A Left-Wing Pro-Life Perspective

[hasikelee]

This campaign to help without changing our legal status is a bunch of baloney.

It’s something that a large part of the anti-abortion group has swallowed hook, line and sinker.

What a joke. Our country declares it a legal right to violently destroy another human. So let’s leave that law for the crowning end. We should just give out hugs and advice until everyone agrees that killing is bad.

 

[Julianna]

Quoted by YADA
*

I support these causes with my time and treasure because we aerw called to assist those in need generously … I suport fund raisers that support these and similar causes… Have you filled a baby bottle with change lately? Did you eat the spaghetti dinner that funded the home for unwed mothers? Have you given to catholic charities adoption services? Attended the golf tournament and then written the $1000 check at the associated dinner?

I think you started the “beginning” of what should be the Pro-life movement. The lock up and throw away the key is not the answer. It starts with other options. Having been through the “loving option” a.k.a. ADOPTION with my daughter, I can tell you from experience, there is a little man out there who not only was given “LIFE” but “a life” through adoption.

I will also tell you that I was lambasted and slashed to pieces on this very forum. The guy dumped my daughter and her friends told her she could easily get an abortion,and still others told her that she could get lots of money from the government for free housing, free food and college tution. Imagine that!! My husband and I had enough. We were at a time in our lives where we were looking to retirement and my daughter who spent one semester at college, no job, no skills was thinking of staying home while my husband and I raised another child until she “found” herself. And who would “suffer”…the child of course.

I was recently asked to speak at the adoption agency fundraiser. Due to scheduling, I was unable to attend. I wholeheartely support adoption. How pro-life can you get? A double whammy. Not only is a woman giving a child LIFE, but also given the child "a life’. The agency provided counseling to my daughter before and after she placed the child…and two years later, the agency calls her and invites her to birth mother retreats and I have been invited to a birthgranny luncheon.

My daughter placed her child in an OPEN adoption. This was her choice. My husband and I stay out of it, unless the adoptive parents contact us directly. They have sent us pictures and have emailed us. We are planning a trip later in the summer to see him. I am not his grandmother, my daughter is not his mother. We got that down. This child was born 5 days before Christmas and was taken home from the hospital on Christmas Eve. The adoptive parents sent us an email picture on Christmas Day…the caption read…

“A Family is Born”

Adoption is the way to go, when there is no other way. For too long abortion has been touted as the only way. It’s time for a change. Women need to know that is not the only way.

YADA…keep up the good work. This I believe is how abortion will be a thing of the past.

 

[rlg94086]

I’m one.

Yea team! “An Army of One.”

 

[goofyjim]

Yea team! “An Army of One.”

There are more of us than you think. We need to both make it illegal and at the same time back this up with funding for life through adoption services. Charity doesn’t cover enough of it so the government needs to do it. A government that makes something illegal has to provide reasonable alternatives.

 

[rlg94086]

There are more of us than you think. We need to both make it illegal and at the same time back this up with funding for life through adoption services. Charity doesn’t cover enough of it so the government needs to do it. A government that makes something illegal has to provide reasonable alternatives.

That is something the majority of conservatives agree with you on.

As far as the numbers, it was a joke son…I know you aren’t the only one. There are at least 4 or 5.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Gee. Still not one remark about what “they” did to Robert Bork.

Why is that???

Hmmmmmm???

I really don’t remember much about it and it seems nobody else does either, so perhaps you could perform an act of charity and educate us.

 

[frankadams]

Look here brother, this is where ya have it wrong. We don’t feel voting conservative on the issues contradicts our Catholic Faith. I agree with the Church when She says, unjust war is wrong, the DP unless in extreme cases, and feedimg the hungry, there is debate between lib and conservative how we go about those those items.

We’ve had that talk on this thread if ya wanna go back about 25 pages. But it usually consists of Vern posting from the CCC and someone telling him he doesn’t understand what he just read. LOL.

But there is no debate abortion is wrong. You put a plan out here on how rid us of it and every conservative on this board will listen. All ya gotta do is present us with a liberal candidate with a sure plan to do a end run on Row v Wade, and we’ll take a look.

But the thing is ya can’t. Pro life and liberal right now is a oxymoron. That species doesn’t currently exist, so you gotta make a call, not us..

Y’all kick and scream when a guy like the RidgeRunner, who is not party loyal, comes on here and says," I vote the best I can for what I believe, I don’t get all I want, but I get most of it." And y’all say he is “compromising.” No he’s *not *he still believes what he believes, so instead of gettign NONE, (what those do that sit out for vote for some wackon 3rd party that is not gonna win dog catcher on a good day. He’s gonna get some of what he wanted, and keep working on the rest.

But we can have a guy with a distinct pro life heart, who will appoint conservative (many of them Catholic) judges in courts across this land. but y’all dismiss him because he wont jack up the minimum wage, and wants to cut the rate of growth for some social program from 6% to 4%. When that happens libs jump up and down and proclaim the repubs are cutting social programs, when all they’re doing is cutting the rate of growth!

Just so happens our guys not only agree with us on abortion, but most secular issues. My issue with the current crop of repubs has not been their* abortion *stance, but what they’ve been doin regarding their secular agenda such as “no child life behind,” which dems were bemoaning as soon as the ink dried, never mind Ted Kennedy helped write it!

It appears you’ve made your choice, your secular agenda has trumped how ya feel on abortion, at least you’re honest.

You want a “plan” on abortion? If your plan is to ignore every other social and life issue about which Mother Church has spoken (which you erroneously reduce to minimum wage and the percentage increase in social programs) while saying that a Catholic must vote Republican and only Republican, then your “plan” has failed miserably.

The bottom line is results. A Supreme Court that was 6/9ths Republican gave us Roe. A Supreme Court that was 8/9ths Republican upheld Roe. Republicans have had the presidency for 23 out of the 35 post-Roe years. Abortion skyrocketed on their watch.

Results matter. Lip-service to get votes does not.

 

[vern_humphrey]

You want a “plan” on abortion? If your plan is to ignore every other social and life issue about which Mother Church has spoken (which you erroneously reduce to minimum wage and the percentage increase in social programs) while saying that a Catholic must vote Republican and only Republican, then your “plan” has failed miserably.

On what grounds do you accuse us of " ignore(ing) every other social and life issue about which Mother Church has spoken?"

The bottom line is results. A Supreme Court that was 6/9ths Republican gave us Roe. A Supreme Court that was 8/9ths Republican upheld Roe. Republicans have had the presidency for 23 out of the 35 post-Roe years. Abortion skyrocketed on their watch.

Results matter. Lip-service to get votes does not.

Thanks to vigorous resistance and pro-abortion propaganda, it is very difficult to overcome Roe v Wade. Stop helping the pro-abortion side, and come over and join us, and see how you can make a difference.

 

[mapleoak]

You want a “plan” on abortion? If your plan is to ignore every other social and life issue about which Mother Church has spoken

How on earth did you come to that conclusion? What does fighting for the unborn have to do with ignoring Mother Church?

(which you erroneously reduce to minimum wage and the percentage increase in social programs)

Not reduced to these, but they are indeed responsible for good deal of social discord.

The bottom line is results. A Supreme Court that was 6/9ths Republican gave us Roe. A Supreme Court that was 8/9ths Republican upheld Roe. Republicans have had the presidency for 23 out of the 35 post-Roe years. Abortion skyrocketed on their watch.

Correction, A pro-choice supreme court gave us Roe and has upheld it.

 

[frankadams]

How on earth did you come to that conclusion? What does fighting for the unborn have to do with ignoring Mother Church?

Not reduced to these, but they are indeed responsible for good deal of social discord.

Correction, A pro-choice supreme court gave us Roe and has upheld it.

Two Supreme Courts share responsibility for the continuing murder of our unborn: 1973 and 1992. I pointed out that six of the nine justices in 1973 were appointed by Republican presidents. I pointed out that eight of the nine justices in 1992 were appointed by Republican presidents. These are facts that cannot be wished away by any amount of propoganda. And yet, I am told on this thread that to vote against a Republican presidential candidate is to “compromise my soul,” no matter what that candidate’s stand on any other issue.

When the bottom-line is that Republican presidents bear a significant degree of responsibility for these court decisons, including “pro-life” presidents like Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, I must question the position that my eternal fate may rest on whether or not I vote for a Republican candidate.

 

[frankadams]

On what grounds do you accuse us of " ignore(ing) every other social and life issue about which Mother Church has spoken?"

Thanks to vigorous resistance and pro-abortion propaganda, it is very difficult to overcome Roe v Wade. Stop helping the pro-abortion side, and come over and join us, and see how you can make a difference.

My contributions to the movement are relatively small, but I have “joined you” on multiple occasions. I have spoken publicly on abortion in front of small audiences. In doing so, I have tried to intelligently respond to pro-abortion arguments. Some of these responses include pointing out the inconsistency and/or hypocrisy inherent in the pro-abortion position. (Incidentally,these “debates” or “exchanges” did not address matters of who appointed who to the Supreme Court). I have attended a couple of pro-life rallies and I have sent a very small amount of money to pro-life causes.

It is simply that I cannot ignore history and reality when going to the ballot box. Having six out of nine justices in a court that creates Roe is a shameful number for a "pro-life party. Having eight out of nine justices in a court that upholds Roe is downright disgraceful.

In the meantime, I am familiar with a wealth of Catholic teaching on social issues that seem largely contrary to the Repubican platform. But I am told I must ignore that and vote only Republican so as to not “compromise my soul.” My intellect insists that I take results into account, and the results thus far have been the murder of our unborn made into federal law and later reaffirmed by Supreme Court justices appointed by Republican presidents.

 

[vern_humphrey]

My contributions to the movement are relatively small, but I have “joined you” on multiple occasions. I have spoken publicly on abortion in front of small audiences. In doing so, I have tried to intelligently respond to pro-abortion arguments. Some of these responses include pointing out the inconsistency and/or hypocrisy inherent in the pro-abortion position. (Incidentally,these “debates” or “exchanges” did not address matters of who appointed who to the Supreme Court). I have attended a couple of pro-life rallies and I have sent a very small amount of money to pro-life causes.

It is simply that I cannot ignore history and reality when going to the ballot box. Having six out of nine justices in a court that creates Roe is a shameful number for a "pro-life party. Having eight out of nine justices in a court that upholds Roe is downright disgraceful.

If you cannot ignore history, do not ignore history. Look into how judicial appointments have been blocked – note how the president cannot subject a nominee to a pro-life “litmus test,” but how the left then applies a pro-choice litmus test.

The President doesn’t simply appoint judges – they have to be approved by the senate, and to date, the left wing in the Senate has made it impossible to assemble a true pro-life force in the court.

In the meantime, I am familiar with a wealth of Catholic teaching on social issues that seem largely contrary to the Repubican platform.

Please quote those objectionable parts of the Republican platform here, and match the quoted sections with the Catholic teaching that says the contrary.

But I am told I must ignore that and vote only Republican so as to not “compromise my soul.” My intellect insists that I take results into account, and the results thus far have been the murder of our unborn made into federal law and later reaffirmed by Supreme Court justices appointed by Republican presidents.

Which is a standard “pro-choice” argument – which translated into plain English is, “Because we have been successful in thwarting your attempts to end abortion, it is your fault that abortion is still law.”

 

[Al_Masetti]

I really don’t remember much about it and it seems nobody else does either, so perhaps you could perform an act of charity and educate us.

I think you’re right.

I guess I will have to drink five cups of coffee and a few Diet Pepsi’s and “perform” a rant about what the Libs did to Robert Bork.

[The silence is deafening, which tells me something right off.]

[sigh]

 

[Joe_5859]

Please quote those objectionable parts of the Republican platform here, and match the quoted sections with the Catholic teaching that says the contrary.

That’s a very fair request. It seems that some people think that the Democrats (minus the “abortion issue”) would be 100% in-line with Catholic social teaching and Republicans (minus the “abortion issue”) would be 100% opposed to Catholic social teaching. I just don’t see it.

It’s not as though the Democrats have all of these wonderful, fool-proof plans that will drastically reduce poverty while the evil Republicans actually desire to see poverty increase. It seems to me that both parties simply have different policies to address the same social problems. Now, we can debate which policies might be more effective, but I think both parties would agree that there are social problems. They just disagree with how to solve them.

Abortion seems different because one party doesn’t seem to believe it is a problem, or at least not the same kind of problem.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I asked:

Originally Posted by vern humphrey
Please quote those objectionable parts of the Republican platform here, and match the quoted sections with the Catholic teaching that says the contrary.

And Joe said:

That’s a very fair request. It seems that some people think that the Democrats (minus the “abortion issue”) would be 100% in-line with Catholic social teaching and Republicans (minus the “abortion issue”) would be 100% opposed to Catholic social teaching. I just don’t see it.

Fair, yes – it’s simply a challenge to prove an accusation.

But what do you bet no one will rise to that challenge?

It’s not as though the Democrats have all of these wonderful, fool-proof plans that will drastically reduce poverty while the evil Republicans actually desire to see poverty increase. It seems to me that both parties simply have different policies to address the same social problems. Now, we can debate which policies might be more effective, but I think both parties would agree that there are social problems. They just disagree with how to solve them.

The major disagreement is whether the solutions should work or not. One side is willing to spend unlimited resources on programs that on balance have proven either ineffictive or counterproductive.

The other side, says, “It ain’t working, change your approach.”

Abortion seems different because one party doesn’t seem to believe it is a problem, or at least not the same kind of problem.

Absolutely correct – one side says abortion is wrong, the other side says it’s a right.

 

[goofyjim]

That’s a very fair request. It seems that some people think that the Democrats (minus the “abortion issue”) would be 100% in-line with Catholic social teaching and Republicans (minus the “abortion issue”) would be 100% opposed to Catholic social teaching. I just don’t see it.

It’s not as though the Democrats have all of these wonderful, fool-proof plans that will drastically reduce poverty while the evil Republicans actually desire to see poverty increase. It seems to me that both parties simply have different policies to address the same social problems. Now, we can debate which policies might be more effective, but I think both parties would agree that there are social problems. They just disagree with how to solve them.

Abortion seems different because one party doesn’t seem to believe it is a problem, or at least not the same kind of problem.

My approach is unconditional love. This involves making sure that noone is homeless or hungry. If that takes government programs so be it. Do we make abortion illegal? Yes. Do we cut back on these services and leave them with no choice but to commit an illegal act? No. Make it illegal but provide the alternatives. And provide those alternatives unconditionally.

 

[vern_humphrey]

My approach is unconditional love. This involves making sure that noone is homeless or hungry. If that takes government programs so be it. Do we make abortion illegal? Yes. Do we cut back on these services and leave them with no choice but to commit an illegal act? No. Make it illegal but provide the alternatives. And provide those alternatives unconditionally.

Are you saying women have to commit abortion?

You know that’s not true! And shame on you for saying it!

 

[goofyjim]

Are you saying women have to commit abortion?

You know that’s not true! And shame on you for saying it!

You’re reading thins into my statement. Shame on you. But for some when we cut off funding for life they may feel their only option is to abort. We must make it illegal but keep the funding stream for life going or else we are just creating laws without backing them up with alternative options.

 

[vern_humphrey]

You’re reading thins into my statement. Shame on you.

You said, and I quote:

Originally Posted by goofyjim
My approach is unconditional love. This involves making sure that noone is homeless or hungry. If that takes government programs so be it. Do we make abortion illegal? Yes. Do we cut back on these services and leave them with no choice but to commit an illegal act? No. Make it illegal but provide the alternatives. And provide those alternatives unconditionally.

Now, are you telling me when you say we “leave them with no choice but to commit an illegal act” you don’t mean they “have no choice?”

But for some when we cut off funding for life they may feel their only option is to abort.

Ah, so we cause abortion by “cutting off funding?”

Please tell me which funding has been cut off, causing women to “feel their only option is to abort?”

We must make it illegal but keep the funding stream for life going or else we are just creating laws without backing them up with alternative options.

Specifically which funds have been cut?

You made the accusation, pretending woment were “left with no choice but to commit an illegal act” – now back it up. Prove that abortion is necessary because women were left with “no choice.”

Shame!

Shame on you for being an apologist for abortion!!

 

[goofyjim]

You said, and I quote:

Now, are you telling me when you say we “leave them with no choice but to commit an illegal act” you don’t mean they “have no choice?”

Ah, so we cause abortion by “cutting off funding?”

Please tell me which funding has been cut off, causing women to “feel their only option is to abort?”

Specifically which funds have been cut?

You made the accusation, pretending woment were “left with no choice but to commit an illegal act” – now back it up. Prove that abortion is necessary because women were left with “no choice.”

Shame!

Shame on you for being an apologist for abortion!!

I am NOT an apologist for abortion. Shame on you. But it is the people on the right who propose slashing spending indiscriminately until there are no programs left to pay for these children to be born. Unless charitable donations are going to cover it the government will have to keep the spending going. If you keep insisting that I favor abortion then you simply ignore my beliefs for no reason.