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.
P

pnewton

Guest
From another thread, someone asked for a spin-off. I decided to make it as part of a poll, though I recognize this place is hardly representative of society at large. How should do we best address abortion:
  1. Increasing legal restrictions until (hopefully) making it illegal.
  2. Addressing economic factors that drive those deciding to abort their child into making the decision to abort.
  3. Addressing sexual immortality in society.
  4. Reversing the culture of death that makes life of less value.
Now obviously we should never be satisfied with a focus on one area to the exclusion of others. If you like, rank these four in area of greatest impact. Expound on the areas you think are critical and if you know of steps that might be taken, bring them up for discussion.
 
I would say No. 4, but I think Nos. 2 and 3 are actually extensions of No. 4.

If we value life, we respect our own sexuality and that of others. If we value life, we value providing for one another when needed. (I don’t look at No. 2 as consisting of more government spending, BTW, but as a Christian society, we should always be looking for ways to help those in need.) Pope Francis said something at one point to the effect that the most important part of the gospel to get out there is that Jesus loves us. People need to know that God loves them, and that there is no greater good than loving Him in return. Everything else flows from that.

I do support No. 1, but ultimately, trying to stop abortion by force is probably not going to be as effective as changing hearts and minds, in my opinion.
 
laircy said:
3, ultimately. which is probably also the hardest. 😦
Click to expand...
That is my choice. My wife works with high school kids and the attitude toward sexuality is appalling, not just among the worst kids, but in the main stream. Television portrays teenage sexuality as inevitable, and even acceptable by parents. The standard has gone from marriage to love to just being “special” as to when parent on television should start having sex. The internet has made sexuality available to kids everywhere and cell phones has facilitated the process of casual sex. This is why we have abortion, far more than economic hardship, in my own experience and opinion, anyway.

This is also why I deem the worst harm done politically has not been the laws pertaining to abortion but the laws pertaining to homosexuality. At the level of young people, the openness to homosexuality has made openness to casual heterosexuality more prevalent, among other factors, of course.
 
I really think the primary way to do this is to address the concerns of the mother and give her support, whether she needs information, financial assistance, moral support or anything else.
 
I thought 1. Increasing legal restrictions until (hopefully) making it illegal.

I put a lot of faith in the power of societal taboos. I really believe that every person has within him truth regarding the natural laws and the desire for the grace of God. A lot of the community can be converted by good moral teaching however I think more people have a respect for the law first and the ethical/moral roots of the law second. Even as Catholics, we have the benefit of the traditions of the Church to give us that first openness to the moral and ethical principles behind laws. The authority of tradition and the authority of the law play a highly significant part in influencing people.

This in my mind, makes it imperative that the Catholic ethics arm remain a strong and vibrant force in upper parts of society (as in legal and medical fields) and also that high ranking Catholics use their position to promote godly laws and live openly and faithfully their Catholicism. It is such an important duty of office.
 
I don’t believe in a primary way, but each one can be very effective.

We should have more of a unity to fight this and not separate
 
Cimachol said:
I would say No. 4, but I think Nos. 2 and 3 are actually extensions of No. 4.

If we value life, we respect our own sexuality and that of others. If we value life, we value providing for one another when needed. (I don’t look at No. 2 as consisting of more government spending, BTW, but as a Christian society, we should always be looking for ways to help those in need.) Pope Francis said something at one point to the effect that the most important part of the gospel to get out there is that Jesus loves us. People need to know that God loves them, and that there is no greater good than loving Him in return. Everything else flows from that.

I do support No. 1, but ultimately, trying to stop abortion by force is probably not going to be as effective as changing hearts and minds, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I completely agree with this. It was a difficult choice, but I picked #2. But I think that 2 and 3 are indeed extensions of 4. I think if we are talking about changing things on a policy-level (not just a general, social-level of change) then focusing on socioeconomic and related educational reasons for unwanted pregnancies will do the most to reduce the number of abortions.
 
I picked 4 after much thought only because I figured it would be the one choice presented that could reduce the most amount of abortions. However I wonder if this poll allowed multiple choices then a better result could have been done.

Economics isn’t the biggest indicator towards abortion because while abortions have gone down in the past 5-6 years, median income in families have also gone down as well.
 
pnewton said:
From another thread, someone asked for a spin-off. I decided to make it as part of a poll, though I recognize this place is hardly representative of society at large. How should do we best address abortion:
  1. Increasing legal restrictions until (hopefully) making it illegal.
  2. Addressing economic factors that drive those deciding to abort their child into making the decision to abort.
  3. Addressing sexual immortality in society.
  4. Reversing the culture of death that makes life of less value.
Now obviously we should never be satisfied with a focus on one area to the exclusion of others. If you like, rank these four in area of greatest impact. Expound on the areas you think are critical and if you know of steps that might be taken, bring them up for discussion.
Click to expand...
#4 - it’s inclusive of all of the above.
 
If we do 3, then 4 will happen by itself, and when that happens 1 and 2 will only be common sense.
 
seakelp said:
I completely agree with this. It was a difficult choice, but I picked #2. But I think that 2 and 3 are indeed extensions of 4. I think if we are talking about changing things on a policy-level (not just a general, social-level of change) then focusing on socioeconomic and related educational reasons for unwanted pregnancies will do the most to reduce the number of abortions.
Click to expand...
I briefly looked into this and there does seem to be a correlation between income level and abortions, at least at this time, but there is no correlation between the economy and abortions. As we “will always have the poor” I have to consider this as the least effective method of addressing abortion. If we doubled the GNP in a year and everyone was twice as prosperous, there would still be the desire for those that make less to be more like those who make more. It is human nature. It is that desire for greater prosperity that underlies the willingness to kill one’s child. Yet somehow, this desire for economic prosperity does not deter the same people from having sex outside of marriage.
 
pnewton said:
I briefly looked into this and there does seem to be a correlation between income level and abortions, at least at this time, but there is no correlation between the economy and abortions. As we “will always have the poor” I have to consider this as the least effective method of addressing abortion. If we doubled the GNP in a year and everyone was twice as prosperous, there would still be the desire for those that make less to be more like those who make more. It is human nature. It is that desire for greater prosperity that underlies the willingness to kill one’s child. Yet somehow, this desire for economic prosperity does not deter the same people from having sex outside of marriage.
Click to expand...
I assumed that the choice implied addressing issues of economic justice, not just the nation’s economy as a whole.
 
It makes sense that society is becoming more polarized. The crowd in the middle ground is deciding to either use Foolproof Birth Control, or become sexually conservative and get married young. I hate to admit it, but that’s probably what needs to happen to reduce abortions and the poverty created by rising numbers of young men who were mostly looking to get lucky and don’t want to be responsible fathers.

The Philosphers were correct: promoting Nietsche’s Love Of Self is forcing most women onto foolproof birth control over fear of poverty, which will slowly float down fears of overpopulation, with the exception of the few of us last remaining Romantics. I feel most sorry for the single moms who are still Romantics. Their hearts are in the right places, but Nietsche’s Love of Self is slowly overtaking society. Effective for reducing the number of carbon burners on the planet, but sadly anti-romantic. Fix one problem, but sadness results. 🤷
 
seakelp said:
I assumed that the choice implied addressing issues of economic justice, not just the nation’s economy as a whole.
Click to expand...
Of course. However, a person’s perception of poverty is as important as the actual dollar amount when it comes to making such decisions. That is why the money that one sees among neighbors, peers, in the media, etc., can set the standard that one feels is the minimum one needs tor raise a new life, as opposed to terminating that life.

GNP is just data. It is proof of nothing, only additional information to be considered. Looking at history can help determine if it is actual poverty that is the issue or the* relative* poverty that is the issue.
 
I went with 3. Ideally we would make it illegal but we need to first convince everyone how wrong it is. As a teenager, I can definitely say that our society, especially younger people in my experiences, are far too obsessed with sex. If we could fix this, there would naturally be less abortions and the practice would slowly die out as people learned to keep it in their pants. It would make it easier for us to get people to understand how immoral such a practice is.

4 is also pretty good though so it was a tough choice. People need to understand how important life is. My sister actually acknowledges that it is a living human from the moment of conception and has said that she would never get one because it would be murder, but she still thinks people should have a choice. I can’t even begin to comprehend that frame of thought.
 
delmo said:
I went with 3. Ideally we would make it illegal but we need to first convince everyone how wrong it is. As a teenager, I can definitely say that our society, especially younger people in my experiences, are far too obsessed with sex. If we could fix this, there would naturally be less abortions and the practice would slowly die out as people learned to keep it in their pants. It would make it easier for us to get people to understand how immoral such a practice is.

4 is also pretty good though so it was a tough choice. People need to understand how important life is. My sister actually acknowledges that it is a living human from the moment of conception and has said that she would never get one because it would be murder, but she still thinks people should have a choice. I can’t even begin to comprehend that frame of thought.
Click to expand...
As a teen who agrees 100 percent I could have written the same exact thing, word for word. AMEN!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top