Comments on: Flashpoint! A Woman’s Right To Choose

By: You’ve Come A Long Way Baby? « The American Catholic

You’ve Come A Long Way Baby? « The American Catholic — Thu, 14 May 2009 10:38:11 +0000

[...] is of course that it has been a bonanza for predatory males. As actor Gary Graham in this incredibly moving piece notes: ” So this abortion thing was pretty damn convenient for a guy.” Feminist [...]

By: Trevor Reynolds

Trevor Reynolds — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:45:49 +0000

i saw them at the gibson ampitheartre here in LA they rocked so hard!!! I LOVE U NICK JONAS!! lol wow that does not sound like me.

By: Siarlys_Jenkins

Siarlys_Jenkins — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:09:36 +0000

Yes, here in American we also have godless atheists for life. We also have Catholics for Choice, and Protestants who are pro-choice, and we have pro-life Democrats, some of whom supported Obama for president. In short, this issue, for all kinds of reasons, cuts across all religious and political lines, regardless of what the Party Line may be (did you know some state Republican parties have a Central Committee?), and regardless of what ecclesiastical hierarchies would like to believe.

By: Siarlys_Jenkins

Siarlys_Jenkins — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:05:23 +0000

I don't see the president's name on this bill, although I anticipate he might well sign it if it is passed by both houses of congress. I don't really see anything in there which is not already well settled law. It basically opens up the federal courts for individual women to sue against state practices which might coerce their individual decision. As long as the legal right to make the decision is their's, that makes sense. IF the legal right is taken from them, on the grounds that their pregnancy implicates an entirely independent individual human life, then of course this law would fall with whatever change brought that about. The legal reasoning is much more complex than I would have made it, and I am familiar with the Supreme Court decisions limiting the powers of Congress that they are working their way around.

As to your earlier comments, I think that protecting young pregnant women from exploitation by adult males who want her to have an abortion for their own reasons, is a valid concern. I also think that the kind of information you enumerate should be AVAILABLE, but it should not be FORCED on women who don't want it. To say that providers must offer it is one thing, to say that she is required to watch it all is another. In fact, not all contracts have a waiting period, and we don't all recognize it as a contract with the devil. Abortion should be made rare by developing a culture that treats sexuality with more respect, on the one hand, and by providing pregnant women with the assurance that they have a support network sufficiently strong and reliable to bear and raise their child with confidence. Government has little role in the former, and only a limited role in the latter. There are some things that really do have to come from the private sector, not business, but individual voluntary acts, not even by non-profits, but just people, and of course churches.

By: Nancy

Nancy — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 05:11:54 +0000

You may want to check out Rachel's Vineyard, for women who have miscarried or had an abortion. It is a weekend for healing and to understand God's love for you. I also had a out of wedlock pregnancy 28 years ago, but fortunately for me, my Catholic family were loving and supportive. My mother said the worst thing that could ever happen to her would be to lose a child–such as my precious son who has given me two beautiful grandchildren. Peace be with you.

By: Nancy

Nancy — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 05:03:16 +0000

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.2020...
See here what our illustrious liberal congress and president have in mind for our yet to be born citizens.

By: Nancy

Nancy — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 04:50:36 +0000

You seem to be reasonable and intelligent. My complaint about the pro-choice movement is the that it supports a hard-core industry intent on making money by exploiting young girls and young women. Most Pro-choice advocates fight tooth and nail to prevent laws such as showing a young woman a sonogram, providing information about the developmental stages of pregnancy, information about the possible side affects, such as higher rates of suicide and fatal accidents for women who have abortions vs those who did not, allowing a waiting period (something we have whenever we sign a contract. Shouldn't there be something similiar when we sign a contract with the devil?), Parental Notification or at least appearing before a judge so that a minor is not subjected to exploitation by adult males, state inspections of abortuaries for the safety of at least one of the patients, and the list could go on. The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) will wipe out entirely any advancement made in the laws of each state to try to make abortion rare. President Obama says he wants to make abortion rare, but keep it available. I wonder how he intends to reduce the number of abortions while whole-heartedly supporting FOCA. Peace be with you.

By: Tina S.

Tina S. — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 00:29:58 +0000

Since I am not American but German I can't say that I am a Democrat. But if I lived in the USA I'd surely be a Democrat.
Moreover, I am not religious and I don't consider the Bible or God when debating about such important issues.
This doesn't save me from knowing that the biggest problem about the whole abortion discussion is the fact that people tend to make differences between a born and an unborn child.
Why?
Because of one simple reason: a baby that is already born, a little cute boy or girl we can touch, smell and see luckily addresses our protective instincts, the schema of childlike characteristics take over and we KNOW for sure that the baby is a living being, a human being, someone that has to be protected.
An unborn child does not activate these instincts to this extent, therefore, for many people, abortion seems to be not as bad as killing a child outside the womb.
Well, this is an error in reasoning. A child is a child, wether outside or inside the mother.
Unborn children already have the survival instincts. They try to swerve the instruments when an abortion starts, their heart beats fast. They try to defend themselves and doctors speak about panic reactions. And the worst thing is that they don't have to be 5 or 6 months old fetuses, it already happens after the first few weeks.
So what does this make of a person who brutaly kills a scared and defenseless being?

Somebody here wrote earlier "Who do you people think you are, have so much control over another persons life and not to mention body!?!"
This is a great question – concerning the unborn child as well. Because killing it means to do exactly what is mentioned above… control over another persons life and not to mention body.
The unborn child is not just a tumor or something zombie-like thing without any feelings. A lot of people ignore this, some due to lack of knowledge, some due to a guilty conscience they would get if they considered the aborted child as a feeling human being.

The mother is not the only one with ethical rights, the unborn has them as well.
And the child does not care if the mother had the CHOICE and how hard it was for her to abort it when it is DEAD in the end…

I don't have to be a Conservative to be against abortion and I don't have to be a Democrat to be against the death penalty. I just have to be me.
Killing means killing. There is no "but" and "if".

By: Siarlys_Jenkins

Siarlys_Jenkins — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 03:16:50 +0000

As long as you have no interest in locking people up (or executing them) I really have no quarrel with what you have posted. The key thing for me, as far as the law is concerned, is that government not make these decisions for everyone. That said, everyone has a right to present clear, firm, passionate arguments for what they believe, and urge their fellow citizens to choose accordingly. Pro-choice people are not entitled to a monopoly on advocacy. Of course, when you say abortion is murder, it logically follows that you should advocate locking up and/or executing every doctor who performs one and every woman who has one. Maybe the rhetoric should be toned down just a degree or two. No, its not really murder, because you really have no interest in treating it like murder. In orthodox Jewish teaching, it is not murder, but it is bloodshed, and it is prohibited, unless the mother's life is truly in danger, in which case it is mandatory.

By: Ryan Jackson

Ryan Jackson — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 01:22:19 +0000

omg taylor was awsome she is the best