Jim Caviezel: ‘I just don’t see abortion as helping women.’
by Big Hollywood
Catholic Digest has a fascinating interview with Jim Caviezel, star of “The Stoning of Soraya M.” Here’s an excerpt:
This guy I know said, ‘You’re pro-life. Tell you what, if you really believe in what you speak, adopt a child — not any child, he’s got to have a serious deficiency,’ (and I will become pro-life). He never changed his (position), but it convicted me. I don’t think he thought I would step up to the plate.
I was listening to Johnny Mathis the other day and I said, “What an amazing voice.” I have yet to hear another person sound like Johnny Mathis. How are we so arrogant to think the 51.5 million babies who have died in this country… Look, I am for helping women. I just don’t see abortion as helping women. And I don’t love my career that much to say, “I’m going to remain silent on this.” I’m defending every single baby who has never been born. And every voice that would have been unique like Johnny Mathis’. How do we know that we didn’t kill the very child who could have created a particular type of medicine that saves other lives?
There’s much more about both “Soraya M.” and “The Passion of the Christ.”
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
227 Comments
It would be interesting to know (from God's perspective) what so many of these children could have done for the world that weren't given the chance.
Honorable man. Quite rare, now a days.
I'm a guy…. but you gotta love this guy! Please, please put him in more movies, I thought he was superbly cast in the "Passion". Now I reckon I gotta see "Soraya M." too. Actually, I feel kind of bad I haven't yet come to think of it.
Caviezel is one heck of a good guy. It's amazing he hasn't been publicly stoned by the tolerant left on the Sunset Strip for his "crazy views". I think any reasonable person can agree with his statement. Even a pro-abortion activist must admit his assertion is correct and the only answer is that that's the "choice" the would -be mother makes and she has to live with that choice forever.
Just because we can, does not mean we should.
I always scratch my head at people who think pro-lifers must take care of children pro-aborts don't want or don't think are desirable. Uh, why? It's still just absconding responsibility. In any case, many pro-life people do adopt and I've read that the waiting list to adopt children with special needs/disabilities is pretty long.
How about this for a challenge? Pro-choice folks work the slop buckets for a day at the abortion mill.
Those babies that where aborted would have taken a place in our society and things could have been very different then they currently are!
If abortion were allowed at the turn of the last century, I wouldn't be here. I don't know one woman who has had an abortion who is OK with having had an abortion. Luckily, I am not one. If they say that they are fine with their decision, they are lying. I have seen that decision ruin people, and I'm not talking in huge dramatic shifts, more in slow decline all the way denying that it was that decision that started it. The same liberals who are saying 'hands off a woman's body" when it comes to abortion are the ones who want government intervention in healthcare decisions. The irony and the arrogance is both ridiculous and appalling. Hands off my body indeed.
Now, if they ever could come up with an almost full proof way to prevent pregnancy…./sarc
Huge Jim Caviezel fan here!
He was in a motorcycle accendent recently. Does anyone know if he's okay?
Someone here who can reach Mr. Caviezel should invite him to write for BH, even if just occasionally.
Wow, Jim must not be looking for more work…he's got some big marbles to speak up the way he does.
If Jim has a problem with abortions then he shouldn't have one. As long as he doesn't try to tell a woman what to do then no problem.
Then women should have absolutely no opinions about anything men do. Fair's fair.
How many other visitors have done what you have done: read the Bible cover to cover? It would change their lives as it did yours.
I've always had a bit of a crush on Caviezel. Now I have respect for him. .
nebby, it's not Jim that's going to be telling you, it's Uncle Sam.
That is such an awesome statement from Mr. Caviezel! Just like women posing nude in magazines I believe abortion degrades a woman because she refuses to be seen by a man as property but she regards her unborn child as her "property" that she can do whatever she wants to with it. Not only does abortion have physical repercussions (it's a major surgery!) but there are many more emotional and psychological issue that arise from having an abortion that the liberals want to hide.
I call myself a suffragette and not a feminist because even though I believe in equality and could be considered a feminist, to me the feminist movement that came out of the sexual revolution in the 1970's left a lot of the foundations that the original feminists stood on. For instance being feminine and still being equal as well as abortion. This is what Elizabet Cady Stanton, a suffragette, had to say about abortion: "When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."
Eliza Bisbee Duffey (another suffragette who believed in abortion until later on in her life) said this in a rather length chapter entitled "The Limitation of Offspring" in her book The Relations of the Sexes printed in 1876: "Nature has put this little creature—this small man or woman, as yet all undeveloped—in a place of seeming security, and has placed every guard around it to keep it safely until the hour shall come when it is fully prepared to make a complete change in its mode of existence. If by intent or accident it is disturbed before that period, the whole of nature’s plans are thwarted, and nothing is in readiness…. Natural parturation may have its perils, but unnatural parturation slays its hundreds where that slays one. Yet young married women consider [induced] miscarriage a trifling affair!….It is a sin against nature…. And it is a crime in the fullest extent of the term, because it is murder ….But no; I must not be too hard upon all these unwomanly women. Their ignorance must be held responsible for their sins. And men must share the responsibility too…."
Good for Jim. I can't help but notice the two things the Left is most against – war and having a child – are the two most sacrificial acts a human can face. No wonder we have a big chunk of selfish, clueless population.
That is such an awesome statement from Mr. Caviezel! Just like women posing nude in magazines I believe abortion degrades a woman because she refuses to be seen by a man as property but she regards her unborn child as her "property" that she can do whatever she wants to with it. Not only does abortion have physical repercussions (it's a major surgery!) but there are many more emotional and psychological issue that arise from having an abortion that the liberals want to hide.
I call myself a suffragette and not a feminist because even though I believe in equality and could be considered a feminist, to me the feminist movement that came out of the sexual revolution in the 1970's left a lot of the foundations that the original feminists stood on. For instance being feminine and still being equal as well as abortion. This is what Elizabet Cady Stanton, a suffragette, had to say about abortion: "When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."
Eliza Bisbee Duffey (another suffragette who believed in abortion until later on in her life) said this in a rather length chapter entitled "The Limitation of Offspring" in her book The Relations of the Sexes printed in 1876: "Nature has put this little creature—this small man or woman, as yet all undeveloped—in a place of seeming security, and has placed every guard around it to keep it safely until the hour shall come when it is fully prepared to make a complete change in its mode of existence. If by intent or accident it is disturbed before that period, the whole of nature’s plans are thwarted, and nothing is in readiness…. Natural parturation may have its perils, but unnatural parturation slays its hundreds where that slays one. Yet young married women consider [induced] miscarriage a trifling affair!….It is a sin against nature…. And it is a crime in the fullest extent of the term, because it is murder ….But no; I must not be too hard upon all these unwomanly women. Their ignorance must be held responsible for their sins. And men must share the responsibility too…."
I just read an interview with a pregnant Kourtney Kardashian on Foxnews.com in which she said her doctor told her something like "You will never regret having the baby, but you may regret not having the baby." One of the smartest things I ever read that came out of her mouth.
I think that if Jim C. DID step up & adopt a special needs child, his friend still wouldn't change his position. I thought it was a silly request anyway. We're not talking about going down to the local animal shelter and rescuing an abused puppy. This child, depending on their needs, would take a level of dedication and commitment that not every person has. I'm pro-life but I'm smart enough to know that I could not provide a good home to a needy child. That may sound like a cop out & an excuse but it's not. It's being realistic and it would be unfair to the child to adopt him and then not provide the best I could for him. I suppose a pro abortion person would say that's the reason we need abortions (better to never live that live a neglected life) but it's not the same thing and it's not always true. If these babies aren't even given the chance to live, then we'll never know how their lives might have turned out and how they might have changed the world.
thank you
Oh, and maybe if guys had cajones like Mr. Caviezel and spoke up, fatherhood wouldn't be viewed as some useless part time job.
Wow – great argument Socrates. How bout we try that same argument in a different venue? "If Mr. Lincoln has a problem with slavery then he shouldn't own one. As long as he doesn't try to tell a slaveowner what to do then no problem."
Okay, so if nothing else at least this guy puts his money where his mouth is. Gotta respect that.
Now, then…
"How do we know that we didn’t kill the very child who could have created a particular type of medicine that saves other lives?"
Firstly, isn't that kind of a utilitarian argument – implying that if we DID know and the answer was "no" the conclusion might be different? And are true pro-life believers 'okay' with that?
Secondly, WHY does no one ever have the stones to call people out on this particular commonly-made argument. Sure, it MIGHT be the next Einstein… but it also has the same exact potential to be the next Hitler. Or bin Laden. You just as easily be SAVING millions of lives. It's every bit as logical an argument.
A new American hero. Thank you Mr. Caviezel.
Gotta love pro aborts who say men have no right to an opinion on abortion. Guess they shouldn't weight in on anything at all then.
I do know quite a few men who use their gender ais as a cop out.
Real Men Don't Abort.
Way to go, Jim Caviezel.
The great divide on the issue of human life comes down to this: Those who declare themselves "pro-choice" see each new human life as competition for an ever-diminishing share of a shrinking pie of resources. Caviezel sides with those who recognize the unique gift which each new human life brings to the table.
We see a benefit; the Culture of Death sees a burden.
Actually it was a "popular" underground at the turn of the century. In my research I read that one woman had multiple abortions she did herself by drinking an herbal remedy and thought it was like drowning blind kittens.
(This was in a book written in the latter 1800's)
Someone really close to me had one 27 years ago. She went on to get married and have 4 wonderful children. It took her about 24 years to come to turns with it. That is part Planned Parenthood doesn't discuss.
Gotta love pro aborts who say men have no right to an opinion on abortion.
LOL I know…if he had no part in the conception that would be one thing but usually any female who goes through invitro doesn't want to conceive the child so she can then turn around and abort it.
So I guess if I'm opposed to bank robberies I shouldn't commit one, right? But I guess if YOU are okay with robbing banks, how dare I tell you not to. Or if I think animal cruelty is wrong, I shouldn't set my dogs on fire, right? But it would be fine for you to torture your pets? And I shouldn't judge you or tell you not to? See how easy that is?
All the intellectual depth of a tampax wrapper.
rant? hardly. A much more articulate response than I could have come up with.
And it makes me smile to know that there are still a great many in the medical profession who have not forgotten why they are there.
Interesting that the abortion proponent insisted Caviezel adopt a child with a severe deficiency when the vast majority of abortions are done solely out of inconvience and not some "deficiency" with the child (not that a deficiency is reason to abort at all). I agree with an earlier commenter too: Why don't the proabortion people work a week at an abortion clinic disposing of the bodies?
Thank you for your kind comment.
This a topic that has fallen in my lap over the past few years in my Speech, Sociology, and History courses so all of that information just exploded into one huge comment.
(I think the BH monster ate my reply to you so hopefully it will work this time!)
Thank you for your kind comment.
This topic is something that has fallen into my lap on several occasions in different college courses so all of that knowledge just exploded into a gigantic comment.
You're being sarcastic, but I wouldn't be surprised if the pro-slsvery Democrats actually DID use that argument!
I agree with his posistion on abortion, however, the arguement that what if the unborn babies were meant to find a cure for cancer? This is silly thinking. If so, I think we all agree we wish Hitler had of been aborted. The reality is that the vast majority of abortions are by people who wouldn't be a responsible parent anyhow, therefore, the odds of that child growing up to be a productive member of society are not likely. Of course there are exceptions, but we are talking about odds here. The key is birth control. If there are no pregnancies, there are no abortions. To expect people to refrain from sex is silly and ignores human nature.
well done
i hate to sound flippant here but at least STDs still provide a bit of disincentive to dnagerous behavior.
well done
i hate to sound flippant here but at least STDs still provide a bit of disincentive to dangerous behavior.
I've never been able to understand that argument from the pro-abortion crowd. If I have to adopt a crippled orphan to justify my views against abortion, then shouldn't THEY bring a rapist or murderer into their homes to justify their views against the dealth penalty?
Exactly Bill. Can you imagine what we might have missed? The next Beethoven? Another Einstein? A new Cary Grant? I can't even fathom what we've missed by these lives.
"If Jim has a problem with abortions then he shouldn't have one."
A man doesn't have an abortion. Show me one who has had it.
Tampax wrapper, indeed.
Jim Caviezel. A true class act. Not only enormously talented, but a man with solid footing and bold integrity. He reminds me of the Golden Era in Hollywood, with men like Jimmie Stewart – who left the glitz and glamor to fight for his country – or John Wayne – who never curved his convictions to appease his dissenters. Or Clint Eastwood, coming later in life, who by the sheer glint of his eye can beat back liberal absurdity.
We need more men in the public eye, not to mention actors, like Caviezel.
Jim blew me away in "Thin Red Line'" and then again in "Passion" ,we need to see more roles for him !
And yes, he needs a regular post on 'Big Hollywood " !
If a woman goes out in the middle of a busy street with a knife a starts slashing herself, we should not try to stop her?
Where did this silly notion that a woman can do ANYTHING she wants to do with her body and expect no backlash come from?
Jim Caviezel is certainly one of the Very Good Guys.
You know what is VERY interesting is, the same people who are pro abortion are the same lunatics that chastise us for cutting trees down. They actually think a tree is more valuable than a baby. They will actually say that what if mankind cuts down the forest that could have cured AIDS (cancer doesn't count because it is not a homo disease). They dont care if some aborted baby would have the been the one to cure cancer or aids or whatever else is out there. Just abort that baby because they don't count, but don't you DARE cut down that tree.
how 'bout from the kid's perspective? This was hard to find so I hope the link works…
http://www.amazon.com/gp/recsradio/radio/B0000031...
he was excellent in the Thin Red Line. one needs to watch the movie a couple of times to see the full scope of what Malick was actually attempting to accomplish. it falls short, but it's a good effort, and parts of the movie are hauntingly beautiful.
Thank you.
One would hope it would deter them from having sex…
Part II…
Development is a continuous process that starts at Fertilization and ends with the death of the individual.
So, in these times of ‘HOPE’ and “CHANGE’, we can’t afford to remain uneducated and look the other way. Every abortion kills an innocent human individual: that is horrible!
I do not care what Religion you are: Just answer this question: Are all human individuals equal? Yes or no.
If you are not a Nazi or a slave owner you must answer YES!
There is only one way forward: do not kill the babies, ban abortion and support the women who are forced to abort their own children, often by Planned Parenthood (an institution that profits from performing abortions).
I remember years ago an elderly neighbor saying she still thought about and regretted a baby aborted when she was a teenager. She had several children and many grandchildren, but still said prayers for the soul of the dead baby.
Part I
When it comes to the Abortion issue, I wish people could sit down, take a deep breath and consider the following: This is not really a religious issue.
If this was strictly about a ‘Religious” belief I would say: you know, you should do as your religion tells you, because I do not think people should impose their religious views on others.
But someone is getting killed in these abortions, and it is not a Religious belief the one being thorn to pieces: it is an individual of the human species.
You do not need to have two PhDs in Developmental Biology to check this out: you can go and investigate this by reading and understanding basic embryology: Science has demonstrated over and over that the human embryo –from implantation onwards- is an individual of the Human species.
This is not an individual developing into Human, but a human individual undergoing development.
Don't even get me started on PETA and their hypocrisy on this issue.
"Don't kill the baby calf because it's soooo cute!" *rolls eyes*
"Now, if they ever could come up with an almost full proof way to prevent pregnancy…./sarc"
They have. It's called marriage. (snark back at ya!
indeed, such preparation will never be wasted.
People who lose hands, feet, arms and legs usually find it rather traumatic, have phantom pains and are known to get therapy in order to cope with the loss. Yet, Pro Abortion people wants us to believe that when a woman has a baby killed an sucked out of them, it won't have any adverse effects? What a horrible lie.
Actually I agree. It''s immoral to force a women to have an abortion and to prevent her from having an abortion. Hear me out.
There is always going to be abortion. This issue will never go away, as sad as that is to say, it's true. We will always disagree on the subject. It's part of the human condition.
Here's what I propose: repeal Roe v. Wade, because its a judicial nightmare and makes the Supreme Court look like clowns – no disrespect to clowns. That kicks the issue back to the state levels, and to the voters. Some states will completely out law abortion, others will allow abortion on demand. Most will end up some where in the middle. And then, if you want, and I do, do what ever you can to convince pregnant women, as individuals, to choose life.
It's far from perfect, I know, but its the best I have been able to come up with.
My girlfriend and I had to search entire Kansas City area to find the “The Stoning of Soraya M." movie. The Glenwood in Overland Park had it for about a week. Powerful movie. Excellent acting. Pulled you in to story immediately. She and I were affected by it…..and incredibly sad that only about a dozen people were in the tiny theater to see it…..You are a real man Jim. You walk the Talk!
(You should see this film).
Wonderful post.
I completely agree with this. I don't look at the life of a child as a religious issue, though I'm surely branded a religious nut if I make my pro-life stance known. It's an issue of life, which I believe begins at conception. Left to its own devices that "bundle of cells" the pro-death side will flush out of a woman's body without a second thought will develop into a healthy child almost every time. I get really tired of all the excuses. I think it's a pretty solid guarantee that most aborted babies are not the product of rape or incest. They're the product of people who can't bother to think about something other than their own convenience.
The flip side of this though are the men who angrily say that if a woman doesn't have an abortion, then she should be willing to take on the responsibility of the child on her own if the guy wants to abort the child. I got into a big argument with a guy over this. I stuck to the point that if you don't want the responsibility of a child, then you better keep your pants on. He wouldn't acknowledge the point at all though. I guess it's just another example of the liberal mentality that no one should be held accountable for anything.
I just read this post:
"If Jim has a problem with abortions then he shouldn't have one. As long as he doesn't try to tell a woman what to do then no problem. "
This statement reminded me of a very old 'Pro-slavery' slogan: "If you do not want to have a slave don't own one, but do not impose your views on us".
It doesn't matter if you are a man or a woman, gay or straight, black or white: Honest people have the moral obligation to stand up and speak for those who can't, and to demand that all Governments recognize the Universal Principle stating that 'ALL INDIVIDUALS ARE EQUAL".
Come on people, these are NOT the Middle ages! Get educated, reach out and make this a better World!
Amen to that! I love Susan B. Anthony! Plus you reminded me, I want to dress as a suffragist for Halloween! Better get busy on that costume. And since we are quoting suffragist, try this one my daughter turned in for a class assignment last year – It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union – Susan B. Anthony
The right to one's body is not absolute (most common pro-choice/pro-death argument is that "it is the woman's body, and her choice.").
Again, the right to one's own body is not absolute. Don't believe me? Try to commit suicide. It is illegal. If you fail, you will be arrested, charged, and committed.
For me it put all the missing pieces together. It filled in the gaps of what I knew, what I felt, and what I need to do. I still enjoy the studying and learning.
I love that quote by Susan B. Anthony!
This year for Halloween I'm going as Amelia Earhart! (I decided to go as her way before I knew there was a movie coming out about her.)
Thank you!
Good grief…let's hope that guy never procreates…we don't need anyone related to him running around in the world screwing things up.
"To expect people to refrain from sex is silly and ignores human nature."
No its not human nature, its animal instinct. As humans, we have reason, we are better than the base animals we started out. A male dog that has reached puberty can not ignore a female dog in heat. They are hard wired to reproduce. As a human male I'm quite capable of walking down the street with out jumping any and every woman I come across. I have the ability to reason and see why that's wrong.
The question is whether or not I chose to do what's right.
It was so interesting to listen to the some of the very people who exhibited vocal outrage at Vick for badly abusing and killing helpless dogs, but did not condemn the similar circumstances or reveal even mild concern at the ongoing bloody slaughter of thousands of innocent, helpless babies who are violently tortured and dismembered every day! To me their behavior is beyond rational.
Jim Caviezel knows who he is, what he believes, and that he was created by God. Certainly he has a right to express his opinion. Has the Hollywood Left ever not screamed their liberal views? And he doesn't have to adopt a special needs baby to be pro-life. The many millions of babies who have been snuffed out are in the presence of God, but that does not excuse those who ended their lives. There will be an accounting. Jim is right to condemn abortion and he's right that it certainly is not helping women. May God bless his career, as this gives him a louder voice to speak.
To follow your thought would you say Charles Manson or others of his ilk equal to you? I do believe all are born equal it is actions of a person is a differentiator.
Excellent point.
There will always be debates about where human life fundamentally begins and when society should recognize this even in terms of human rights.
While this debate goes on, its important that we agree about the merits of sexual responsibility. Many on the side of abortion rights point at the misery of life experience that unwanted children may be given. Well, such misery may be avoided if would-be parents act responsibly and use birth control or abstained from sex all together – whichever works best for the parties involved.
Certainly, if more people applied careful judgement about birth control, society may avoid seeing more "Hitlers" come into this world.
We Hold These Truths to be self evident, all men (people) are created equal, and they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, among them, LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.
As humans, we do not posses the unalienable right to determine an unborn child is not a human. That violates their right to life.
I'm trying to remember back, when the Passion came out, I think Jim Caviezel was on Rush's show for a rare interview (Rush does not like to share the spot light). He said when they were filming the scenes when he was on the cross, there was a thunderstorm and the cross was struck by lightening. He said something like he looked up and said "Was I that bad?"
I'm a bit surprised more posters here didn't know how conservative Jim Caviezel really is. Loved him in "The Count of Monte Cristo".
I once read (and I know you can't believe everything you read) that Caviezel refuses to do nude scenes in movies, out of respect for his wife. How's that for standing up for your beliefs???
He is a very, very impressive individual, and I hope to see more of him in the future.
Isn't it odd the view of Pro-Abortion people? The example given would suggest that Pro-Abortion people do not think much of life after birth. They obviously think certain lives are not worth living and it would be better to kill this person.
Of course you can't see how it helps women. Look in a mirror, are you a woman and are you over 40? For those who don't remember the 70's the issue for abortion wasn't to have the right to kill your baby. It was about whether the GOVERNMENT has the right to tell a woman what to do with her life and her body. And back then if a woman was raped by her Republican Father/Brother she had to use a wire coat hanger and then died in an alley. Surprising how now that those who want the GOVERNMENT out of their lives want it back in the lives of their women. Gals? It's your body, you want to give control to the GOVERNMENT I don't give a damn. I think abortion is murder but I'll never have to make that decision. Back in the 60's I was considered a CONSERVATIVE because of my support for the government, our troops and our way of life. I haven't changed but conservatives have and I can no longer take part in the hatefest that the party has become. All a bunch of raging, pyschotic hypocrites getting tingly wheniver Rush talks. BARF!
the debate on when life begins and acting responsibly , birth control etc……….we had that discussion over and over since 1973
the people who see death as the only solution are loud and forceful
You can be pro-life and still not want the government involved with the medical decisions of a woman. For those of you who don't remember the 70's it was the fight to keep government out of these decisions that created Roe vs Wade and NOT the desire to kill unborn babies. There, will this pass the Big Hollwyood Big Censor board?
[...] the original post here: Jim Caviezel: ‘I just don’t see abortion as helping women.’ This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
Exactly. These issues should never have been decided by judicial fiat. They should be decided at the state level by elected legislators. If you don't like the laws, you can work to change them.
I totally disagree with your opinion that it is immoral to prevent a woman from having an elective abortion, however, and your drawing an equivalence between that and forcing a woman to have one is ridiculous.
You're correct EdSki. If you have a membership to Rush's site, you can access the full transcript here: http://tinyurl.com/lpa6d8
Otherwise, here is the part you mentioned (from FEB 27, 2004). Also, Rush didn't even set this up with him. He states at the beginning of the call that Jim took the initiative to call Rush up on his own. Pretty cool.
*****
RUSH: You were struck by lightning as well, weren't you?
CAVIEZEL: Yes. I got struck by lightning, and (laughter) about three seconds before it hit I knew it was going to happen. It was like you were in the eye of a storm or something, like in a hurricane.
RUSH: Did you wonder (laughter) what was going on when these things were happening?
CAVIEZEL: Yeah, I looked up in the sky and said, "You didn't like that take, eh?"
RUSH: (Laughing) You know, I have read that Mel Gibson said to you when he offered you the role that it might be your last.
CAVIEZEL: Yeah, he did.
RUSH: Is that because of the nature of the controversy?
CAVIEZEL: I think so. But any time you're going to cover something like this, people are easily going to be offended. The guy that I chose to play didn't go walking around saying, "Hey, be a good person." "Hey, what are you telling me be a good person for? By God, let's kill him." He went after a regime, and there are many regimes, and still in the church and in the government, and he told the truth. And that's what I was interested in playing. So when I met with Mel Gibson, whether it was Mel or anyone else, it didn't matter to me. What was important was that we stayed with the gospels. That was too sacred to me for any director.
RUSH: And this isn't. Did you have any doubts at all before you said "yes" to this?
CAVIEZEL: Um, yeah, I mean, but I never let my fear rule me in what I'm going to do in my life. I didn't want to get to the end of and say, "Gee I wish I would have done this and that." Braveheart is one of my favorite Mel Gibson films, and that's what I liked about it, and he talked about, "When you get to the end of your life, would you exchange one moment from this day to that for one chance to come back here and tell our enemies that you may take our lives but you can never take our freedom." And something like that rang true to me a long time ago, and that piece of work was inspired about this story. Many a great stories that you see including the Lord of the Rings, are inspired from this story. It's the greatest love story ever told.
The abortion excuse – 'a woman has a right to her own body' – totally falls flat. That's because the unborn child is NOT the woman's body – the child is its own body that simply happens to exist for 9 months inside the woman's. And as a separate body from the woman's, the child's body has rights. The woman may choose to terminate her own life – but she has no right to terminate someone else's. No matter how you cut it, killing someone other than yourself is a crime. It's called murder. And NO one has a right to murder.
As for Jim Caviezel – damn, you can not imagine how wonderful it is to have an actor you can respect as much as for being an outstanding person as for being an outstanding artist. Oh, that is so wonderful. Thanks, Mr. Caviezel.
I'm glad you like my idea, and I respectfully accept your disagreement. (Imagine what it would be like debating a liberal like this? Polite!)
The moral equivalence between forcing a women to abort and preventing a women from aborting is the act of using force on the individual at all. It's the individual's decision. Not the state. Rather than promote the use of government force, appeal to them as individuals. I predict it will be a lot more effective.
Mr. Caviezel, Courage, honesty and integrity are all that's really required. After that, political persuation just doesn't matter. Thank you for walking the walk!
Here's one for the feminists: Knowing the cultural bias against women in Asia and India, unscrupulous genetic testing firms are aggressively marketing their gender-testing services to the Asian and Indian communities in the United States, Great Britain and Canada. Thus has abortion become the ultimate tool of sex discrimination.
Giving birth to a baby is 10X more dangerous to a woman than an abortion. Figure it out you moron.
you cant really go by that logic though, because statistically speaking it is far more probable that they will end up being a rapist, murderer, criminal, or some other threat to or drain on society. I do think that there are good arguments against abortion, but "what will they become" isnt one of them. There is just too many holes in it
Yet they don't teach kids to avoid the risks anymore, they just teach them how to minimize the risks.
For some reason, it's not appropriate to point out that ABSTINENCE is the only birth control method to be proven absolutely 100% effective against STDs and unwanted pregnancies. We'll tell them about Condoms, we'll tell them about The Pill, but we won't tell them about Keeping Your God Damn Pants On.
It's not a perfect argument.
But I think it's an argument that people come to naturally because they recognize that there is something fundamentally wrong in the mind-set that children are BAD. There is a very strong cultural… I'd say "demand"… that children are consumers, takers, and must not be useful, that it's actually *wrong* for them to be contributors or seen as something that makes us richer. Now, it could be that this started with the desire to get child laborers out of dangerous jobs, but it's gone from there to something that is warped beyond all reason.
If it were just a population issue, just an argument against abortion as population control, it really wouldn't make any sense to argue that the missing children might be creative geniuses, because the logical conclusion would be a need to have as many children as possible. (Pro-abortion as population control is a irrational argument anyway, since there is no reason at all to believe that women don't have just as many total children as they would have).
But the argument that children are BAD is pervasive. They are expensive and disrupt careers and having a child out of season is portrayed as the worst possible thing that can happen. Even WANTED children are portrayed as this huge sacrifice emotionally… not that there is more love, but less attention to go around… and financially… and this is where the odd warped-ness really comes in because there are people who will insist and will chew you out, even, if you suggest that children can be financial contributors to the family OR are a net-gain to the community even in the future when they are grown, much less as "children". Hey, *I* didn't have a child, they will say, I don't need anyone else to have children, nothing in our lives is dependent on on other people having children… which actually makes no economic sense if you think of it… The dynamic nature of our economy, communities, and culture absolutely depends on birth and growth. Not at maximum fecundity rates, but there *has* to be children or we die and are simply *gone*.
And I think that is what most people are responding to when they point out that the children killed, the babies aborted, would have made us richer, not poorer, that they would have been contributors at least as much as they were consumers, and that some of them may have been brilliant. We have not conserved our resources, we've squandered them. Killed them, actually.
No. It's not. However, an abortion is 100% more dangerous to a baby than being born.
I am sick and tired of this liberal dribble about daring pro-life or conservatives to do this or that..and then what?
Is his freind really going to have an ephinany then. I have to do the proving something is wrong? The burden of proof is on us? The problem here is too many of us just accept these idiot liberal premises from the start. Yes, turn toward them as say, why dont you participate in an abortion and then throw the baby in a trash can..then come back and if your still pro-choice..then maybe we can talk further and I will listen.
True, very true. That is what seperates the humans from the animals, our ability to reason.
Very nice indeed!
I am pro-choice, but I'm anti murder which is what abortion is. Wait, you may say, if you are pro-choice how can you be anti abortion? It's simple.. those who claim to be pro-choice aren't really.. they're actually pro-do over.. because the choice comes when you choose to have sex. A possible outcome of sex is a child. A person has to consider that before carrying out the act of sex. if you accept that and do the deed.. then when you get pregnant you say Oh wait.. I don't want to have a baby.. I'll have an abortion.. that's a do over.. not a choice.. the choice came when you had the fun.
Abortion is murder. Collectivist liberals will fight for the right to abort and against the death penalty… which goes to show that the left is on the left side of the bell curve when it comes to reason and brain power.
I am in awe of this guy. As a Catholic it makes me proud that he is a fellow Catholic and it makes me proud he is an American. See boys: This is a real man. Someone who actually says what he means and means what he says. Someone who is unselfish enough to put something bigger ahead of his own career and interests. This is what our younger men should be using as a role model. Not George Clooney or that idiot Bill Maher. Wanna impress a lady? Be like Jim Caveziel. A man who loves God is a man.
You must be logged in to post a comment.