I was thinking today, which is always a dangerous and perilous venture, about Bristol Palin and all the hubbub with the Neo-Coms over the Pro-Life values of the Palin family. A lot of people ascribe to be Christian, yet find a way to say they are pro-choice and come away thinking it is somehow compatible. I am sure you have read with wonderment of the brouhaha with the Vampiress herself, Bella Pelosi, go through convoluted logic trying to justify her pro-choice stance as Roman Catholic. Anyway, I just want you to know that while it is possible to take a pro-life position from a secular standpoint, it is impossible, as a Christian, as a Jew, or as a Muslim, to be pro-choice and be consistent with your religion. This is not a judgement, it’s a fact. At the very least, be honest and tell me you are picking and choosing what you believe and what you do not. Of course the Neo-Coms have plenty of company in this area, some of which are even “reverends”, like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. It was their cost of entry into the temple of the Neo-Coms. So if you are pro-choice, at the very least be intellectually honest and tell the truth.
Thank you for reading this blog.
9 comments:
Amen!
I also enjoy reading your posts on the blogs at desmoinesregister.com. Thanks for sharing your opinions!
Normally I do not allow anonymous comments. May be I have made a mistake here, but I will take complements any day. In the future, please use your name. Thanks for the reply.
I think you can support legal abortions while being a roman catholic. Even if you believe that life begins at conception, you can also aknowledge that ilegal abortion is extremely dangerous and a real health issue. So, by supporting legal abortions, you'd at least prevent another death (the mother's). However, a pro-choice person that believes life begins at conception shoul always encourage more policies to make abortion EXTREMELY rare (support and promote adoption, proper sexual education, etc.).
Your logic is flawed and honestly, you cannot be a roman catholic and support abortion. The church is very clear on where it stands, and that is that abortion is the taking of an innocent life. Insofar as the health of the mother, in this country, a woman can go to an abortion clinic if she choses. Those things are so rare as to be non-existent. What you fail to address, as a roman catholic, is, how do you put a greater value of one life over another? If it is ok to abort from a point of view that life begins at conception, BUT... this is inconsistent. You are also inconsistent by supporting abortion and then wanting to make it rare. It's like saying I support drunk driving, but I want to limit drunk driving deaths.
Jim
I do not mean I suport abortion. I would always reccomend a woman to give her baby to adoption instead of aborting.
But that does not mean I do not see that ilegal abortion isn't safe (especially in third-world countries). So, if it comes between the life of the baby or the life of both the baby and the mother, I don't think there is much to consider.
And if someone believes that life begins at conception, why should he impose that vision on other? remember that a true liberal (in the good sense) state is not "married" to any particular religion or morality.
Again, one thing is to support a law that allows a woman to abort safely IF SHE WANTS, and another is to support abortion...
I do not think one life is worth more than another.That is libertarian, no? I do believe that life begins at conception too and I can make the argument secularly. You won't see me marching in front of abortion clinics or picking fights with people, but it's my moral value that I live by. My main accusation to those that quote the life of the mother etc, is that, at least in this country, a pessimistic position. Those cases are very rare and a doctor must be involved. For those on the left, you'd think every abortion involved the life of the mother. Not true. Now, to take Obama, he was even against giving life support to babies born during late term abortions and were breathing. He thought they should be killed as that was the original intent. As someone born 3 months premature, I can tell you I find that insensitive to say the least. Thanks for writing Hector.
Jim
Of course one life is not worth more than other life, but I think two lives may be more worth than just one.
I woul'd like to point out that illegal abortion has a high death rate (I believe, around 25%). That's what I mean when I say abortion shouldn't be illegal (but doctors should be able to refuse to "perform" an abortion). I think, if a woman is going to abort, then (1) It should be her last resort (support adoption, sexual education and family planification) and (2) it should be safe for her to do it.
Illegal abortions are non-existent here. As far as the legal stuff, I am against federal funding of abortion clinics. Hows that for free market?
Of course they are not existent, abortion is legal...
I agree with you, one thing is to say that abortion is not a crime (from the government's point of view). That doesn't mean government should encourage it (they do so in Mexico City...).
Post a Comment