Abortion pictures rile members of pro-choice church
Abortion pictures are not pleasant to view, particularly on one’s way to Sunday morning worship service at a pro-choice church.
For the past several weeks Todd Bullis has taken his Church Project to the Custer Road United Methodist Church in Plano, Texas.
Showing the reality of abortion through abortion pictures, Todd and his team have made it their mission to educate church goers that the place where they worship condones this heinous act against God, in whose image we are made.
There is no denying, although some uneducated parishioners tried, that the United Methodist Church supports abortion. From its website:
The United Methodist Church is also affiliated with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.
Todd put together a video montage of reactions to his signs from this past Sunday and posted them on YouTube, which YouTube immediately removed.
Thank goodness there is now ProLifeBook.com, where the video now resides. It is amazing. While the various reactions are sad, Todd’s responses are great. Watch til the end to be inspired (and note the slap at :48)…
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.
Ah, the underbelly of subjective truth….
Either abortion kills an innocent child, or it doesn’t. No in-between.
Either Jesus Christ was the savior for everyone, or he wasn’t. No inbetween.
Either 2+2= 4 all the time, or it doesn’t.
Except if you’re Methodist.
Here is another link showing United Methodist Church supports the pro-choice movement.
http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=4&mid=9239
I am in a group with the wife of a Methodist minister who was shocked to find out the church’s stance on abortion. This needs to be told. Many have no idea.
I like how some people are telling them that they’re wrong about the church supporting legal abortion, but at the same time, others are telling him that they’re well-aware the church supports legal abortion.
This is what happens when you’re more concerned with filling pews and taking in tithes than actually letting people know what is right and taking a stand for it.
Dear Susie I am so Glad to hear what you posted, That is the reason i went to their church. Praise God for your post, it really did bless me.
“kids that need help…that are dyin’…that are dyin’…that are already alive…”
Yep. That’s why we oppose abortion, sir. If you’re so concerned with children dying you should oppose abortion, too.
They object to the SIGNS…but not to abortion itself… ?
This is why abortion was legalized, and why it has gone on for so long. Because THE CHURCH (meaning ALL churches) did NOTHING to stop it, and they “tolerate” it NOW.
“The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing” Edmund Burke
(*sigh*) This is the end-result of the deluded line of thought which uses sentimentality and personal opinion to replace a rightly-formed conscience (i.e. saying that “conscience” = “my personal opinion, no matter how I arrived at it”).
This is also a stark reminder to those who view moral relativism as a harmless and acceptable way of approaching the world. At the end of it, people suffer and die because of it. Those who will not submit to the boundaries of objective morality (i.e. reality) will find that they have submitted to a far more merciless task-master.
God bless your efforts, Todd! You’re in my daily prayers.
Not knowing much about this denomination, I checked Wikipedia. Wikipedia is vague on the UMC’s position on abortion, definitely not as concise as what is taken from The Book of Discipline (above). Wiki also states that Hilary Clinton is a member. They can draw their own conclusions about that. I suspect the female priests generally lean pro-choice, but would love to be proved wrong.
Good job Todd, you’ve gotten the conversation started. Just curious, do you sit in on services with them?
Awesome work, Todd.
Do you have hard copies of the website to give to the members walking in so that they may see for themselves?
Instead of “Hitler went to church” I suggest “The apostle Judas went to Church.”
One thing that you can remark in the video is that there are very few children or young people in that church. 90% of the people that passed by were baby boomer age or older. This representation is symbolic of the fact that most people under the age of 35 or 40 have fled the church, and fled it fast. I am under 35 and don’t go to church any longer because of precisely the attitudes displayed in those older parishioners. I saw right through them and knew they had not been changed by God and were just doing the motions to make themselves look good in the community. The apathy and not caring is flagrant. The go along to get along attitude is rife. No wonder abortion has been legal all this time. Most “Christians” don’t really care. All they care about is reaping the good life, not doing any work for the Kingdom of God. If they really cared, they would not have reacted the way they did, nor gotten defensive. The guys doing the signs were fabulous. The reason America is in trouble can be clearly seen in the video presentation. It reminds me of a verse where they will profess me with their lips but their hearts are far from me. This footage clearly should ring the alarm bells as to the actual state of the broader society and the leadership in a large section of churches out there.
Hi Janetforlife
I have not sat in on any of their services but i have watched them online, nice services.
Awesome work Todd!!
But…..no cops?? COME ON!! :)
I noticed that too Xalisae….some said YES they knew that their church was prochoice and others said no it wasn’t. So which is it peeps??
Thank you Todd and Family for not being afraid to show your Amazing Grace!
Todd, you’re my new hero. If you ever come up to Chicago, I’ll join you on the sidewalk.
If abortion is morally permissible then why can’t it be used for birth control? I have never understood people who say that.
If abortion isn’t the killing of a human being then it should be used however the woman sees fit and whenever she sees fit. If abortion is the killing of a human being then nothing can justify it, even when the pregnancy is unplanned and threatens the woman’s “sacredness”.
I thought it was bad enough when I heard a United Methodist minister explicitly deny the Resurrection of Christ. This is exactly why mainline churches are shrinking and dying: they threw basic Christian precepts overboard in favor of becoming a tea and cookies social club.
Well, I can have tea and cookies any old time, but Sunday morning is when I worship the Risen Lord in a church that has always defended the sanctity of human life from conception.
I believe with all my heart that each one of us must look to the church we go to and make sure they stand up for the unborn. Most churches say the are pro life but do nothing or almost nothing to help end abortion, some churches help CPC and almost nothing else. We owe it to our churches to ask them what they do as a local organization to help end abortion.
http://www.ProLifeBook.com
Todd Bullis
Thanks Jill for this wonderful write up.
Nice to see ya here Todd! Excellent God Bless!
Todd, This video was so sad and yet not shocking to me at all. My husband is President of our local RIght To Life Chapter. We have 3 active members, including my hubs, son and I ! The local churches are apathetic and people do not seem to take abortion seriously and sweep it under a bloody rug of apathy. Even our local Catholic church is not involved and never returns our calls. My own church, baptist, is pro-choice openly but that is about as far as it ever goes. The occasional prayer or mention during a service, but no one is ever willing to help us when we need them. The fact that a baby is aborted ever 20 sec. is jolting to me and breaks my heart. Yet others it seems to unfaze. I salute you and will pray for you and your family as you continue this important ministry. People’s eye’s need to be opened and hearts need to be stirred . I pray that each of those parishnors in the video do some research and discover the truth . THou Shalt Not Kill, there is no gray area, no buts, a life is a life . Period ! God Bless You and Keep you safe as you minister to the masses. Blesssings ~Angela
Abortion is not a choice it is murder. period , enough said
“(*sigh*) This is the end-result of the deluded line of thought which uses sentimentality and personal opinion to replace a rightly-formed conscience (i.e. saying that “conscience” = “my personal opinion, no matter how I arrived at it”).”
A rightly-formed conscience, of course, is one that is a perfect mirror image of your own. These pro-choice churchgoers are obviously amoral sociopaths who are out robbing banks and shooting people when they’re not in church.
Todd,
Great job!
Is just unbelieveble how people can think abortion is not murder.
If it were not, why do these people in the video have these enraged reactions?
Is their conscience telling them something they don’t want to hear? I saw a family with kids skirt the posters, why they didn’t want to let the kids see the photos?
I wonder what their reactions would be if you had pictures of any other type of violence, say on animals or from a war?
I am soo-o-o-o glad I’m not a Methodist right now.
Dear Angela You are so kind.
I think that if the Church will not help to end abortion and if the church will not teach against it or bring light onto the issue of abortion than it is our obligation to teach from out side the gates of the church just like in Jeremiah 7:7
Jeremiah 7:7 This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: 2 “Stand at the gate of the Lord’s house and there proclaim this message: “‘Hear the word of the Lord, all you people of Judah who come through these gates to worship the Lord….. 7:31 They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind.
You see Angela this Church and most others who do nothing to help end abortion are doing the same thing that the people of Judah were doing. God Loves his Church, His Bride. I wish everyone loved the Church enough to stand up for what is right.
Please people do not change Churches make change happen at your Church, God is with you.
It’s so ironic, isn’t it? People are angry at the people HOLDING the signs, not those committing the carnage. I feel ashamed that I don’t do more to end abortion after watching this video. I did go to a clinic on Saturday morning to stand outside and pray with the “regulars” who witness outside the clinic every Saturday. What strikes me is that the people walking by the clinic and those going into this church reacted much the same way when confronted with the truth, ie, angry and exasperated! It’s very frustrating and quite frankly, really scary.
Great response on Todd’s part: “Do you think Satan called me to the church?” :)
joan: “These pro-choice churchgoers are obviously amoral sociopaths who are out robbing banks and shooting people when they’re not in church.”
A risible straw man. Many German citizens knew what was happening, and aside from suppressing anything of conscience with respect to the Holocaust, lived what we’d consider unremarkable moral lives. Were it not for one glaring blindness, they’d be indistinguishable from the Reich’s principled dissenters.
The banality of evil, joan. This is basic stuff. Unless, of course, you’re just trolling…
So they reject gender selective abortions (terrible) but accept other reasons for abortions (not so terrible).
Makes perfect sense. Not.
Rasqual wrote:
The banality of evil, joan. This is basic stuff. Unless, of course, you’re just trolling…
:) That’s akin to asking the Amazon River if it might just be conveying a bit of moisture…
Joan, there were prochoice slaveholders. Does that mean they did not have faith and were not loved by Jesus? No.
Does that mean they did not fully understand the dignity and worth of every human being, specifically because Christ redeemed us on the cross?
Unequivocally, unapologetically, YES.
And to reiterate what I just before, either abortion is the killing of an innocent human, or it’s not. It does not change, depending on the circumstances of his conception. Christians must pick a side to this issue, and if they choose the proabortion stance, then they either right or in error. I bet everything I have, own, make, believe, and parent on the fact that proabortion Christians cannot fully embrace Christ. Thank goodness He can fully embrace them.
If abortion is morally permissible then why can’t it be used for birth control? I have never understood people who say that.
I can’t understand prochoicers who get upset at women who have multiple abortions. What difference does it make if you have one, two, or ten? They’re all blobs, aren’t they?
I would have stood beside you Todd. Thank you for doing the right thing regardless of it’s popularity. :) xoxo
If abortion is morally permissible then why can’t it be used for birth control? I have never understood people who say that.
It can be used for birth control. wouldn’t be a preferred method I am guessing but who says it can’t be? seems easier to take a pill or use a condom, but I certainly wouldn’t tell a woman not to use abortion for birth control.
Todd, You are so right ! No church is perfect, they are full of sinners ! Make change where you are, educate where you are, God has you there for a purpose. The church goers in the video were so irate, why ? Because they know deep down that what they are doing is wrong ! It is no different than teaching my son that stealing is wrong, as I shoplift in front of him. We as Christians have to set the example, it is not always easy or comfortable or make you popular. We have to be an example to the new generation or history will just keep repeating itself over and over. The Nazi’s told the Germans that only pure Aryan Germans were good people or people at all. Everyone else had to be eliminated. Result, some Germans did the right thing and helped the Jews and formed a resistance. Others complied and did nothing. Did they kill anyone with their own hands? NO, did they enslave anyone personally? NO But were they equally responsible for not standing up for the Jews ? YES
This is what so many Pro-Lifers are doing. Are they having abortions themselves? No Are they supporting abortion clinics ? NO But are they doing anything to stand up for the unborn or supporting their local Right to Life Groups or organizations….NO Doing nothing is how we got in this nightmare in the first place. It is way past time Christians stood up and demanded to be heard, no abortions, no gay marriages, no taking God out of our schools and gov. ….Jesus is coming back soon to judge each one of us. What will we be able to say when he ask ” What did you do to stop abortion, what did you do to help save an unborn baby” ?
THank You for stepping forward and taking the road less traveled !
Blessings ~Angela
Thanks for the kind words Angela.
The angry reactions? Totally makes sense, especially if one has had one or more abortions. It’s too painful to look at. Underneath that anger is probably some deep, deep pain that someone is suffering, due to an abortion. It’s hard to look at evil.
Todd, you rock.
Todd – How absolutely loving of you to confront them in their sin. For that is what it is, and complacency in our sins is eternally dangerous. You are courageous, and inspiring.
“They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him” Titus 1:16.
What have I done today to save lives and souls?
I know Christ loves his Church we need to help the Church. If we can not convince the Church abortion is wrong and worth standing up for how do we prove it to the world. I believe Gods heart is still for his people, lets wake them up. I see more and more Church projects starting up, I praise God for that.
Angela – I am a pro-lifer and I had an abortion. The two are compatible. Most of the women and men I know have had (sadly) and abortion experience. I am sad that the Catholic church in your area does not return your calls. Have you contacted their Respect Life committee? Most Catholic Churches have one and they would be the people you want to talk with.
Going to a Methodist Church or any pro-abortion church to learn about Christ and God’s will in our lives is akin to going to a bicycle shop to learn how to be a diesel mechanic. Makes about as much sense.
Lee,
You are very brave to talk about your past abortion, sadly many women try to hide their abortion experience. Instead they choose to suffer in silence. Isn’t it great that we serve a forgiving Savior !
I will ask my hubby about the Respect Life Committee, maybe this will open a new door for us. Thank you so much for the kind suggestion !
Blessings to you ~Angela
Doe,
I would have to agree with that. The anger can sometimes come from a past abortion experience. Maybe some of those men drove their wives or girlfriends or paid for one. And of course it is all hidden behind the usual, “get a life” ”go to church” ”why would you want children to see those?” type responses.
There is hope and healing after abortion!!
http://www.rachelsvineyard.org
You are welcome, Angela. I don’t know if many women “choose” to suffer in silence – their behavior can quite often speak volumes … i.e. drug and alcohol abuse, anger, rage, not bonding with subsequent children, infertility, suicidal thoughts, and the list goes on.
More and more men are speaking out about their abortion experiences. Rachel’s Vineyard, of which I am a team member, is a wonderful healing retreat for any and all those suffering from abortion. 877 HOPE 4 ME.
Lee, You are much more eloquent in your words than I am and I totally agree ! They often do not “choose” and sadly do not realize that there are wonderful loving and caring ministry’s , such as Rachel’s Vineyard out there. And you are right in pointing out that men as well as women are touched by abortion. Thank you for supporting and working with such a wonderful ministry ! Blessings ~Angela
Tks Todd for showing other’s the truth of abortion. It is a sensitive and difficult topic and the picture of it all is terrible, but that’s where the “Truth” comes to “Light”….abortion is killing Life, no gray, no riding the fence. God’s faithful must be informed, may God bless you with wisdom, grace & knowledge to defend Life.
I have lived with post abortion trauma for over 38 yrs. No amount of therapy or counseling helped until I went to Rachel’s Vineyard retreat a divine healing program. Over the last 3 yrs I have gone from not ever being able to even say the word ‘abortion’ to being ProLife advocate, Regional Coordinator of Silent No More of West TN, speaking, sidewalk counseling, 40 Days for Life and teaching, sharing & educating men & women with crisis pregnancy and healing after abortion. There is healing after abortion. silentnomore.org
I love his response to the guy who said “Get a life.”
“I have one, I’m trying to save other’s.” Great line!
The pro-life movement needs to point out that when people kill babies, they do not worship God, they worship Baal-Moloch (“l’Molech”). The Bible is very clear about this, not just about sacrificing babies to Moloch, but even about those who stand idly by without acting against those who do.
A church that condones such evil loses its sanctity and is unclean. Its rites are impure and it no longer rests on sacred ground.
Members of this church would do well to read Matthew 5:13 again. They are to be the Salt of the Earth, but if salt loses it’s flavor, what good is it? Just toss it out like it was the dirt under your feet.
Anyone interested in Christianity could well ask them, as quoted on a favorite television show of mine, “Then, what is the point of you?”
Paladin says:
“This is also a stark reminder to those who view moral relativism as a harmless and acceptable way of approaching the world. At the end of it, people suffer and die because of it.”
How very true! Some 50 million dead babies are a testament to what happens when the “dictatorship of relativism” reigns. Oddly enough our resident trolls, whom themselves prosper and enjoy the blessings that come with a code of objective morality built into our laws, are the first to condemn efforts to extend the same rights to others.
For our resident trolls we must quote Benjamin Franklin: “Experience is a dear teacher, and only fools will learn from no other”. We hope and pray that they do not find themselves someday on the receiving end of the lack of compassion they exhibit now to unborn babies. Maybe it will happen when they are old and deemed a burden upon society and suffer a horrible death having been denied medical care because of Obamacare dictates.
As Francis Schaeffer put it, “How shall we then live?” Not, mind you, “How shall we live, then?”
Ez. 33: “Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the people of Israel; so hear the word I speak and give them warning from me. When I say to the wicked, ‘You wicked person, you will surely die, ’ and you do not speak out to dissuade them from their ways, that wicked person will die for their sin, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. But if you do warn the wicked person to turn from their ways and they do not do so, they will die for their sin, though you yourself will be saved.”
Donald, with all due respect, I do not worship Baal. I have a great fear of God and am working out my salvation with fear and trembling.
I was raised in a Christian home. I had an abortion when I was eighteen. In hind sight, it was due, I believe, to fear of my parents having people find out their daughter was unmarried and pregnant. They had my son aborted, I had no say in the matter.
When you make broad statements, you do not permit yourself to converse with those who might wish to discuss ann issue with you as you shut them down with your statement which may, certainly in my case, bit be true at all.
The pro-life movement, of which I am pastry of, needs to do a better job listening and inviting those with different opinions into conversation, versus just stating their own rhetoric.
Find a way to be Christ like, do not judge, do mitt concern, but be a
Donald, with all due respect, I do not worship Baal. I have a great fear of God and am working out my salvation with fear and trembling.
I was raised in a Christian home. I had an abortion when I was eighteen. In hind sight, it was due, I believe, to fear of my parents having people find out their daughter was unmarried and pregnant. They had my son aborted, I had no say in the matter.
When you make broad statements, you do not permit yourself to converse with those who might wish to discuss ann issue with you as you shut them down with your statement which may, certainly in my case, bit be true at all.
The pro-life movement, of which I am pastry of, needs to do a better job listening and inviting those with different opinions into conversation, versus just stating their own rhetoric.
Find a way to be Christ like, do not judge, do not condemn, but be a person who shows they love their enemy…and then do it!
Reach out to a woman who is post abortive, listen to her story, love her as Christ DOES.
we’ve come full-circle. Looking over the poetry submissions for the convention in Jill’s previous post, I found this:
Genie Abrams is the author of the pro-choice novel Louey Levy’s Greatest Catch, available at http://www.genieabrams.com. She enjoys teaching, hiking, writing, birding, and promoting her hometown of Newburgh, NY. She is the mother of the fabulous independent radio producer Rachel Quimby; stepmother of the awesome musicians Jon and Sam Riss; and wife of the pastor at the Hicksville United Methodist Church, the very sweet, brave, smart, and good Tim Riss.
(emphasis mine)
For the 40 Days for Life and our pro-life conference featuring Abby Johnson, I went around with posters and DVDs to the different churches in my area. Also included was literature about Natural Family Planning – Creighton Model – that was being taught at a local hospital. I asked the pastors to please put up the posters featuring the pro-life conference and to please join us in telling people about the 40 Days for Life and Natural Family Planning. When one pastor saw the DVD that featured an unborn baby, he literally thrust the DVD back in my hand and backed away from me, saying, “We don’t do that kind of thing here”.
Then, at another church (Episcopalian), there was a woman pastor. I asked, “Are you pro-life?”. She said, “Oh, well, we are, but we’re not THAT kind of pro-life”. The church secretary looked at me suspiciously, and finally allowed me an audience with the pastor. I explained everything to the pastor, and asked if she would help to promote the pro-life causes. She seemed wary and suspicious of me and finally agreed to take the information. They put the poster up in an out-of-the-way place with little visibility, and I suspect that it was taken down as soon as I left.
As far as participation in 40 Days for Life, and the Lifechain, we (Catholics) have had very little success in getting participation from any of the Protestant Churches. One Evangelical Lutheran Church (they support abortion) – even refused to allow us to distribute pro-life signs for the Lifechain in their parking lot!!!!
Personally, I am glad that I am part of a church that has always defended life in the womb and always WILL defend life in the womb. From conception to natural death, HUMAN life is sacred. This is the teaching of the Catholic Church. If you are wondering which church is the TRUTH, look no further than this truth. No other church defends life as strongly as the Catholic Church. No other church says that contraception is wrong.
Abortion is child sacrifice. No doubt about it. The killing continues as satan laughs with glee. The entire industry is based on the deception of the father of lies.
Women and men who regret their abortions and long for healing find the grace and mercy of God. We are forgiven and set free. I did not just ask forgiveness for my abortion but for ALL of the behavior that brought me to such a dark place.
Lee: It’s a shame more young people don’t tell their parents to take a flying leap when life is at stake. Kids rebel at so much else — rebelling for life would be the ticket.
Our own daughter-in-law told the rest of us to take a flying leap in another respect — before the marriage when she became pregnant and their relationship was in turmoil. We believed adoption would be the best option for everyone. She stubbornly dissented — and I’m glad she did. They’re a great little family!
Amazing hypocrisy on the part of Todd Bullis. He wants his religious freedom protected by not having to deal with Obamacare, but those who are also entitled to their religious freedom the same as him he “protests” on Sunday. He and radical Muslims make for strange bedfellows.
That analogy isn’t quite right, Jason. I am sure Todd would have no problem with people who protesting his church to offer free contraceptives or whatever. That is freedom of speech, and anyone can protest anything and try and persuade people to change their mind about something. I don’t think he is protesting that they should not have religious freedom either. However, the desire to have one’s freedom protected from Obamacare is not the desire to not hear people protest, but rather, the desire to not be forced into providing certain things that go against one’s conscience. So the analogy does not really work.
Sure the analogy works, Bobby. And, Todd just wants to bully people.
Rasquel…the fourth commandment…
I am glad the mother of your grandchild chose life.
I cannot change what happened, but I do pray that my experience will not have been in vain, what satan meant for evil, God is using for good.
Off to the abortion mill to pray, with none other than Dr. Alveda King.
Jason,
Supporting abortion is the ultimate bullying.
Jason, I showed precisely where the two things you were comparing differ and why that difference is relevant to the analogy. Responding to this critique by asserting that the analogy works without addressing the critical difference I pointed up is no response at all.
Yes, Bobby, in your opinion.
Oy vey…
Jason, that’s jejune. Everything anyone says is an “opinion”. It may be more than merely an opinion, but it’s at least an opinion. Therefore, it’s no critique, nor does it reduce the weight of what someone has to say, to assert “in your opinion.” It would be like me telling you “you’re using words. So there.”
@Jason: No. Obamacare is forced on people by the government. You have to go along with it whether you agree or not. Todd Bullis’ protests, while they might be placed so as to require people to look at things, do not force anyone to take any particular kind of action.
Are you really going to sit there and tell us that having to look at pictures is totally identical in every way to being forced, by law, to buy a whole bunch of stuff–most of it not even for you–some of which you find morally abhorrent? We’re really having that conversation right now?
Freedom of religion does not mean nobody can ever tell you you’re wrong about what you believe. I imagine the atheists would have something to say about that if it did. Lrn2Constitution.
Alice, please. Todd is going to harass the congregation until they “change their minds”. That’s what it’s about. And, yes, Alice, people can “tell you you’re wrong”, but when they do the telling to the point of obsession, that is when they are control freaks. How many times has he protested in front of the church? More than three? By now everyone in the church has been told either by Todd or through word of mouth. At least Fred Phelps and his crew diversify and go to many churches.
I guess Todd will try to change their minds until they change their minds. It’s murder, Jason. Somebody must bear witness, especially to our Christian brothers and sisters.
Right, Jason, “in your opinion.” Right? ;-)
Dear Jason.
I want to let you know that I only wanted to meet with your pastor and that is still my goal. I think two reasonable men can at least agree to meet if nothing else. Your pastor has never returned my phone calls or emails.
Just so you know I once stayed at one church over 6 months. It was a big blessing for everyone. Tons of fruit, our God is so good.
Here is my question for you Jason.
Why do you think I am at your chruch?
Do you think God has sent me?
Do you think that Satan has sent me?
Do you think I do it for the attention?
Why do you think I am there?
Todd, I don’t even go to that church nor do I live within a thousand miles of there.
Well lets pretend you do ok. Do you mind answering the questions anyway?
Courtnay, if it’s murder, then call the police immediately. But it’s not.
Todd, here are your answers:
Why do you think I am at your church? Answer: Already provided in another post.
Do you think God has sent me? Answer: Not enough information–did he call you and tell you to go?
Do you think that Satan has sent me? Answer: Not enough information–did he call you and tell you to go?
Do you think I do it for the attention? Answer: Possibly, but probably more because psychologically you feel the urge to control others.
Why do you think I am there? Answer: Obsession.
They are merely lying murderous hypocrites. If they were really pro-choice, they would be willing to allow themselves to be chosen for the vivisection and dismemberment of abortion. Why they are such hypocrites can be seen at http://www.100abortionpictures.com and http://www.abortionno.org, or by googling other ‘abortion pictures’ websites.
Ok well I think Jason does not want any answers just wants to voice his pro-choice views. They are noted.
I answered your questions, Todd. But you appear to not like the answers.
Thanks, Carla. I have such respect for your (and others) courage about being silent no more and sharing your experience. You have brought so much good out of the evil. Life can be messy and we all have our demons and wounds from our past. Thank God for His Grace and Mercy.
I am greatly saddened by the generalities/assumptions made in these comments. How can you on one hand claim to be a supporter of human rights, the right to life and common decency and at the same time make comments like:
- claiming this church is more concerned about filling pews and collecting tithes
– that they’re just making themselves look good in society
– that they are “amoral sociopaths out robbing and shooting people” (how this statement doesn’t get deleted based on the rules of this board is beyond me)
– those in the video have guilty or shameful consciences or are immoral
I am a pro-lifer, but do not agree with the methods to which these protests are held. By displaying the graphic pictures as you do, you are forcing those images on all who pass – including those who are pro-life - and including innocent children who should not yet be exposed to such images or realities. It is a parent’s time, place and choice to educate their children on God’s way — and expecting it to occur between the sidewalk of a church and the pew where you and your family honor God, is NOT appropriate. If you were at my church, I would explain to my 5 year old that some people choose very inappropriate ways to show their support of God’s word.
I simply have a hard time believing that radical methods of this sort are effective outside of churches. You can’t possibly know the extent to which a church spreads God’s love in the community unless you’re a part of it. Attacking a church for not supporting one movement, while they might be supporting hundreds of others, can’t possibly gain you more supporters. It’s like the old addage – you simply attract more flies with honey. Perhaps you could try it sometime.
Jason wrote:
Courtnay, if it’s murder, then call the police immediately. But it’s not.
Jason, this is puerile. Given that this particular murder is currently condoned by USA law, the police are powerless to do anything (save, perhaps, slap the caller with a charge of “false report”, or some such thing). Surely you don’t think this was a good argument, on your part?
”that they are “amoral sociopaths out robbing and shooting people” (how this statement doesn’t get deleted based on the rules of this board is beyond me)”
That one was clearly intended sarcastically. It’s obvious if you’re familiar with the person who posted it.
Saddened wrote:
I am greatly saddened by the generalities/assumptions made in these comments. How can you on one hand claim to be a supporter of human rights, the right to life and common decency and at the same time make comments like:
- claiming this church is more concerned about filling pews and collecting tithes
– that they’re just making themselves look good in society
– that they are “amoral sociopaths out robbing and shooting people” (how this statement doesn’t get deleted based on the rules of this board is beyond me)
– those in the video have guilty or shameful consciences or are immoral
I am, at least for the moment, assuming that you are sincere, and that you are not simply (forgive me) a concern troll (and we’ve had a few of those, here). Three responses to your initial question:
1) It’s rather odd that you, who seem to be championing the “benefit of the doubt” for the abortion-tolerant congregations, would then turn about and deny that same benefit of the doubt to those who post here. By failing to live up to your own standard, you remove a key motive for taking your question seriously.
2) You say that you are “a pro-lifer” (below), but you have far more concern for “indecorous language” (and that concern is not a bad one, mind you) than you do with a Christian community giving explicit support/cover for the murderous crime of abortion; this extreme disconnect between your treatment of each makes me (at least) wonder whether you have a right sense of proportion about this matter.
3) You obviously do not like the use of graphic abortion images (as you mention, below), and that seems to be your main concern (especially with regard to exposure to children–and that is not an unreasonable concern); but you blend this concern in (rather seamlessly) with weaker concerns about the method itself (even if restricted, hypothetically, to adults), and there is where your argument derails into mere opinion.
I simply have a hard time believing that radical methods of this sort are effective outside of churches.
First, your label of “radical” is plainly your own raw opinion. Second, “effective” seems to have more than a bit to do with “make me feel emotionally settled”, in your mind, since your argument is couched in sentimental, affective terms. Third: this concern seems a bit like a red herring, since I doubt that you’d like them any better if they were wildly successful.
You can’t possibly know the extent to which a church spreads God’s love in the community unless you’re a part of it.
Pardon me, friend, but this is facile. “Spreading God’s love” (which is a frighteningly nebulous term which could mean nearly anything, in our confused and heart-based culture), if the term means anything at all, cannot possibly work unless it is SPREAD; yes? And if it is spread, then it must be spread beyond the confines of that particular congregation; right? And if that is done, then there must necessarily be some evidence of that “spread”, OUTSIDE of the congregation… so it’s simply silly to suggest that one needs to be a part of the community in order to examine whether its fruits are rotten or not [cf. Matthew 7:15-20, etc.].
Attacking a church for not supporting one movement, while they might be supporting hundreds of others, can’t possibly gain you more supporters.
Aside from the fact that you’re suggesting rather base motives for posters on this forum (e.g. they’re “only in it for the recruitment value”): if the abortion-tolerant congregations support hundreds of other causes, then that is to be praised (if those movements are, in fact, good). But you speak as if support for one hundred good things would somehow excuse a blind eye to murder… and I can’t fathom why you would think so. What, am I excused from giving the wink-and-nod to the murder of an innocent, so long as I bake several dozens of cookies for various charities? The two have nothing to do with each other!
It’s like the old addage – you simply attract more flies with honey. Perhaps you could try it sometime.
(*wry look*) Mm-hmm. My father (a farmer) had a standard rejoinder for that saying: “If it’s flies you want, you’ll attract even more with bull-[expletive deleted]!”
Paladin –
I would suggest that perhaps some of your best “converts” were once trolls – so my intent here should not matter. If you want people to learn more about your pro-life views and further understand your reasons for the protests, it would seem trolling would be welcome. There are certainly good/substantial arguments made on this website, yes?
We’ll have to agree to disagree on my ability to give anyone the benefit of the doubt.
I didn’t think it necessary to explain my pro-life stance on a board such is this, but it would seem a pro-life supporter could disagree with the methods used – much like I know Muslims who disagree with terrorist activity (and no I’m NOT saying that Todd is a terrorist, simply that I can agree with someone’s view/beliefs but not agree with the method of delivery)
Yes, I have a problem with the images and do HONESTLY wonder if they are effective in envoking more support from church-goers. While I could see the images changing the mind of someone walking into a clinic for the purpose of an abortion, I am admittedly ignorant as to whether they are effective in championing the cause to a group of people in which the majority are doing good for the society at large.
I was, of course, referring to God’s word, love and messages being spread OUTSIDE the congregation and the church at which Todd is protesting is very good at that. They certainly do more than ”bake cookies” as you so snidely or sarcastically stated (IMO). I do not condone turning a blind eye – but simply believe that taking the chance of offending, insulting and/or infuriating members of a reputable church (by bombarding them with explicity images & comparing them to Hitler as Todd and some of these posters have) may not be the way to go. And if it is the best method for gaining more support for the cause, then you may be right about ”whether I have the right sense of proportion on this matter”
Paladin – By the way….Very good relpy here even though I suspect we both know my intent… :-)
It’s like the old addage – you simply attract more flies with honey. Perhaps you could try it sometime.
(*wry look*) Mm-hmm. My father (a farmer) had a standard rejoinder for that saying: “If it’s flies you want, you’ll attract even more with bull-[expletive deleted]!”
Paladin, it is not murder under the law. I agree it is a form of killing; however, in this country, murder is a legal term. What I find peculiar is that most legislators who want abortion to be a criminal act only want to punish the doctor and not the woman who has the abortion. If it were indeed murder, and abortion is criminalized, then punishment for the woman would also be in order. But, of course, that doesn’t seem to be the case.
If they’re tolerant/supportive of killing children in utero, they’re not reputable. The two are mutually-exclusive.
Xalisae – Respectfully missing my point by picking one word in my narrative upon which to make your rebuttal. Once again, just simply stating I don’t agree with the method and asking if the it is truly effective for purposes of educating myself if nothing else. Finding it disappointing that there isn’t support for this kind of exploration
Most Pastors, even pro life pastors will not teach on abortion, most will not even meet with me to discus it. Preaching it from the street in front of the church is a good effective way. I have had lots of fruit from it. Works well. Yes you don’t like it but your now interacting and talking about it. Abortion is on the hearts and minds of more people because of it. I am not braking the law or sinning. 4000 babies a day are being killed and what is the church doing about? If it is happening and nobody cares than we need to bring it to light.
Do you have a better idea that will help to end abortion?
A woman who was proabortion asked a young mother holding the pictures depicting abortion. ”How can you allow children to see these horrible pictures?”
The young mother asked, “How can you allow children to become these horrible pictures?”
Graphic pictures that depict what abortion does to innocent human beings should OFFEND. Abortion is OFFENSIVE!
Carla, it’s one thing for adults to see them, it’s another for a young child to see them. Are you OK with young children seeing photos of soldiers blown up by IED’s or decapitated kids due to bombing in, say, Iraq? Or, children seeing other graphic photos for other things? What about “age appropriate” sex education photos (not by the schools, but by parents)?
It seems to some of you, “by any means possible”, is your mantra.
Jason Jason Jason.
I have read your stuff. Not impressed.
Have a good night!! I have to put my four former fetuses to bed.
The Church (all of us Christians) need to be a voice for the ones who have none. I imagine my daughter asking me, when she is an adult, “Mom, tell me about the time when people thought it was ok to kill the unborn” in a voice of disbelief, IN THE SAME WAY as I, a child born in the late 60s, wonder, There were separate drinking fountains?? REALLY? OR like my grandparents born in Maryland ask, so it was OK to buy and sell people??
Jason, wake up. Abortion–the killing of a kind of human–lessens us all. Just as Jim Crow. Just as slavery.
Carla – I can accept that abortion is offensive, but there are plenty of other sins in this world that are not protested via the use of graphic photos of the offense and/or at least not done so in a manner that forces the images upon children. If those images were on TV they’d be delivered with a warning. Shoot, some of the pro-life websites even give warnings. Not saying the pictures aren’t or shouldn’t be offensive, just wishing they weren’t forced.
Todd – thanks for your reponse – the only one that actually addressed my questions. I still think “preaching it” is different than showing graphic photos – but as you stated, you are not sinning or breaking the law. No, I unfortunately do not really have better ideas.
Thanks to all for shedding further light on my own position.
Courtnay, your Jim Crow comparison is bogus.
Carla, I don’t post to impress you.
How is it not valid? In your opinion …
Jason, whether you agree or not, Courtnay is right. Jim Crow laws, just as the Roe vs Wade decision, accord different rights to different humans based on classification. Both disregard the notion of Equality Before the Law.
Carla, it’s one thing for adults to see them, it’s another for a young child to see them. Are you OK with young children seeing photos of soldiers blown up by IED’s or decapitated kids due to bombing in, say, Iraq? Or, children seeing other graphic photos for other things?
http://www.abortionno.org/index.php/public_education_projects/using_graphic_images_in_public/
As you were saying? Do you attack newspapers for putting these images on the front page, or grocery stores for putting them on shelves where children can easily see them?
OK, Eric, every sperm is sacred. My goodness.
Little kids are only shocked when they ask their parents if its true that mom and dads kill their kids, and when the parents tell them yes it is true, that shocks them, not the pictures but that parents let this happen and not only let it happen but do nothing to try to stop it. Abortion is the number one killer in America and people just dont care, its time to show them what abortion looks like.
Todd, if people want to join you at these churches where can we find out when and where you’ll be?
Well, Jason certainly overwhelmed us with that razor-sharp comeback.
This gif (which, amusingly, was actually created to mock pro-lifers) strikes me as relevant. Sperm indeed.
I like that. It’s like 2 + 2 = 4. Ha! Gotcha!
Ha. I think we should take it from them and use it in earnest, since it’s true. Wow, they’ve finally mastered the art of 5th-8th grade science! No…wait…they’re not being serious. They’re being sarcastic. SO CLOSE, AND YET SO FAR AWAY!
Jason,
If you’re just going to spout the canned bumper sticker phrases, please, spare us. We’ve heard them all before, and they’re no less ignorant coming from YOUR screen name.
Members of the United Methodist church need to protest its involvement with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.
That church has many affiliates, which should also be protesting.
My son had to stay home from his 8th grade class field trip to a mission location which was affiliated with the United Methodist Church.
It was not sensible for me to contribute the funds to that church, which belongs to an organization that directly opposes conscientiously objecting health care professionals who do not participate in abortion.
This is not the first time that his Catholic grade school arranged service trips with a church affiliated with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. For that reason we’re looking into joining a different parish.
Dear Tiff
I always post on the calendar of events on http://www.ProLifeBook.com when you join ProLifeBook.com just ask to be friends with Todd Bullis. Make sure you say hi.
Dear Pharmer
Please do not leave your Church be be a Voice of God to them. Two things will happen they will repent and do better or they will kick you out than go find another church to attend. I have been kicked out of one church and I lived, but now that Church is much more pro-life than it has ever been. If all the good people leave the church it will suffer. Sounds like to me that you have a mission. I am so excited for you.
Jason, I’m sure you can do better than that.
@xalisae: That’s what I’m gonna do with it. I saved it and I’m using it every time someone starts going off about sperm or periods or something else stupid like that. It’s not complicated anyway, but perhaps the visual will help.
Saddened wrote, in reply to my comment:
Paladin – I would suggest that perhaps some of your best “converts” were once trolls –
That’s more true than you know; I was a troll, once, myself (who would have put many of our “regular” trolls to shame). You’re new to the board, so you’ll not have heard my story to that effect; but I do not warn people away from “feeding trolls” because I hate them or wish them ill. Rather, I know (from personal experience… both as a troll, and as a troll-feeder) that engaging a troll on his/her own terms is not productive at all, and it merely feeds the disease (i.e. their desire to rage, foam, prevaricate, distract, run in rhetorical circles, and the like).
so my intent here should not matter.
I’m afraid that makes very little sense, if the “intent” spills over into action. In one sense, it’s quite true that intentions can be secondary to a conversation, if only the person in question engages the people and issues with logic, manners, and the like; but if someone displays some (or many) of the characteristics of a troll (whose very definition includes “it’s rather a waste of time to engage them”, and past history gives some strong indications of how to diagnose troll-dom), then you’ll need to forgive us if I am (and/or others are) a bit wary. You’ll note that I gave you the benefit of the doubt, in this regard, at least for the moment.
If you want people to learn more about your pro-life views and further understand your reasons for the protests, it would seem trolling would be welcome.
You seem to be confusing “dissent” with “trolling”… and that simply isn’t the case. The very definition of “troll” includes “seeking to disrupt, distract, inflame, or otherwise fail to engage in any meaningful, sincere or authentic manner”… and no sane person would welcome that (save, perhaps, for amusement value… though my tastes don’t usually run in that direction).
There are certainly good/substantial arguments made on this website, yes?
Of course. They are made by non-trolls. Again: were you under the mistaken impression that anyone who is abortion-tolerant is immediately labelled a “troll”? That is not at all the case. (Gracious, how many times, on how many threads, will I have to repeat that plain fact?)
We’ll have to agree to disagree on my ability to give anyone the benefit of the doubt.
Friend, I evaluate only your own words and style! You assume (without benefit of the doubt) that all “dissidents” are automatically labelled as “trolls” (which is false), you assume (without benefit of the doubt) that those who angrily denounce the rubbish being promoted by these abortion-tolerant congregations are “not supporters of human rights and the right to life” (which is absurd), and so on. You, in your rush to admonish us not to “judge”, used a great deal of judgment (and rash judgment, at that!) to deliver your admonishment (which is logically incoherent).
I didn’t think it necessary to explain my pro-life stance on a board such is this,
Well… unless you were assuming that your views were identical with those of everyone on this board, explanations do have a tendency to minimise misunderstandings and confusion…
but it would seem a pro-life supporter could disagree with the methods used – much like I know Muslims who disagree with terrorist activity (and no I’m NOT saying that Todd is a terrorist, simply that I can agree with someone’s view/beliefs but not agree with the method of delivery)
Had you said only that, I would never have scolded you for your inconsistency and apparent lack of authenticity. But you go farther, and strongly insinuate that those who angrily denounce the congregations in question are “not supporters of human rights and the right to life” (i.e. not true “pro-lifers”). Beyond this: surely you’re not surprised that people became somewhat annoyed at you when you burst upon the scene, without so much as a cursory investigation (i.e. asking non-scolding, non-inflammatory questions about the attitudes of the commenters, etc.), and spray criticisms left and right? That was rather presumptuous (and judgmental, in your sense of the word) of you, was it not?
Yes, I have a problem with the images and do HONESTLY wonder if they are effective in envoking more support from church-goers.
All right.
While I could see the images changing the mind of someone walking into a clinic for the purpose of an abortion, I am admittedly ignorant as to whether they are effective in championing the cause to a group of people in which the majority are doing good for the society at large.
One consideration: the main opponent to the elimination of abortion seems to be two-fold: a desire to protect sexual license at all costs, and a staggering degree of apathy. So long as abortion can be presented as a “neat, quiet and tidy issue, out of sight and out of mind”, it will stay with us. Those who claim that the abortion war can be won solely with decorous debate and philosophical explanations (as useful and necessary as these are, for parts of the battle) are, with all die respect, delusional. I do not deny that the details of such a method (e.g. finding some way to minimise exposure to young children, etc.) are open for discussion, and that sincere people can disagree about them while remaining morally coherent; but the rejection (or unqualified criticism) of the method itself is going rather too far, I think.
I was, of course, referring to God’s word, love and messages being spread OUTSIDE the congregation and the church at which Todd is protesting is very good at that.
I was responding to your specific claim that “no one could know how effective the congregation is at spreading God’s love, unless one is a member of that congregation” (which was–forgive me–a rather silly and easily disprovable claim). Surely you’re aware of the idea of “by their fruits you shall know them” [cf. Matthew 7:15-20] and of the Lord’s reaction to those who produce bad fruit (or even no fruit [cf. Matthew 21:19, Luke 13:6-9])? The extent to which a congregation acquiesces to abortion, in stark betrayal of Our Lord’s wishes [to protect those who are being led to death, cf. Proverbs 24:11] is the extent to which they are complicit in the evil. This isn’t merely “bad arcitecture” which Todd is protesting, you know; this is congregation-tolerated murder… and Todd would be remiss if he did NOT try to rouse these blind congregations out of their self-poisoning stupors.
This, by the way, is why I try to repeat the oft-forgotten truth: the definition of “love” needs to be quite solid, first, before any claims of “spreading God’s love” can make much sense… especially in this age where Kathleen Sebelius can call herself a “fervent Catholic”, where abortion clinics can call their atrocities “a holy work”, and the like.
They certainly do more than ”bake cookies” as you so snidely or sarcastically stated (IMO).
Nor, if you took even a moment’s careful reading, did I suggest that they didn’t (nor was I being snide, as you hastily and rashly judged me to be). I was emphasising two things: that your definition of “spreading God’s love” was hopelessly vague (and useless for the purposes of this conversation, without a clearer definition), and that support for even countless other good things does not excuse aiding/abetting a moral evil whose defeat is a moral imperative. Again: we’re not disagreeing about the colour of drapery; we’re trying to keep a so-called “Christian” congregation from teaching their members that abortion is an acceptable/tolerable thing in society.
I do not condone turning a blind eye –
You might note that the congregations in question, in fact, DO.
but simply believe that taking the chance of offending, insulting and/or infuriating members of a reputable church (by bombarding them with explicity images & comparing them to Hitler as Todd and some of these posters have) may not be the way to go.
And I’d suggest that you take some time to read the comments again, with more care. You’re “catastrophising” Todd’s actions in your own mind, which is leading you to use inflamed and inaccurate descriptions of Todd’s actions. To hear you speak, one might (without further evidence) assume that Todd is screaming “Hitlerites!! Baby Killers!! Hell-bound scum!!” at every congregant!
And if it is the best method for gaining more support for the cause, then you may be right about ”whether I have the right sense of proportion on this matter”
I do not say that it is necessarily the best method; I say only that it is a useful and morally licit method (and you seem to disagree with that). Again: if you had limited yourself to the mild claim that “it’s not the very best method” (though perhaps you meant that as a bland understatement?), I would not have objected at all.
In short: you seem to be angry about Todd’s use of the images, his challenge to particular congregations about their abortion-tolerance, and some of the heated language used on this thread to describe those congregants. All right; but your anger does not automatically translate into “they must, therefore, be wrong”.
(*sigh*) At the risk of feeding a new troll (and I’ll give the benefit of the doubt for just a bit longer, against my better judgment)…
Jason wrote:
Paladin, it is not murder under the law.
And surely you know that this is utterly irrelevant, and a mere accident of politics? The term “murder” was in existence long before the USA was even founded, friend; it is a term of morality/ethics, which political systems happened to use while trying (at least when they worked properly) to uphold the objective moral law. The fact that a given country does not recognise any given instance of unjust killing (of a human person) as “murder” means simply that the laws of that land do not reflect reality.
I agree it is a form of killing;
All right.
however, in this country, murder is a legal term.
It is; but it is not only that, nor is that even the most important fact about the term. See above.
What I find peculiar is that most legislators who want abortion to be a criminal act only want to punish the doctor and not the woman who has the abortion.
Since you’re rather new to the board, you’ll not have seen the volumes of comments about that very topic. In short: the extent to which someone freely and knowingly chooses an evil act is the extent to which they are blame-worthy (and the extent to which a civil government is morally free to set legal penalties/punishments); and while abortionists are almost certainly in a position to do their “jobs” freely (who’s forcing them?) and knowingly (they can hardly deny that a young human is dying, when they forcibly extract the legs, arms, ruptured torso with beating heart, and head of a young child from a woman’s uterus, piece by piece), but women are often the victims of relentless propaganda (ask any post-abortive mother on this board about what they were told, re: their abortions) and coercion (and sometimes threat of harm/death).
If it were indeed murder, and abortion is criminalized,
(?) Half a moment, here. Earlier, you equated “illegal” with “murder”, and said that the absence of a law against it would neutralise the word “murder” altogether; now, you seem to be making a distinction between “murder as a fact” and “criminalising that act”. Could you clarify?
then punishment for the woman would also be in order. But, of course, that doesn’t seem to be the case.
See above.
Dear Paladin
You are the best, thank you.
Paladin –
I’ll credit you for the passion you have for the topic and – as respectfully as I can in written words – recuse myself from the discussion. I simply do not have the time that you have to overanalyze every word written by people like myself who were simply looking to be further educated about the cause and the methods used to promote it.
If I’m reading this correctly (which I’m sure I’m not as implied by your responses) I have been labeled, as having “characteristics of a troll”, hastily judging others, scolding others as well as being inflamatory and angry. I do not personally feel I was any of these things. Yes, I was taken aback by the method of protest used. Yes, a part of me still disagrees with it. Yes, I do still find the pictures and some of the things Todd (and congregants) said in the video to be offensive.
However, you have taught me the lesson that inquisitive minds should beware upon entering comments on boards such as these. I obviously do not (and never will) have the time to analyze and disect my thoughts and words to the extent that you are able. Sincere kudos to you for your obvious intellect, and as I previously stated, passion for the cause.
Exit troll stage left. :-)
(*sigh*) …and an exit with no shortage of drama, at that. I really do not wish you ill, Saddened… but if you ever do engage these issues on a discussion board again, do be prepared for the fact that we (on both sides of the issue) stress definitions so strongly, not out of ill-temper or amusement, but because lives and deaths hang on the difference between two definitions of a single word. (E.g. “person”: does it include “viability outside the womb”, or “brain activity”, or “heart-beat”, or “ability to reason”, or “implantation in the uterus”, etc.? A careless blur of these could allow unborn children to die, in cases where the prevention of that death might have been not only possible, but easy.)
I, for one, do not “dissect” things for fun, or (God forbid) to “show-case my intellect (there are plenty of people on this board alone who are my superior, in that regard… and I really don’t much care about my dignity or status); I carefully parse words and meanings because lives depend on it, and because truth (which can be eclipsed by vague language/terms, dissimulation, etc.) is so very important to me. If you read everything I write with the lens of “He’s fiercely passionate about the truth, and he means no disrespect”, you’ll be spot-on.
Paladin, if the fetus is a person, and abortion were illegal, then women should receive the same punishment as a woman who kills a born child. The fact that you and others dance around this and classify the woman as a victim under those circumstances is typical of your inconsistency. It’s along the lines of people who say abortion is murder because an innocent life is taken, yet want rape and incest exclusions.
Jason wrote, in reply to my comment:
Paladin, if the fetus is a person, and abortion were illegal, then women should receive the same punishment as a woman who kills a born child.
My dear fellow: since we are not living in a world in which a wide-spread programme of desensitisation is being enacted about post-birth infanticide (and we are not… at least, not yet) as it has been about abortion (for at least 40 years, if not much longer), your conclusion makes no sense. You, yourself, think that it is quite acceptable to procure an abortion, yes? And yet, I don’t think (correct me if I’m mistaken) that you’d be so eager to give the nod of approval for killing unwanted children who are already born… right?
And again: the legality of the matter is utterly and completely irrelevant; slavery, for instance, was immoral in the USA in the 1850’s, despite the fact that the Supreme Court ruled (i.e. pronounced it “legal”) that black slaves were mere property, after all. And if you think that any earthly legal system is so omnipotent and infallible as to “create” morality or immorality by its mere enactment/promulgation, then I really don’t know what to tell you. (E.g. If, God forbid, the USA were to re-legalise black slavery, and reinstate a “master’s” legal right to execute any unwanted and/or disobedient slaves, would you nod in approval and say, “Well, it’s legal, so it must be right”?)
The fact that you and others dance around this and classify the woman as a victim under those circumstances is typical of your inconsistency.
Friend, merely asserting your raw opinion, repeatedly and forcefully, does not make it so. You really do need to prove your case.
It’s along the lines of people who say abortion is murder because an innocent life is taken, yet want rape and incest exclusions.
Out of curiosity: since you are apparently abortion-tolerant, why would these so-called “exceptions” (and I think they are illogical and cowardly) bother you? And you have the matter quite wrong: in cases where the mother actually made a free and informed choice to kill her child (though the prospect of trying to discern that in any given real-life instance makes me giddy), I would also say that that particular mother is guilty of premeditated murder… and should be treated accordingly. I add only that this state of affairs (i.e. a fully-informed, freely-choosing mother who aborts) is not at all likely to be common, and discerning it in specific cases would be a nightmare. As such, any blanket suggestions about “treat the mother exactly as you would treat the abortionist” are simply silly… especially from the mouth of an apparently abortion-tolerant individual such as you. Try again.
Dear Paladin
Would you please consider joining http://www.ProLifeBook.com Your web site and your logic are both great and need to be promoted also. Thanks so much for who you are. You have always been so kind to me.
Thanks.
Hello, Todd!
:) Believe it or not, I’m already there… but in my “secret identity”! I’m already on your “friends” list over there, in fact. I’ll send you a message, when I have a moment.
Thank you for the kind words… and especially for your courageous witness!
Todd,
I’m thinking of moving also for social reasons, for my kids to have more attractive (adherent) opportunities to participate. Switching parishes is different from switching churches, as the Catholic church is more of a beehive than some other denominations.
Each person has a specialty in the biz, and I have one too: working on preserving the human rights of health care professionals who choose not to participate in abortion/euthanasia. Obama has been quite a problem to us, but he is by no means the first.
It might be nice to be at a parish in which participation in the charitable outreaches is compliant with Catholic teaching. It’s hard to babysit everyone.
Also, money talks in that particular parish. If enough of the regular contributors migrate, attention might be brought to the reasons why.
I applaud your zeal and hope that you have continued success in your pro-life specialty of reforming the churches.
How many women seeking abortions were jailed before Roe V Wade Jason?
How many women were convicted of murder before Roe V Wade?
Who is dancing around it?
I am post abortive. I have been told I should go to prison. I have been told I am a murderer. That I will go to hell. From prolifers and proaborts alike.
Some folks believe that women are NEVER victims of abortion. Some folks believe that women are ALWAYS victims.
I have seen enough hatred for post abortive women to last me a lifetime.
What to do what to do? I will continue helping other post abortive women find hope and healing in Jesus Christ. :)
Carla, you had your abortion when it is legal, right? What I am saying is that if it becomes ILLEGAL, and the fetus is deemed a person, not just the doctor should be charged. In your case, no, you should not (and cannot be) charged.
If a fetus is deemed a person, and abortion becomes illegal, then not only the doctor should be charged.
As far as being the victim, couldn’t a woman be a victim, too, if she killed her born child?
Paladin, once again, if the fetus is considered the same as a born person, then why should there be exceptions such as rape and incest?
Yes Jason.
It was legal and WRONG for me to pay an abortionist $250 to kill my daughter.
Do YOU think women should be charged when abortion becomes illegal? Why or why not?
Thank you for your honest questions. Sorry if I was snarky yesterday.
Jason wrote:
Carla, you had your abortion when it is legal, right? What I am saying is that if it becomes ILLEGAL, and the fetus is deemed a person, not just the doctor should be charged. In your case, no, you should not (and cannot be) charged.
In other words, you have NOT read (or you’ve not understood, or you’ve rejected out-of-hand) the plentiful comments explaining the difference between mother and abortionist. Unless you take some time and care to study this issue, rather than firing off knee-jerk, carbon-copy replies, this discussion will rapidly become pointless.
If a fetus is deemed a person, and abortion becomes illegal, then not only the doctor should be charged.
If the mother knowingly and willingly (with sufficient freedom and accurate information) consented, then yes. Otherwise, no.
As far as being the victim, couldn’t a woman be a victim, too, if she killed her born child?
Yes… though it’s not nearly so easy to plead an “out-of-sight, out-of-mind” claim, is it, if (for example) a mother drowns her children with her own hands? Read the above comments again; there’s a chasm of a difference between a woman who’s coerced or brain-washed into “having a harmless and morally acceptable procedure done” and having an abortionist be honest and say, “This way, to the room where we’ll kill your baby for a fee!” Have some sense, man! How long have you lived in this country, anyway, that you don’t know this?
Paladin, once again, if the fetus is considered the same as a born person, then why should there be exceptions such as rape and incest?
There should NOT be an exception for rape and incest. Where did you get the idea that I thought otherwise?
Carla, if abortion becomes legal, yes, the woman should be charged as well as the doctor. Some antiabortion people have used the analogy that the doctor performing the abortion is a “hit man”. Well, those who hire a “hit man” are also responsible. The fact is if the fetus is a person, having the same rights as a born child, then why should there be a distinction at that point between a woman having an illegal abortion and a woman killing a born child? Also, if abortion is criminalized, the clinics will close up and it will not be easy to find a doctor willing to perform an abortion like it is now in many places. Hence, the woman will have to put more effort into her decision.
BTW, my statement to Palladin about classifying women as victims was not meant to hurt or offend you.
At town hall meetings, I have asked antiabortion legislators about the doctor only punishment and it basically put them on the spot because they hadn’t thought about the inconsistency involved. And, many attending agreed with me. In fact, two legislators decided to withdraw their co-sponsorship as a result unless the proposed bill was modified to include punishment for the woman.
Now, do I want to have the women or the doctor punished? No. I do not want abortion to be criminalized.
Paladin, the first two paragraphs of your most recent post are ridiculous. While you want to defend your inconsistency, I still maintain that if abortion is criminalized (illegal), then the woman should NOT go unpunished but the doctor should. If you can’t see that, you are not worth responding to. Is the fetus a person or not?
And in the second two paragraphs of your most recent post, why the distinction? If a woman kills a born child, there is no distinction (save mental illness supposedly like Andrea Yates).
Fact is, Paladin, you want your cake and eat it, too.
Concerning the rape and incest exceptions, in one of my posts, it was a comparison to the inconsistency of the punishment only for the doctor example.
At any rate, I hope abortion is never criminalized in this country, period. But if it is, there needs to be consistency.
If abortion becomes illegal I think you meant in your first sentence.
That is your opinion and I disagree.
I am not easily offended. So no worries there Jason.
Women are told constantly that its just a blob, just tissue, just cells. Just a routine medical procedure. I was denied an ultrasound. I was lied to by omission.
Instead of jail how about the prolifers continue to do what we are doing? Offering free ultrasounds, (Upwards of 80% of women choose life after seeing their babies)help, support and hope. How about adoption?
Hello dear Paladin!
Always good to see you!!
Jason wrote:
Paladin, the first two paragraphs of your most recent post are ridiculous.
Your opinion is noted and logged… as is your inability (or unwillingness) to read anything of substance that has been written on that point.
While you want to defend your inconsistency, I still maintain that if abortion is criminalized (illegal), then the woman should NOT go unpunished but the doctor should.
(I assume you mean that the doctor “should” be PUNISHED? Your wording gives the impression that you think the doctor should go UNpunished.)
Yes, you maintain it… and I assert that you are being thoughtless and illogical in maintaining it. For example: would you punish a woman who had an abortion at gun-point, against her will? If the legality and the act are all that concern you, then you would, wouldn’t you? If not, WHY not? Please do be specific, and don’t simply blow off the question with more hand-waving and foot-stomping.
If you can’t see that, you are not worth responding to.
You’re welcome to reply or not, as you please, of course. And I “see” that you’ve asserted your opinion, repeatedly and forcefully; you’ve simply neglected to prove your case, even one jot. Would you be so kind as to do so?
Is the fetus a person or not?
He/she is, yes.
And in the second two paragraphs of your most recent post, why the distinction?
Because the two cases are, in fact, distinct. It is a plain fact (do look it up; don’t take my word for this) that guilt, even in the eyes of the law, is connected to the agent’s freedom, awareness, and intent. One who is forced at gun-point to hold the money-bag for a thief is not treated identically to the master-mind of the robbery, yes? One who holds the gun for a robbery because the other thieves have threatened to slit her child’s throat if she refuses would never be treated identically to the master-minds by any sane person. A woman who was told to “push a red button, which will automatically clean up the next room” would not be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law if she were unaware of the fact that the button released poison gas to kill all the Jews in the next room.
Does that clarify, even a bit? Your insistence that freedom, knowledge and awareness are utterly irrelevant to “blame and legal punishment” is sheer nonsense; you can’t possibly believe that, can you? I’m hoping you’re saying it out of a reflexive and thoughtless desire to defend your view-point, and not because you actually believe it…
If a woman kills a born child, there is no distinction (save mental illness supposedly like Andrea Yates).
See above. You name one possible distinction (i.e. insanity, which impairs freedom), while ignoring all others which don’t suit your personal tastes… and that’s simply not reasonable, friend.
Fact is, Paladin, you want your cake and eat it, too.
Balderdash, sir. See above; I want blame assigned where it’s due: no more, and no less. If a woman truly is guilty of 1st-degree murder of an unborn child (i.e. had sufficient knowledge, freedom and awareness), then she should be convicted of 1st-degree murder. You seem to be suggesting that every last woman (who isn’t clinically insane) would fall into that category, and that it’s utterly impossible for there to be exceptions. That does not reflect reality in the least.
Concerning the rape and incest exceptions, in one of my posts, it was a comparison to the inconsistency of the punishment only for the doctor example.
Well… given that I do not support such exceptions, it’s a non-issue here, yes?
At any rate, I hope abortion is never criminalized in this country, period.
All right: why not?
But if it is, there needs to be consistency.
I agree. But it cannot be a mindless, broad-brush, reductionist consistency in which there are no possible accommodations to circumstances. That very idea is puerile.
:) Honoured, Milady Carla… from one of your biggest fans!
Must dash… back tomorrow, God willing!
You know Paladin, reading this exchange, I’m beginning to realize the (a) problem that pro-choicers like Jason are making. He is attempting to argue from our premises using our logic to show that we are inconsistent, a fair strategy indeed. However, what I am noticing (and have noticed with other pro-chociers who make this same argument) is that they think that having a pro-life logic means that you are an absolutist when it comes to morality (so far so good) but THAT in turn means that you don’t make any distinctions. “Killing is killing is killing to an absolutist, right? Either you kill or you don’t, period. Either it’s wrong or it’s right, period. I’m thinking like an absolutist.” But no, this is incorrect. Believing in absolutes does not at all imply that we throw distinctions out teh window. And that is Jason’s (and other pro-choicers who make this false supposition) problem- by attempting to argue using a pro-life mindset, they believe that this necessarily entails that we don’t make distinctions and that every little letter of the law is either black or white, period. The point of this all is that there is room for careful and nuanced distinctions on an absolutist POV, and if the pro-choicer refuses to recognize that we pro-lifers believe that, there isn’t much more that can be said.
@Jason,
This question has been asked so many times before, but what term would you use if a woman is murdered and she’s pregnant? What was done to her preborn child? Is it murder, accidental miscarriage, what? Perps have been charged for the murder of two.
Paladin,
I am one of YOUR biggest fans good sir!!
Carry on.
“they (pro-choice people) believe that this necessarily entails that we don’t make distinctions and that every little letter of the law is either black or white, period.”
Great observation Bobby Bambino. Most people I’ve met who consider themselves pro-choice display serious splitting and projection. Perfect example above.
Eric, the woman should be punished for having an illegal abortion. But the fact is prolifers are hypocrites. I agree with Jason. If the unborn and born are to be treated equally, not punishing a woman who has an illegal abortion says the unborn is worth less than the born child killed.
In order not to be hypocritical yourself, Randy, you dare not forget about punishing those fathers and others who know about the pregnant mom and either coerce/or do nothing to stop her from killing the child. Wouldn’t you agree that I should be punished if I know someone is planning to kill a child and I do nothing?
Did you know sometimes a pregnant mom is coerced by more than one person? Do you know the percentage of moms coerced to abort?
Oh, well. At least with your idea, it’s more jobs for the construction industry. We’ll need more jail space.
Paladin, I appreciate your reasoning. But you’re wasting your time. According to these types, there is only ever one degree of murder, one flat punishment for all cases (regardless of things like intent, state of mind, coercion, etc), no account for the reality of the political process, and no account for relative danger to society in a law enforcement system with limited resources. From these premises, there are only three acceptable responses to the question “How should women be punished for illegal abortions?”:
– Life in prison for every woman who has an abortion. Conclusion: Pro-lifers are heartless monsters that just love spending their days locking women in small cages.
– Never punish the woman under any circumstances. Conclusion: Pro-lifers are dishonest hypocrites that don’t really believe the unborn have the same moral status as more mature humans.
– “I don’t know”, as seen in a certain viral Michael Moore style Youtube video. Conclusion: Pro-lifers are just clueless idiots.
You didn’t choose any one of the three acceptable answers, so they’ll just ignore your arguments and put you into one of the categories (the second one, it would seem).
For those actually interested in what pro-life experts have to say on this issue, checking out these links wouldn’t be a bad idea:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/221742/one-untrue-thing/nro-symposium#
http://serge13102.libsyn.com/webpage/lti-podcast-episode-11
Jason and Randy,
Awesome links posted by Navi above. Please read them.
Praxedes and Navi, keep on making excuses for the inconsistencies in the prolife world.
Seriously, the truth of the matter is many prolifers really care more about criminalizing abortion because so the woman will have to take some responsibility for having sex. The fetus be damned.
We are talking about ILLEGAL abortion. If the woman knows abortion is illegal, then how can she really be a victim in 98% of the cases?
Face it, it’s really about the sex, except prolifers simply don’t want to admit it.
So reasoned explanations are now “excuses”?
The woman should take some responsibility for having sex if a child is conceived as a result. So should the man involved. The gestating human being would not be damned if they DID take responsibility for their actions. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact. That’s our point.
If the woman knows abortion is illegal, and illegal abortion is more dangerous than legal abortion, she’s putting herself in physical danger. That indicates a self-injurious behavioral tendency in addition to her homicidal intention. That indicates diminished mental capacity or extreme coercion. That means she would be a victim, too.
No, it’s really not about sex. I personally don’t give a squat about anyone’s sex life. However, if a child is conceived, we’re not just talking about someone’s sex life. We’re talking about a child’s life.
Face it, it’s really about the sex, except prolifers simply don’t want to admit it.
That would explain why pro-lifers also generally oppose infanticide, euthanasia, and embryonic stem cell research (where the embryos destroyed are never conceived through actual intercourse).
Then again, Amanda Marcotte probably doesn’t actually mention any of that. So I can forgive you for not knowing any better.
Seriously, the truth of the matter is many prolifers really care more about criminalizing abortion because so the woman will have to take some responsibility for having sex.
I know right, Randy.
Glad you figured that out. Most of us prolifers don’t care about humans once they are born either. Fetus Worshipers R Us.
I’m afraid I’ll have to call “troll” on Randy; this tenacious refusal and/or incapacity to engage beyond the reactionary “bumper-sticker” level doesn’t bode well for any serious discussion of the issues with him.
Randy: “Face it, it’s really about the sex…”
Of all the sophomoric generalizations…
The fetus be damned.
Finally! The pro-choice motto surfaces.
Paladin, continue to get your sexual gratification from being obsessed with fetuses.
Randy,
Oops. You’re projecting on the wrong site again. Here’s where you need to be:
http://saa-recovery.org/
Praxedes: :) An eloquent and good catch!
Randy: well… it was generous of you to confirm your species (troll); at least the small bit of uncertainty is now gone! Go haunt another bridge with your prurient eruptions, will you?
Randy, if you insist on trolling, would it kill you to be somewhat original?
jcgirl1979, you’re right. there were hardly any kids there, thanks to contraception.
I totally agree with your stance… and the work you are doing i.e. abortion = murder… except, if your goal is to get people to know their church is pro-choice, it isn’t necessarily efficient to show people graphic images. I used to be pro-choice, but those images actually just made me stronger in my stance. What broke me down was a love for Christ. You most definitely are doing a good work by showing people their church supports this though. I suggest handing out flyers with the websites that show their church supports this (minus graphic photos).
“A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong castle” Proverbs 18:19
God bless