Hillary Clinton’s “guns and religion” moment on abortion
by Carder
Regardless of how one feels about gay rights or the abortion debate, it is interesting that liberals are finally getting around to openly confessing something all of us sort of know — yet few will say out loud: Achieving a liberal social agenda will necessarily require first extirpating many “deep-seated” Christian values and tenets.
~ Matt Lewis, analyzing presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s recent pro-abortion speech to the Women in the World Summit in which she states, “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will, and deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed,” via The Daily Caller, April 24
[HT: Hot Air]
Apr.27, 2015 6:00 am |
Political anti-life bias |
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.
Tell us, Chairman Hil, when will we have to start carrying the little red book??
“(Hitler said) … the Churches must yield to the ‘primacy of the state'” – Joseph Goebbels, 1937
And once again, the a-word isn’t used in her speech.
I was opposed to Hillary, simply because she is opposed to pro-life and children.
But Hillary has not learned from her time under Obama. She seems bent on bringing even more “change” to America.
We have to oppose and defeat her, to any hope of saving America for our children.
Dang… It’s too early for this sort of political alarmism, but she has revealed her stripes. I was hoping that she would at least try to copy the fiscal restraint, bi-partisanship and prosperity of her husband’s era. Alas.
“Achieving a liberal social agenda will necessarily require first extirpating many “deep-seated” Christian values and tenets.” That’s such a great and true quote, and I’m very happy that we are headed this way. Christian values are meaningless to me and my generation. Let’s talk about your “Christian values”.
Let me ask you this question, if the 10 commandments are supposed to guide your moral compass, why did god miss obvious and seemingly important items… like prohibiting slavery? Did it just slip his mind? Was he having a bad day? Doesn’t sound like divine planning to me. It sounds more like human planning… one group trying to control another group.
Gee, freeing the Israelites from slavery in Egypt seems like God spoke quite clearly on the subject.
The New Testament goes even further:
Galatians 3: 27 – 29
For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise.
Colossians 3: 10 – 12
and have put on the new self who is being renewed to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created him renewal in which there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all. So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience
Tell us, Chairman Hil, when will we have to start carrying the little red book?? – that’s President Hil, not chairman. I’m guessing that your reference to a little red book alludes to communism, something hugely remote from anything Hillary, or Obama for that matter, ever espouse or enact.
I was opposed to Hillary, simply because she is opposed to pro-life and children. – well that’s not true.
I don’t see the problem. No one is going to force christians to behave against their beliefs. It’s simply that christians do not have the right to force others to behave according to christian beliefs.
“Slavery,” such as was practiced under the Law of Moses, was a form of indentured service. A guy borrowed money, and promised to work for a term if he didn’t pay it back. Usually, he intended to choose the work, and the loaner understood that. Attaching oneself to the household of a good master was not a bad deal for the slave — he got fed and clothed and cared for, and wasn’t worked too hard for it.
There was a provision in the Law of Moses that allowed the slave to attach himself permanently to a household, if the Master would have him. If his life and work were good, he would not ever have to leave.
What we hate is the practice of “chattel slavery,” in which persons are treated as property…. bought and sold when wanted, and discarded when unwanted. Chattel slavery is like abortion…. it refuses to recognize the human dignity of the victim.
We use the same word slavery to describe both conditions, but they are very different in nature.
The Law of Moses prohibited chattel slavery. Catholic Christianity also condemned chattel slavery. It didn’t become a problem much until the Spanish, Portugese, and English began a lot of sea-faring trade, stealing natives from Africa and America. So in 1537, there was a Papal Bull condemning the slave trade.
Unfortunately, Europe was soon in the throes of the Reformation…. and neither the Protestants nor the Catholic traders paid much attention to the Pope.
But in case — God, His Church, and His Church’s Scripture were all clear about the evil of chattel slavery. But just like homosexuality and abortion, people won’t listen when they don’t want to hear.
People like Hillary.
Del, your god, your church, your scripture may be against homosexuality and abortion but other than for those who believe the same things you do, it’s irrelevant. It doesn’t matter. And given we don’t live in a christian theocracy, it should not impinge on others.
Try telling secular society not to impinge its values on my Christianity.
(Don’t bother responding Reality. I’m not going to read it anyway because your opinion means nothing to me, and it should not impinge on others in this blog.)
Try telling secular society not to impinge its values on my Christianity. – it’s not. When it comes to topics such as abortion, sexuality or marriage no one is forcing you to behave in ways you don’t wish to. Yet you seek to force others to behave in ways they don’t wish to. You’re the one seeking to impinge your values.
And yet there you were responding. Plus what you said needed correcting.
Reality, you sound like a slave trader or slave owner to a slave abolitionist in the mid 19th century, “no one is forcing you to behave in ways you don’t wish to. Yet you seek to force others to behave in ways they don’t wish to. You’re the one seeking to impinge your values.”
Reality, what about non-religious prolifers, like the folks at secularprolife.org? Can you tell me how they are imposing their religion on others?
Is there meant to be a point to what you are saying Eric TL?
JoAnna, if they don’t have religion then they aren’t attempting to impose religion on others, that’s not hard to understand is it?
If that’s the case, reality, why are you accusing pro-lifers of impinging their religious beliefs on others, if opposition to abortion isn’t a religious belief?
In the case of MoJoanne JoAnna, I was addressing her question regarding her christian values. Opposition to abortion is part of the religious beliefs of many religious anti-choicers. We see it here all the time.
[…] all, she “told the audience at the sixth annual Women in The World Summit last week that ‘religious beliefs’ must be changed for the sake of abortion.”) No, she was speaking about cases in which Black men have been killed by police officers. […]
[…] to appreciate the tenuous nature of their pro-life hegemony. Not only is [Hillary] Clinton’s suggestion not absurd, recent history tells us it’s completely […]
Reality, I believe abortion is unsafe for children in the womb. Just like carseat laws and seatbelt laws, laws against drunken driving – abortion is unsafe. It is about safety. I believe in protecting the health of these young children. It seems that you are opposed to their safety. More limbs are saved and more beating hearts are saved through non-abortion than through abortion, so I believe in non-aborting. Non-aborting is the safest option.
Health and safety – psychologically and physically can be extended to other issues as well.
Let’s just examine lifestyles and compare chastity and man-woman marriage in terms of physical health. A man-woman marriage is always physically healthier – longer life w/ less issues with e.coli and damaged body parts and infections. Just as with smoking, risky behavior equates with a shorter lifespan and more health complications. There is nothing religious about wanting to preserve the health of others in our nation. In fact, insurance companies are allowed to charge higher premiums for smokers, and companies can refuse to hire someone who is smoking. Businesses can refuse to serve someone who is carrying a cigarette and smoking one. This is because it is physically unhealthy.