Abortion: What do you think is the primary way of reducing abortion

  • Thread starter Thread starter pnewton
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
josh987654321 said:
👍

I think all of the options are good, but ultimately 1. is the most important I believe. I am suprised only a small few (11%, 5 including me and longing soul) selected 1.

I believe If one of us were watching a woman getting beaten by her husband, I doubt we would simply walk away saying “we should instead address the root causes of spousal abuse” or “we should change peoples views of spousal abuse” and let him continue beating his wife. I mean sure, we can and should address the root causes of spousal abuse and work to change societies views (if they were for it), but wouldn’t people agree that, that is secodary to first and foremost stopping him from beating his wife to death?

Thank you for reading
Josh
Click to expand...
Except vilifying wife-beating husbands is not only socially mainstream, but socially glorified. Western culture experiences sadistic pleasure in seeing their downfall, and uses such people as a smokescreen towards their own sinfulness.

On the other hand, vilifying murdering your child in the womb remains controversial. You can’t legally stop a person from doing something that is gravely immoral if you don’t have the necessary support among the population to make the legal changes in the first place. Even in an authoritarian government it is difficult to go against the appetites of the mob for practical reasons, but in a democratic government, it’s pretty much impossible.
 
Making it illegal or giving abstinence only talks is like trying to put a tiny bandage on a gaping wound. You have to address the real issues like support programs for single and low income mothers and honest, realistic sex ed. Of course, the GOP is so concerned with outlawing abortion, but not with actually helping the children after they’re born. You can’t call the GOP the pro-life party if they’re only pro-life until someone is out of the womb.
 
Et_Cetera said:
Making it illegal or giving abstinence only talks is like trying to put a tiny bandage on a gaping wound. You have to address the real issues like support programs for single and low income mothers and honest, realistic sex ed. Of course, the GOP is so concerned with outlawing abortion, but not with actually helping the children after they’re born. You can’t call the GOP the pro-life party if they’re only pro-life until someone is out of the womb.
Click to expand...
It couldn’t be a sudden and complete government ban type situation like Ceaușescu did with contraception in Romania. It would have to come in increments to be able to adjust and apply practical solutions and influence the mentality to accompany change.

The portal that abortion found into legal acceptance was that if the life of the mother was in danger, that justified abortion. From that little chink, it very quickly led to the loss of the natural rights of an unborn person. There was no kind of philosophical justification arrived at to support abortion… it was a case of the philosophy having to catch up with the hurtling train of supply and demand of human nature.

If the time comes where a newborn with severe deformities can be legally killed… it would in the same way, be no time at all until that train hurtled into euthanasia station for the depressed, the autistic, the mildly disabled, the chronically ill, the ugly, the fat, the annoying… etc etc.

Govt laws have more influence over the mentality of the people than we give it credit for. Restricting something really is a way that the mentality of people can be honed to be again familiar with what is essentially a self evident truth. Unborn babies are people too.
 
I suppose the same way they reduced smoking cigarettes. Social pressure and marginalization of those who ingage in it.

ATB
 
Mickey_Finn said:
I suppose the same way they reduced smoking cigarettes. Social pressure and marginalization of those who ingage in it.

ATB
Click to expand...
That’s true. It was the same with racial discrimination. The laws against it helped to hone peoples consciences to accept the truth that we know to be universal. That all people are equal regardless of skin colour.
 
I picked the first option. We need to outlaw abortion in all the stages of pregnancy and for every circumstance of pregnancy. No exceptions. Unfortunately there is a portion of the population whose only morality is that which is illegal and they won’t do something simply because it is illegal. Sad but true.

I also think we cannot legislate morality however our legislators need to be moral persons.

I think the last two options aren’t realistic to the true nature of the problem,. There will always be folks who are sexually immoral. The “culture of death” would be reversed simply by outlawing abortion. It would fade into nothingness as time healed the wound contraception and abortion made in our society. I think also that if abortion in all stages of pregnancy and under every circumstance was made illegal tomorrow, it would still take about two or three generations for the damage it has done to be healed in our society.

The second option, economic circumstances in a way attempts to justify some abortions as in cases where the parents to be simply say* they cannot afford another baby*. If all their children are is an expense, then there is much more wrong with them than money can fix. money isn’t the answer, though it does help those whose pregnancies could result in adoption.

Oh well. I’ve said enough.

Glenda
 
Et_Cetera said:
Making it illegal or giving abstinence only talks is like trying to put a tiny bandage on a gaping wound. You have to address the real issues like support programs for single and low income mothers and honest, realistic sex ed. Of course, the GOP is so concerned with outlawing abortion, but not with actually helping the children after they’re born. You can’t call the GOP the pro-life party if they’re only pro-life until someone is out of the womb.
Click to expand...
Excuse #1 and 13

REASONS FOR VOTING FOR PRO-ABORTION POLITICIANS
  1. National Republicans aren’t “really” pro-life, so it’s okay if I vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
  2. Specific candidate isn’t “really” pro-life, or I don’t believe his supposed change of belief, so it’s okay if I vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
  3. My deacon/priest/bishop/cardinal told me or wrote me a letter telling me it was okay to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  4. I’m not a one-issue voter, so I can ignore the Church’s teaching and vote for the virulently pro-abortion politician.
  5. Republicans (at any level) have not passed enough pro-life laws (as decided by me), so I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  6. Republicans (at any level) have not had enough success on pro-life issues (as decided by me), so I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  7. Roe vs. Wade is still the law of the land even though most Supreme Court justices were appointed by the Republicans, therefore Republicans aren’t serious about abortion, so I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  8. I found a Church document that mentioned proportionate reasons in voting, so I personally judged support for a higher minimum wage (or other social justice cause) was on equal footing with abortion, and I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  9. I personally believe that Democratic policies will reduce abortions, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  10. We can’t do anything about abortion until we change the hearts and minds of the people, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  11. You can’t legislate morality, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  12. People will still have abortions even if you make them illegal, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  13. We can’t end abortion until we address the root causes, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  14. I can’t impose my beliefs on other people, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  15. There isn’t any difference between the parties, so it is okay for me to vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
 
Et_Cetera said:
Of course, the GOP is so concerned with outlawing abortion, but not with actually helping the children after they’re born. You can’t call the GOP the pro-life party if they’re only pro-life until someone is out of the womb.
Click to expand...
That’s absurd rationalizing to support the demokrats platform which radically supports poisoning, stabbing, chopping and carving living human beings in their mothers’ womb and refers to them as disposable ‘tissue’, ‘parasites’ or ‘goo’. Did you see the last democratic convention. It was sickening.

The best way way is “all of the above”.

But of course we are talking about individuals. It is immoral risky behavior by individuals. So at the basest level the primary way is #3.

Through education with a focus on ethics and morals. And when possible faith based. Preferably Catholic.
 
Please remember that discussions of particular political figures or parties are not allowed in the Social Justice forum. Thank you for your cooperation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top