! I never asked you about theology????
Posted by: Wendy at November 6, 2008 7:00 PM
“I don’t have the time or the energy so just like with bmmg, I will agree to disagree with you.”
we are all slaves to chronos.
I am a stranger here too. At least I am ‘strange’ here, …..too.
yor bro ken
yor bro ken
And Wendy many many prolifer are actively involved in prolife work that directly helps women. I use to work at Birthright counselling women.
Many prolife couples adopt or foster children. Others are involved in soup kitchens, working with homeless women, women in the third world etc…
I think you are the one making many assumptions here. We are asking you too to be open minded in this discussion.
I like debating as much as the next person but really don’t like going round and round and that’s what I feel like we’re doing. I appreciate your candor, kbhvac, and I find all of you intelligent and articulate. I am just not feeling well today, my heart is giving me problems and trying to explain every last statement I make is tiring, especially since I keep getting misunderstood. Which is probably why I shouldn’t have posted here to begin with. But, God knows best and I think there were some things I needed to hear. I can only hope my words touch someone who happens to read them. Thank you!
I hope your heart gets better Wendy. My mom suffered from heart problems all her life. God bless, Patricia
“I think you have alot of misinformed theology Wendy”
That was your statement Patricia, and no, I am not mad at you or anyone here. I already stated that.
“I asked you to apply your thinking to other life situations”
You did not ask, you just made statements.
“I think you are the one making many assumptions here.”
I did not question you about your work, your life or your involvement with pro-life activities. That was a general statement for the board which is why it wasn’t titled with your name or addressing you.
That’s what I mean about your attitude (or what comes across that way at least). I try to have as open a mind as I can but I am exhausted and repeating myself is not helping. I admire you for whatever you do help those not have to make the decision about whether or not to have an abortion and I would only hope the rest of Americans could do the same thing. It would be nice if we could put the topic of abortions to rest for good by erasing all scenarios in which it would come up. Take care of our kids, keep them safe, take care of each other with loving thoughtfulness–be a friend to all and give. I guess that’s what heaven will be like! : )
Well, I have a hole in my heart (and breath with just one lung) so it won’t really get better but it’s treatable– I just have to take care of myself. Thanks, Patricia, I appreciate the well wishes!
Wendy, Wendy, Wendy, Wendy:
God does not create life and then ask the woman, “OK, you’re pregnant, will you please keep the baby?”
Why would He even allow a woman to concieve if that were the case?
Are you that arrogant to think that God needs your permission to do anything? I suggest you read the entire book of Job and then focus on the last few chapters where God basically tells Job, that Job is no one to question anything God does, nothing.
We have such a namby, pamby view of God as this mellow, wimpy, nice old dude in the sky. My God Wendy, He holds the entire universe on the tip of His finger? I think we should spend some time finding out who he truly is.
Excuse me, but it is a grave sin to terminate a pregnancy for any reason. It is even a greater sin for a government that He instituted to legalize the murder of such unborn, innocent and defenseless children. In fact, our nation will answer for the shedding of inncent blood. This is an inexorable fact.
Your attitudes are indicative of one thing and one thing only….how far away we have drifted from God and our understanding of who He is.
You might be a very nice person but you are not listening to the right people.
Do you study and understand the Bible?
“Where there is no vision, the people cast off restraint”.
The question should be, “how does God view abortion and what does He require me to think about it”.
I’ll ask God to heal the hole in your heart and in your soul.
Thank you, HisMan, for your prayers. In the state I am right now, I won’t even try to respond and really, whatever I say will not be heard by you anyway.
Everyone else, I am done for tonight and for good. I will leaave you all to each other–be well, be blessed and keep fighting the fight!
Bye!
“Why would He even allow a woman to concieve if that were the case?”
yeah, why would he even create gay people and say
“now don’t get married.”
oh Hal
Stop whining!
Hi Wendy,
It sounds as if you’re saying that because we have free will and God knows everything anyway, that whatever we do is just fine with Him. We can make as many immoral decisions as we wish, because, well, if it weren’t in His plan, then surely He would never allow it.
Maybe that’s what the German Christians thought when they watched the Jews and other undesirables being rounded up to board the trains to the concentration camps. Some of them chose to hide Jews in their homes, risking their own lives in the process. But maybe those people were just wrong and should’ve minded their own business. It was the Nazi soldiers’ choice to do what they did. Who is anyone to say that what they did was wrong? Oh, but yes, I know. How dare I compare the millions killed legally through abortion to the millions killed legally by the Holocaust!
You see, Wendy, we view the unborn as living human beings who are being denied their most basic right…to LIVE. Perhaps that’s why you can’t see where we’re coming from.
“If you falter in times of trouble,
how small is your strength!
Rescue those being led away to death;
hold back those staggering toward slaughter.
If you say, “But we knew nothing about this,”
does not he who weighs the heart perceive it?
Does not he who guards your life know it?
Will he not repay each person according to what he has done?” Proverbs 24:10-12
Yeah, Hal…why did God create pedophiles and rapists and say, “Now, don’t do that stuff! It’s bad!” They can’t help it, after all. They were just born that way. At least, that’s what a lot of them say.
And just for the record, that’s all I’m sarcastically saying on that issue here. Elizabeth and I already had a great discussion on this a couple weeks ago on another thread.
My armchair quarterbacking has led me to conclude that Obama’s opposition to the BAIPA was a calculated ploy to discredit his opponents.
Think a minute. In the face of incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, we’ve been totally unable, for over thirty years, to convince Americans that abortion is available at all after 12 weeks. Yeah, they’ll briefly let that fact slip into their minds during news coverage of a PBA ban, but the awareness is fleeting, like something half-remembered from a dream.
Given that they don’t even believe us when we tell them abortion is legal after 12 weeks, showing them ads for clinics that do elective abortions to 22, 24, 26 weeks and more, could we really have even remotely hoped to convince them that babies are born alive during some of these abortions?
Remember — they don’t believe the abortions actually are happening. Much less that sometimes the baby lives.
To expect them to make the leap from “abortion isn’t even legal after 12 weeks!” straight through, “Yes it is” and “sometimes babies even survive these abortions” straight to “And your buddy Obama voted to let those babies die in a utility room” — well, it was more than they were capable of. And I can’t think of a parallel right now and would appreciate if somebody coming up with one.
I’m not sure how to get around it. Maybe we need to give them smaller bites to digest.
Christina, I don’t know. Sadly, I keep thinking of the Holocaust and how no one seemed to believe it actually happened until they saw the bodies and/or the photos of the emaciated bodies of the slain stacked upon each other. :( Some people today still deny that it occurred.
But WE’RE the bad guys for holding up signs with pictures of aborted babies on them. Heaven forbid…the children might see. Then we’d have to explain to them what abortion really is. Maybe that’s why they don’t like it…because then they’d have to try and explain it, but that’s really difficult to do with pro-choice rhetoric. One could face questions such as, “But isn’t it a baby? Could Aunt Jenny abort HER baby if she wanted? Mommy, could you have aborted ME if you’d have wanted to?” and so on.
I’ve explained abortion to my children. They know what it is, and they’re horrified by it. Maybe that’s where we need to begin, and we need to keep telling them and telling them and telling them and PRAY that we will be heard above the shouts of the world that say, “It’s my body, my right, my choice!”
Christina,
Humans are stupid. I know, I am one of them. I read somewhere we are the crown of creation.
That is difficult to fathom, even if I wasn’t a human.
Isa 27:11 Israel is a foolish and stupid nation, for its people have turned away from God. NLT
Jer 4:22 “For My people are foolish, They know Me not; They are stupid children And have no understanding. They are shrewd to do evil, But to do good they do not know.” NASU
Prov 30:2-4 I am tired out, O God, and ready to die. I am too stupid even to call myself a human being! I cannot understand man, let alone God. Who else but God goes back and forth to heaven? Who else holds the wind in his fists and wraps up the oceans in his cloak? Who but God has created the world? If there is any other, what is his name-and his Son’s name-if you know it? TLB
Prov 30:2 Surely I am more stupid than any man,
And do not have the understanding of a man. NKJV
yor bro ken
He who says he know does not yet know as he ought to know.
I do think you are correct (to an extent) that the Obama win didn’t have a lot to do with abortion, although I think that for a lot of women voters that was definitely part of it.
Posted by: hehehehee at November 6, 2008 1:10 PM
hehehehehee, were you aware that in the US there are more anti-life men then women? And if people voted only by abortion then people like Obama would NEVER get elected to public office.
Only 40% of men and 37% of women believe abortion should be generally available. Here is a link to some easy to read US abortion poll results with interesting demographics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States
Do you see now rhow eally far left of the US public your messiah Obama is?
While the abortion issue is and perhaps forever will be a topic never to be agreed upon, there are fundamentals of our constitution that must never waiver. Having said that, the seperation of church and state is the hot button for me. If “Pastors” and “Church Leaders” are going to become prime movers in political issues such as abortion and gay marrage, then they should not be allowed to maintain their “tax free church” status and become a political advocacy group subject to taxes.
Posted by: Chico Brisbane at November 6, 2008 2:03 PM
Chico, the church is there to help you nform your conscience, which means NOT allowing you to support things like tearing babies from a mother’s womb…at least Christian churches anyway.
Doug (He who knows better than dictionaries) says: “If you know somebody that is actually “pro-abortion,” then they are just as anti-choice as you.”
Take a deep breath, Doug, and smell the pages of the dictionaries:
pro-a·bor·tion adjective – favoring legal access to abortion: in favor of open legal access to voluntary abortion http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736813 (SINCE REMOVED!)
pro-abortion SYLLABICATION: pro-a·bor·tion PRONUNCIATION: pr-bôrshn ADJECTIVE: Favoring or supporting legalized abortion. http://www.bartleby.com/61/27/P0572700.html
Main Entry: pro·abor·tion Pronunciation: (‘)prO-&-‘bor-sh&n Function: adjective : favoring the legalization of abortion -pro·abor·tion·ist /-sh(&-)n&st/ noun http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-abortion
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) – pro·a·bor·tion –adjective: PROCHOICE http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=proabortion&r=66
Proabortion: PROCHOICE http://dictionary.infoplease.com/proabortion
Main Entry: pro·abor·tion adjective Date: 1972 : favoring the legalization of abortion http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=proabortion
Jill said: “I see dead people.”
So do I.
Abortion: one dead, one wounded.
Actually, two dead, because by killing her own child, the mother has killed the life of God in her soul.
Child-killing by abortion is a denial of the rights of God, the Author and Creator of all life, and especially of human life, because we are made in His image and likeness.
However, the argument to protect defenseless human life in the womb is absolutely valid and perfectly logical even if one does not have faith in the existence of God.
If one believes that this life is all there is, it follows that we should reverence all human life from conception until natural death, and do all we can to protect it, if this life is all there is.
It sounds as if you’re saying that because we have free will and God knows everything anyway, that whatever we do is just fine with Him. We can make as many immoral decisions as we wish, because, well, if it weren’t in His plan, then surely He would never allow it.
Very nice point. It’s a sort of fatalist view.
Opinionated, what a great name. “Abortion: one dead, one wounded.
Actually, two dead, because by killing her own child, the mother has killed the life of God in her soul.”
Only God determines whether and if God will remove Godself from anyone’s soul. For any human to insist that she or he knows what God does and when and why is the utmost arrogance, Popes notwithstanding.
I was part of the RTL briefly, some years ago. I did the speaker training and went out to churches to show the video and sign folks up.
When the local chapter steadfastly refused to support a local woman who, moved by the plight of unwed mothers who turn to abortion, opened a home for them (She wanted to put a notice in the newsletter that the home needed volunteers to help out; she was refused permission to do so), that’s when RTL lost me.
The group wouldn’t even put a little box with three sentences and a phone number in its podunk newsletter so that the home for unwed mothers could get volunteer support and continue operation, serving pregnant women in crisis!
I thought it was unbelievably hypocritical at the time, then realized it wasn’t. The group genuinely wasn’t interested in preventing abortion by removing the need for the majority of elective abortions; it just wanted to make sure abortion wasn’t available. As for the babies to be born to those women in crisis, well, it wasn’t their problem once the kids hit air.
And that’s when I left the group.
“If you know somebody that is actually “pro-abortion,” then they are just as anti-choice as you.”
Jeff: Pro abortion defines it accurately. Could you be pro choice about slavery or rape or racism? “If you don’t like slavery just don’t own one”. It seems you don’t think that abortion is at the same level as these other issues but I do.
No, Jeff – being “for abortion” is not being Pro-Choice. Yes, one could be pro-choice about slavery, etc., – one could be for it being legal yet not want to do it for oneself.
Being “against slavery” is being “anti-choice” about it, and being against legal abortion is being anti-choice about it.
If somebody is truly “pro-abortion” then they’d not be for it being the choice of the woman. Pro-Choicers, on the other hand, are for it being the woman’s choice, and may well not like abortion on balance in the first place, i.e. it’s better to prevent unwanted pregnancies than have abortions.
Jeff: Pro abortionists will respond with all kinds of excuses and reasons but they are all misguided.
“If you know somebody that is actually “pro-abortion,” then they are just as anti-choice as you.
Agreed that they’d need “reasons,” etc., because who’s going to want them to be able to tell pregnant women what to do?
Meanwhile, Pro-Choicers are for leaving it up to the woman, and she doesn’t need to clear things with you. She doesn’t need “excuses” – it’s not up to you, it’s up to her.”
BMMG: “Pro-choicers are for leaving rape up to the potential rapist. They don’t want to FORCE anyone to rape; they just want to leave it up to the individual.”
How’s that sound?
It’s right, BMMG. Do you know anybody that really is pro-choice about rape? If so, then yeah – that’d be their deal.
Doug (He who knows better than dictionaries) says: “If you know somebody that is actually “pro-abortion,” then they are just as anti-choice as you.”
Doyle: Take a deep breath, Doug, and smell the pages of the dictionaries
Doyle, been through this many times.
Yes, prior to 1973, being “for the legalization of abortion” was sometimes said to be “pro-abortion.”
Well, now we’ve got that. I would rather see a woman prevent an unwanted pregnancy versus have an abortion. I’m not “pro-abortion,” there. Once a pregnancy is fact, I’d rather leave decision to the woman versus have her necessarily have an abortion. If somebody is “pro-abortion” then they want a given woman to have an abortion, versus being pro-choice about it.
Wendy: Doug and *sigh* I am with both of you. You along with Amy are the only voices of reason I see on this board.
Thanks, Wendy.
I would say that there are plenty of fairly reasonable Pro-Lifers too. They just don’t agree with us nor want all the same things.
Janine @9:02, that is too bad. It is too bad that some people that call themselves pro-life can be so heartless but also too bad that you let the bad example of a few discourage you from continuing to do some good. The majority of pro-lifers want to help mothers as well as the babies. They also reach out to those women who suffer as a result of their abortions.
Jim Zorn was a good quarterback.
Janine, that sounds like a very bad group. Not pro-life. I can’t imagine anyone turning down someone who is trying to help women in such a way.
Please know that not all are like this..there are thousands who are volunteering for homes for women who are considering abortion, CPC’s, organizations like Rachel’s vineyard. Please dont judge the whole movement of people based on what those people did.
Kel, you’re absolutely right. They hate your graphic signs because they’re so brutally honest, and they frustrate their ability to euphemize these issues away.
Janine: “I thought it was unbelievably hypocritical at the time, then realized it wasn’t. The group genuinely wasn’t interested in preventing abortion by removing the need for the majority of elective abortions; it just wanted to make sure abortion wasn’t available. As for the babies to be born to those women in crisis, well, it wasn’t their problem once the kids hit air.”
A pro-life group around here once had a campaign of pro-life commercials, but a few years later it ran a campaign of ads criticizing teen pregnancy. That’s hypocritical, too. I’ve heard of certain CPCs (certainly NOT all or even most) helping a girl avoid abortion, but once abortion is off the table they’ll start lambasting her for her “mistake” of having pre-marital sex, as if that beautiful baby they were talking her out of killing is now some sort of ugly plague.
Couple that with the RTL movement’s propensity to tie itself to anti-gay legislation, and, yeah, you can see its love of shooting itself in the foot.
Doug: “No, Jeff – being ‘for abortion’ is not being Pro-Choice. Yes, one could be pro-choice about slavery, etc., – one could be for it being legal yet not want to do it for oneself.”
Okay, but how far do you think someone would get, making that argument? Do you think listeners would say, “Well, I guess that’s a fair compromise”?
Arlen: Jim Zorn was a good quarterback.
He sure was!
John Hadl too.
Doug: “No, Jeff – being ‘for abortion’ is not being Pro-Choice. Yes, one could be pro-choice about slavery, etc., – one could be for it being legal yet not want to do it for oneself.”
BMMG: Okay, but how far do you think someone would get, making that argument? Do you think listeners would say, “Well, I guess that’s a fair compromise”?
Heck no. Who do you see being “pro-choice” about slavery?
And let’s not forget Roman Gabriel, great big guy for the Rams when they were in Los Angeles.
That dude could throw the ball with guys hanging all over him.
Heck no. Who do you see being “pro-choice” about slavery?
People used to be ‘pro-choice’ about slavery, Doug. And in some places, they still are.
Doug, it’s a parallel example. If that argument doesn’t hold water with respect to slavery/arson/abusing your wife or husband, then it doesn’t really work to well for abortion, either.
Doug: “No, Jeff – being ‘for abortion’ is not being Pro-Choice. Yes, one could be pro-choice about slavery, etc., – one could be for it being legal yet not want to do it for oneself.”
BMMG: Okay, but how far do you think someone would get, making that argument? Do you think listeners would say, “Well, I guess that’s a fair compromise”?
“Heck no. Who do you see being “pro-choice” about slavery?”
BMMG: Doug, it’s a parallel example. If that argument doesn’t hold water with respect to slavery/arson/abusing your wife or husband, then it doesn’t really work to well for abortion, either.
It doesn’t apply because you don’t see anybody really being pro-choice about slavery. That has nothing to do with abortion. There are plenty of people who are pro-choice about abortion.
“Heck no. Who do you see being “pro-choice” about slavery?”
People used to be ‘pro-choice’ about slavery, Doug. And in some places, they still are.
Bethany, I imagine so, and if so then Jeff’s hypothetical “Could you be pro choice about slavery…?” applies.
It doesn’t apply because you don’t see anybody really being pro-choice about slavery.
How does that not make his argument apply?
That has nothing to do with abortion.
He never said it did. He was giving a parallel example, to explain to you why your argument is invalid.
There are plenty of people who are pro-choice about abortion.
Why does the amount of people who are currently supportive of abortion have anything to do with this argument at all?
Bethany, I imagine so, and if so then Jeff’s hypothetical “Could you be pro choice about slavery…?” applies.
You’re confusing me. Either it applies or it doesn’t. If it applies, then can one really be “pro-choice” about slavery without being in effect pro-slavery?
“It doesn’t apply because you don’t see anybody really being pro-choice about slavery.”
B: How does that not make his argument apply?
Bethany, on the Do you think listeners would say, “Well, I guess that’s a fair compromise”? – my point is that people are not saying that in the first place. I said to Jeff that it could be that way, but BMMG noted that it’s really not that way.
…..
“That has nothing to do with abortion.”
B: He never said it did. He was giving a parallel example, to explain to you why your argument is invalid.
My argument is perfectly valid. It’s not really a “parallel” because it’s so different – on abortion there is vast disagreement, while on the others there’s none or practically none.
…..
“There are plenty of people who are pro-choice about abortion.”
B: Why does the amount of people who are currently supportive of abortion have anything to do with this argument at all?
Again, with respect to the:
Okay, but how far do you think someone would get, making that argument? Do you think listeners would say, “Well, I guess that’s a fair compromise”?
People really are not saying that as far as rape, etc., but plenty of people are saying that on abortion.
“If that argument doesn’t hold water with respect to slavery (etc.)..”
It would hold water if there was a significant amount of sentiment for it, but there’s not. Has nothing to do with abortion, which is of course totally different in that respect.
…..
People used to be ‘pro-choice’ about slavery, Doug. And in some places, they still are.
“Bethany, I imagine so, and if so then Jeff’s hypothetical “Could you be pro choice about slavery…?” applies.”
You’re confusing me. Either it applies or it doesn’t. If it applies, then can one really be “pro-choice” about slavery without being in effect pro-slavery?
If it applies – if we’re talking about a place where there’s significant “Pro-Choice” feeling about slavery, then per BMMG’s statement the argument is going to hold water, there. They’d agree with the “fair compromise” that BMMG mentioned.
In the US, if we can agree that we’re pretty much agreed on being against slavery, etc, then people aren’t going to think the argument holds water nor that it’s a fair compromise.
On being “pro-slavery” there would still be the distinction between wanting to have slaves oneself and being pro-legal slavery.
The margins in which Barack Obama won this election is a shining example of how our nation is an ever changing and how it it we that must adapt to those changes. Not to allow women to vote, own property, or be considered as chattle to their husbands was law no so long ago. The same applies to voting rights for blacks or inter-racial marriage. These things that were once proudly embraced by so many, now seem unthinkable and over time gay marriage will follow suit. It all boils down to time and like the hand of a clock, our nation can only move in one direction — forward! —
With a new Supreme Court on the horizon, it is more likely now then ever before that we will be able to put this issue of abortion to rest once and for all. If you don’t support it, don’t have one. If your against gay marriage, marry the opposit sex. If contriception violates your religion, don’t use any, if you don’t like the public school system, teach your own kids. But what we cannot or at least should not do is force our beliefs on others. I’d love to see a new law that would make welfare something that subsodizes low income and not a sole source of income for someone to sit on thier butt at home while I’m woking to help pay for it. Of course my own party is the most guilty of supporting this hand-out, but I have faith that in time, this too will change.