Can someone help me come up with a response to pro-choice attacks?

[crazzeto]

**Breathing movements, and development of musculature to enable breathing, does not constitute breathing. Nice try.

Limerick**

Yeah, it really does, but nice try. The lungs are doing what they need to, at first to develop, from 22 weeks forward they’re typically 100% fully capable of functioning out in the air and sustaining the child.

 

[ExDeoVita]

**You missed my point: love and respect for other human beings should not just be turned on with the flip of a switch when one enters puberty. It needs to be reinforced in age-appropriate ways through all stages of a child’s life, by parents primarily, and then by extended family, educators, individuals and groups whom the parents of the children trust. This is simply not being done.

Limerick**

L. I agree with you on this. Love and Responsibility needs to be fostered with families and after it is nurtured and instilled into individuals after many years they carry it with them and can make good judgments henceforth.

Sadly, as you allude to - these two things are not fostered within many modern families, including many Catholic, Christian, Jewish… households and the children have to deal with the consequences for the rest of their lives.

I do sympathize with these individuals who are walking around wounded, who in many cases don’t even know they are wounded and make self-destructive decisions as a result of their poor up-bringing. I don’t get angry when a man or woman rolls down their window and screams profanity at me while I silently pray the Rosary outside my local abortion mill, I think to myself ‘who hurt that poor soul, who is responsible for instilling that hurt (manifest in anger) into that poor man or woman’. I believe most of these individuals are themselves victims of abortion in some way and having not reconciled what happened to them, by naming their child and seeking God’s healing forgiveness, manifest the anger/guild they constantly repress on those trying to help them.

L., I’m agreeing with your statement in as much as love and respect does need to be fostered, and can’t be instantaneously instilled in an individual. I was pointing out the fact that neither love nor responsibility can be established within a society that embraces such violence against its most innocent. It can’t be instantaneously created from a society that embraces the culture of death as JPII called it.

This is not a perfect analogy, but it will help me communicate why I believe the solution to establish love and respect begins with dealing with the root problem, which happens to be abortion -

{Suppose, there existed an epidemic of physically abusive fathers. One in every three families had father’s who physically and verbally abused their wife’s and children to the degree where the second hand violence instilled in one third of the nations children was profoundly impacting schools, and public settings. The violence that began with the fathers hand or scathing words was now manifest in all the schools and society as a result of this our culture was being degraded in too many ways to count.

Suppose then, that in an attempt to deal with the epidemic, the government decided to let the abuse continue but provide free therapy sessions to those who grew up in these domestic violence settings once they turned 20 (if they wanted them) - as they entered the adult world.}

Do you think that kind of solution would have in any way ended the epidemic? Would trying to catch a problem that far along solve much of anything? Here is what I and I presume most sound-minded individuals would seek as a solution: Cut the violence off by separating these abusive fathers (creeps) from their families and stopping the violence before it even begins to fester! Anyone knows that letting a child live and grow for twenty years in that kind of abuse can’t be treated instantaneously or by flipping a switch as you pointed out. In most cases, the young boys involved would themselves grow up to be abusive, same with the young girls and the epidemic would probably become 2:3 families, and grow…

The same is true for abortion, the violent act that the woman is put through weather willingly or unwillingly will undoubtedly manifest itself in her life weather she likes it or not. The same is true for men. And what I am trying to communicate to you is that hoping for things like love and peace while letting* this* epidemic continue would be pointless. In all likelihood, the rise in abortions due to the legality and availability of the damaging procedure will eclipse things like love and respect from ever being restored in our society as long as we embrace them…

 

[limerick]

Yeah, it really does, but nice try. The lungs are doing what they need to, at first to develop, from 22 weeks forward they’re typically 100% fully capable of functioning out in the air and sustaining the child.

**Fully capable. But not actually breathing.

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

**I understand your points but disagree with this imperfect analogy, as you called it:

*{Suppose, there existed an epidemic of physically abusive fathers. One in every three families had father’s who physically and verbally abused their wife’s and children to the degree where the second hand violence instilled in one third of the nations children was profoundly impacting schools, and public settings. The violence that began with the fathers hand or scathing words was now manifest in all the schools and society as a result of this our culture was being degraded in too many ways to count.

Suppose then, that in an attempt to deal with the epidemic, the government decided to let the abuse continue but provide free therapy sessions to those who grew up in these domestic violence settings once they turned 20 (if they wanted them) - as they entered the adult world.}***

Free therapy sessions? That’s where you lost me. Try again if you like.

Limerick

 

[chevalier]

Hi there,

Well, I need some help coming up with a response to these statements

“Why wouldn’t you abort your child? What if your daughter got raped by a violent thug, would you keep that baby? I would forget the so called “God” and kill the child.”

What’s more to discuss if they already admit that point?

and they respond:

“Blah blah blah. I would like to see your daughter raise a child after being raped at the age of 14. I bet that would make some music sensation. He would probably get MTV awards too.”

Can someone help me out here?

-Jeanne

The bolded part puts them in a lost position - that’s an emotional response by people being troubled by a reasonable argument.

 

[crazzeto]

**Fully capable. But not actually breathing.

Limerick**

There for, it is quite disengenous to tell someone considering an abortion, ande faced with these questions that “no, it doesn’t breath” and leave it at that. The organs work, and are working in the mothers womb. It breaths, but does not receive O2 from the placental fluid. If the baby should be born by 22 weeks, in a hospital chances are so great that it will survive that at least NC state law requires medical intervention to save the life of the child.

By attempting to leave it at “it doesn’t breath”, when this conclusion is based only on the fact that it doesn’t actually get O2 from the placental fluid, you are in fact trying to reframe an embryo as nothing but a inanimate mass of tissue. Nothing anyone need be concerned about. Even if that’s not your intent, that’s exactly what is happening.

 

[limerick]

There for, it is quite disengenous to tell someone considering an abortion, ande faced with these questions that “no, it doesn’t breath” and leave it at that. The organs work, and are working in the mothers womb. It breaths, but does not receive O2 from the placental fluid. If the baby should be born by 22 weeks, in a hospital chances are so great that it will survive that at least NC state law requires medical intervention to save the life of the child.

By attempting to leave it at “it doesn’t breath”, when this conclusion is based only on the fact that it doesn’t actually get O2 from the placental fluid, you are in fact trying to reframe an embryo as nothing but a inanimate mass of tissue. Nothing anyone need be concerned about. Even if that’s not your intent, that’s exactly what is happening.

**Your original point was that an embryo/fetus can breathe when in utero. This is false.

I maintain the embryo or fetus is a living being whose life will end in abortion. That is why is it called a termination.

Argue your false points all you want. A woman who has decided to have an abortion does not need your wisdom, your evangelizing or your permission to do so.

Limerick**

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

From Freedom2Care, for those who wish to act:

Just moments ago, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi revealed the federal healthcare “reform” bill that pro-abortion legislators have been working on behind closed doors.

In just a few days, the Speaker wants Congress to vote on the bill.

So our time to act and speak out to our legislators is very, very short. We must do so today.

No one in this short time can analyze the many details of this bill, but one thing is sure:

This legislation would radically change U.S. policy by having the government subsidize abortion on demand.

So our message to Congress is quite simple:

Keep our government from paying for abortions in any way.

When you tell your legislators this simple message, you may get excuses in response. Don’t buy the excuses:

The “Capps Amendment” is a phony scheme written by a pro-abortion legislator to set up accounting screens to mask federal subsidy of abortion. The bottom line after the smoke clears is that an abortionist would get a check from the U.S. Treasury to pay him for the abortion he performed.

The “Hyde Amendment” is a good law barring certain government funding (HHS appropriations) of certain abortions, but it does not apply to funding from this new healthcare legislation. It also has to be approved again and again each year, and pro-abortion legislators are aiming to vote it down. That would open the floodgates for government funding of abortion on demand.

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich. 1) is leading about 40 pro-life colleagues from his party, along with Republican Representatives, in demanding an amendment to bar government funding of abortions.

The Stupak-Pitts amendment would—unlike the phony “compromises” by abortion proponents—clearly and explicitly bar government funding of abortions. The Stupak-Pitts amendment would parallel the good Hyde amendment.

So far, the Speaker and other pro-abortion leaders have refused to give this group a chance to vote. This battle is now coming to a head.

The pro-abortion Speaker doesn’t want that to happen. In a few days, the Speaker will try to get Representatives to vote to disallow any amendments to the healthcare legislation. That’s called a “closed rule” and it prohibits any amendments.

So when you tell your legislators to keep the government from funding abortions, tell them to vote NO on the closed rule. Tell them the Stupak-Pitts amendment deserves a YES vote to keep the government from funding abortions.

What you can do:
Contact the offices of your U.S. Representative today:

capwiz.com/nrlc/dbq/officials/

Tell your legislator to keep the government from funding abortions by:

Voting NO on the “closed rule” (the rule that abortion proponents want to prevent pro-life amendments).
Voting YES on the Stupak-Pitts amendment to ban government funding of abortions.
This is not just politics. Little lives hang in the balance.

Thank you for speaking out.

This bill is wrong. Everything about it is wrong. Abortion is an intrinsic evil. May God have mercy on those of us who see that IF this bill passes.

Not just the unborn, but also the infirm and elderly will be discarded ON YOUR DIME.

 

[ExDeoVita]

**

Free therapy sessions? That’s where you lost me. Try again if you like.

Limerick**

Sure. Free ‘therapy sessions’ or counseling sessions to those scarred by abortion. Its offered in pretty much every crises pregnancy center and even in most planned parenthood’s. (Although the ‘counseling sessions’ that pp offers don’t help women so they really don’t equate to what crises pregnancy centers offer).

As good as these are to women seeking help from the emotional effects of abortion (PAS), they do little in the overall scheme of things because they don’t solve the rampant problem of abortion and many woman don’t seek this help until much later in life.

My analogy pointed to the fact that you can’t let such a widespread epidemic continue and think that things can be made right by bandaging it afterward.

Your ideal - love and respect, in a likewise manner are inconceivable while we let abortion to continue unabated. To leave the killing mills open is pretty much shutting the door on things like love and respect.

My first post highlighted this fact. You cannot build a relationship on the death of your child. You cannot expect love and respect to come from a relationship that begins by killing the innocent child that was supposed to be the beginning of the couples family - the decisions alone precludes love and respect. A family that begins with abortion has already parsed love and respect and simultaneously injected hurt, resentment, and selfishness into its core.

 

[newbetx]

Your ideal - love and respect, in a likewise manner are inconceivable while we let abortion to continue unabated. To leave the killing mills open is pretty much shutting the door on things like love and respect.

Your statement makes it seem like love is conditional. It is not conditional. And we need to remember that.

We will always have abortion. Have had it for a very, very long time. The reason it’s such a big business today is it is only a logical extension and result of the concept of “sex is a fundamental right.” It is not. It is a privilege and with it comes responsibility. People are being taught the wrong concept.

Murder (of one born) IS illegal (abortion is not). Making abortion illegal won’t stop it. It hasn’t stopped all of the murders. My problem with fighting the problem at the abortion clinic is that it’s way too late. It’s like waiting for the bullet to be fired before moving the baby out of the way of the trajectory. We need to back up and fight the problem at the source, not at the outcome. What we teach our children in public schools and sometimes within families is a contributor to the problem. Sometimes what we DON’T teach them is a problem, too.

I believe Limerick is correct about the source of the problem. I heard last week a great lecture from a person who’s been there and done that. It may explain much of what people hear about from our culture that just isn’t true. But with so many saying the same thing, it’s tough to believe there is a better way.

We need to be patient with the ignorant and remember even Christ didn’t convert everyone with words alone, but he died for us all.

 

[crazzeto]

Your statement makes it seem like love is conditional. It is not conditional. And we need to remember that.

I’m with you here, we should always love and support all especially those who have been taken in by the abortion industry.

We will always have abortion. Have had it for a very, very long time.

I used to think this way, but honestly I’ve had a change of heart. I honestly think it’s quite possible to end abortion, what it takes is more action on the part of pro-lifers. In particular what we should be doing is refocusing our arguments on the logical, parctical arguments for now.

I feel, with a sad heart that our first reaction was extreme and to the… ambivilant (towards this issue) as I used to be (I was never pro-choice per se, I just thought I was being smart and superior by keeping my opinion to my self, how stupid I was) get turned off and start to think that the pro-life movement is full of a bunch of crazy religious zelots who have 6th grade educations.

This isn’t true, the pro-life argument is powerful, practical and logical. Lets get it out there.

The reason it’s such a big business today is it is only a logical extension and result of the concept of “sex is a fundamental right.” It is not. It is a privilege and with it comes responsibility. People are being taught the wrong concept.

I quite agree with you and very well said. I think this is another area that we should be working on. However I would like to add that I wouldn’t like to publicly tie the two idea’s. At least not at first. I can’t imagine we’re going to get far telling people

“Abortion is evil, and is the evil result of sex which is evil”.

Murder (of one born) IS illegal (abortion is not). Making abortion illegal won’t stop it. It hasn’t stopped all of the murders. My problem with fighting the problem at the abortion clinic is that it’s way too late. It’s like waiting for the bullet to be fired before moving the baby out of the way of the trajectory. We need to back up and fight the problem at the source, not at the outcome. What we teach our children in public schools and sometimes within families is a contributor to the problem. Sometimes what we DON’T teach them is a problem, too.

I disagree with this completely, making abortion illegal would most certainly have an immediate and dramatic effect on the numbers of abortion in this nation. There wouldnt’ be any legal ones, period. Would some people seek illiciate abortions? Perhaps, but of course now having the benifit of hind sight we know what we must do in order to minimize this action. We now have some framework for helping poor desperate mothers (particularly in the CC), we have professionals employeed who can help mothers navigate the scary waters of low income, perhaps fatherless (or perhaps not), too early motherhood.

To suggest “it’s too late” is just a defeatist motiviation for being pro-choice. Hogwash I say.

I believe Limerick is correct about the source of the problem. I heard last week a great lecture from a person who’s been there and done that. It may explain much of what people hear about from our culture that just isn’t true. But with so many saying the same thing, it’s tough to believe there is a better way.

We need to be patient with the ignorant and remember even Christ didn’t convert everyone with words alone, but he died for us all.

This part I’m a little lost on, perhaps because I’m kind of just jumping back in after a great while.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Once again I would remind one and all that to substitute the word CHOICE to describe ABORTION is not only wrong, but gives ground to the enemy.

Aided by the abortion industry, an unresponsive set of Pharisees is about to enact the biggest pro-death bill in our sad history.

{quote]BREAKING NEWS Abortion industry lobbyists and
their allies in Congress are about to ram through
mandated government funding of abortion in health
care reform legislation THIS WEEK in the U.S. House
of Representatives.

Simply stated, if this abortion mandate is not
stopped, it could result in the largest expansion
of abortion since Roe v. Wade.

To respond swiftly to this crisis, 40 Days for Life
is helping to unify and mobilize the pro-life
movement TONIGHT on a huge nationwide webcast –
and your attendance is crucial:

StopTheAbortionMandate.com/webcast

40 Days for Life and the 70+ pro-life and pro-family
organizations that make up the Stop the Abortion
Mandate Coalition invite you to attend this urgent
educational event.

Though the event is over, the web site will contain action alerts and other info, and I beg your participation, in whatever way possible: prayer, protest, donation.

Becoming a nation of Molochs, eager to slaughter the unborn in the name of expedience or saving ‘the planet’, is THE issue of the day. All else pales in comparison.

 

[newbetx]

This isn’t true, the pro-life argument is powerful, practical and logical. Lets get it out there.

I didn’t say it wasn’t powerful or impractical or illogical. Please don’t shoot at a comrade in arms.

I quite agree with you and very well said. I think this is another area that we should be working on. However I would like to add that I wouldn’t like to publicly tie the two idea’s. At least not at first. I can’t imagine we’re going to get far telling people

“Abortion is evil, and is the evil result of sex which is evil”.
Now that statement is hogwash. That is exactly the way many pro-choice people view pro-lifers. That’s what they think we think.

It’s a wrong perception. Just as “just use condoms and everything will be fine” is a wrong perception. Too many people think there are just two views of sex. The third option needs to be taught.

I disagree with this completely, making abortion illegal would most certainly have an immediate and dramatic effect on the numbers of abortion in this nation. There wouldnt’ be any legal ones, period. Would some people seek illiciate abortions? Perhaps, but of course now having the benifit of hind sight we know what we must do in order to minimize this action. We now have some framework for helping poor desperate mothers (particularly in the CC), we have professionals employeed who can help mothers navigate the scary waters of low income, perhaps fatherless (or perhaps not), too early motherhood.
I say, abortion won’t be illegal until the demand for it goes down, not the other way around.
To suggest “it’s too late” is just a defeatist motiviation for being pro-choice. Hogwash I say.
I didn’t say it was too late. And I’m not taking a defeatist attitude. Abortion has been around for thousands of years. The issue isn’t that about getting an abortion, as much as it is getting a “safe” abortion. Abortion is assumed. It’s packaged as “health care.”

This part I’m a little lost on, perhaps because I’m kind of just jumping back in after a great while.

I think you got lost because you think I am attacking pro-life. I am not. Please understand that we didn’t get the abortion mills that then encouraged a bad sexual perspective. It was the other way around. If the devil started back there and lead us to our abortion problem, does it not make sense for us to go back and make little changes in sexual attitude that would lead people to make the right decision about life?

If you want to change the direction of the boat you don’t put propellers on all four sides. You turn the rudder slightly and finally turn the boat around. It won’t work to just stand in front of the boat and say “whoa.”

Make no mistake about it, the pro-life movement has made great headway in reducing abortion, but that can be swept away with a FOCA like bill. However, properly changing peoples attitudes when young can’t be swept away.

 

[beafedor]

Hi there,

Well, I need some help coming up with a response to these statements

“Why wouldn’t you abort your child? What if your daughter got raped by a violent thug, would you keep that baby? I would forget the so called “God” and kill the child.”

and I respond:

“Well, what if your mom was raped by some violent thug?? I bet you’re glad that she carried you for nine months and gave you the chance to make something out of your life. And also, if a baby is born out of rape, incest, or whatever, it dosen’t make it any less of a human being. The child could grow up to cure cancer, be president, or the next music sensation.”(…)

-Jeanne

Jeanne, you have a very good answer but maybe you need to back it up with real life stories. I was asked the same question when I was speaking on a University Campus recently and I use this book to back up my answers:
“Victims and Victors Speaking Out About TheirPregnancies, Abortions, and Children Resulting from Sexual Assault” edited by David C. Reardon, Julie Makimaa and Amy Sobie. This is from the Elliott Institute website: afterabortion.org/Victims/index.htm

Drawn from a survey of nearly 200 women who have experienced rape or incest pregnancies, Victims and Victors reveals a seldom-heard truth: that most women who become pregnant through sexual assault do not want abortions!

Victims and Victors leaps past the rhetoric that typically dominates the abortion issue to give women a chance to tell their stories.  These are the real "experts" on this complex issue: the women who have been there.  Just listen to what they have to say:

    "After my daughter was born, it was love at first sight . . . I know I made the right decision in having her."  —Nancy "Cole"

    "Often I cry.  Cry because I could not stop the attacks.  Cry because my daughter is dead.  And I cry because it still hurts."  —Edith Young

    "I think that rape victims with pregnancies are discriminated against  because people seem to think you're nuts to have a baby by a man  who raped you. We are looked upon as being liars, or stupid."    —Sharon "Bailey"

    "They say abortion is the easy way out, the best thing for everyone,  but they are wrong. It has been over 15 years, and I still suffer."   —"Rebecca Morris"

    "I thank God for the strength He gave me to go through the bad  times and for all of the joy in the good times. I will never regret that I  chose to give life to my daughter."   —Mary Murray

    "Abortion does not help or solve a problem—it only compounds and  creates another trauma for the already grieving victim by taking away the one thing that can bring joy."  —Helene Evans

    "The effects of the abortion are much more far-reaching than the effects of the rape in my life."  —"Patricia Ryan"

    "I, having lived through rape, and having raised a child ‘conceived in rape,' feel personally assaulted and insulted every time I hear that abortion should be legal for rape and incest.  I feel that we're being used to further the abortion issue, even though we've not been asked to tell our side of the story."  —Kathleen DeZeeuw

 In Victims and Victors, 20 women like the ones quoted above share what it is like to face a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest. They speak bravely and candidly of the pain of sexual assault, of the sadness and trauma of abortion, and of the joy and healing of giving birth.

---

God Bless You for speaking the truth on this difficult subject.

 

[crazzeto]

Just one comment, not that I don’t like inline (to the quote) comments, they do make it harder to respond to specific points

I didn’t say it wasn’t powerful or impractical or illogical. Please don’t shoot at a comrade in arms.

I never said you made any such suggestion, I was commenting on the truth of the matter

Abortion is evil, and is the evil result of sex which is evil".
Now that statement is hogwash. That is exactly the way many pro-choice people view pro-lifers. That’s what they think we think.

Exactly… Sort of… Premarital sex is sinful which does lead to the evil of abortion. So in that sense the statement is sort of correct. I would say it’s problematic in that it’s inflamitory, un-thoughtout, too simplistic and frankly doesn’t resonate with anyone. Which is why I offered it as an example of what not to say, more over as an example of what was being said in the prolife movement when I was a child growing up (80’s through 90s) and was a big reason why I remained ambivolent on this subject for as long as I did even though I could never condone abortion. I took the tact “well I would never choose it, and I would try to prevent any woman I was with (if she carried my child, at any point) to not do it with in reason. But whatever other people do is OK”. This was a very wrong attitude on my part, I see this now. I’m merely demonstrating why I had this attitude and exhorting my fellow prolifers to get on the ball and start being a little bit more rational in our arguments. We have powerful rational arguments, why haven’t we been using them to date?

I say, abortion won’t be illegal until the demand for it goes down, not the other way around.

And I say demand won’t go down until we drop the defeatist it will never happen attitude and get out there with our powerful arguments. I think most people, whether or not they realize it yet, are basically pro life. They just don’t realize it yet. They haven’t had the push from us, using rational arguments out there in the media to 1) make them feel comfortable expressing a definate opinion on abortion and 2) the confidence to know that not only “uneducated religious zelots” oppose abortion.

didn’t say it was too late. And I’m not taking a defeatist attitude. Abortion has been around for thousands of years. The issue isn’t that about getting an abortion, as much as it is getting a “safe” abortion. Abortion is assumed. It’s packaged as “health care.”

Could you please explain the below quotation found in the post you were responding to inline:

Murder (of one born) IS illegal (abortion is not). Making abortion illegal won’t stop it. It hasn’t stopped all of the murders. My problem with fighting the problem at the abortion clinic is that it’s way too late.

Technically what you post is true, you didn’t say it’s “too late”. You said it was “way too late”. And how is that not defeatist?

I think you got lost because you think I am attacking pro-life. I am not. Please understand that we didn’t get the abortion mills that then encouraged a bad sexual perspective. It was the other way around. If the devil started back there and lead us to our abortion problem, does it not make sense for us to go back and make little changes in sexual attitude that would lead people to make the right decision about life?

I don’t think you believe you’re “fighting pro-life”, I dont’ think you’re trying to fight pro-life. I do think the very thoughts and sentaments you express in your post are exactly what they are looking for.

“it’s way to late to fight the system. so lets get behind sex ed. hey, we on the “pro choice” side have a solution, let’s put planned parenthood clinics in every public school for this purpose! HEY!! GREAT!! ALRIGHT!”.

Yeah right, sorry I can’t get behind that.

If you want to change the direction of the boat you don’t put propellers on all four sides. You turn the rudder slightly and finally turn the boat around. It won’t work to just stand in front of the boat and say “whoa.”

Make no mistake about it, the pro-life movement has made great headway in reducing abortion, but that can be swept away with a FOCA like bill. However, properly changing peoples attitudes when young can’t be swept away.

What we need to do is get people to understand what a terrible thing abortion is. This isn’t something that is impossible, truely abortion is an issue that crosses “mere theological lines”. Christianity opposes it (Catholics are on the for front, Orthodox are consitantly against, Protistants are a little too fragmented to, as a whole, be as effective as the first two gropus), Muslims oppose abortion unilaterally, good Jews will oppose it and even many athiests oppose it becase they do at least realize what we’re talking about is the death of our childeren! Our litterally putting them to death. I disagree wtih your assertion about the propeller, on the other hand we need to be coming at this issue from all angles at once. We need to implant this idea, even in popular culture. Until we do we will never succeed.

 

[ExDeoVita]

Your statement makes it seem like love is conditional. It is not conditional. And we need to remember that.

We will always have abortion. Have had it for a very, very long time. The reason it’s such a big business today is it is only a logical extension and result of the concept of “sex is a fundamental right.” It is not. It is a privilege and with it comes responsibility. People are being taught the wrong concept.

Murder (of one born) IS illegal (abortion is not). Making abortion illegal won’t stop it. It hasn’t stopped all of the murders. My problem with fighting the problem at the abortion clinic is that it’s way too late. It’s like waiting for the bullet to be fired before moving the baby out of the way of the trajectory. We need to back up and fight the problem at the source, not at the outcome. What we teach our children in public schools and sometimes within families is a contributor to the problem. Sometimes what we DON’T teach them is a problem, too.

I believe Limerick is correct about the source of the problem. I heard last week a great lecture from a person who’s been there and done that. It may explain much of what people hear about from our culture that just isn’t true. But with so many saying the same thing, it’s tough to believe there is a better way.

We need to be patient with the ignorant and remember even Christ didn’t convert everyone with words alone, but he died for us all.

I too listen to lighthouse Catholic media, however I’ll have to get my hands on the specific CD you are referring to so that I can better understand where you are coming from.

From your response, it appears we are in agreement on the premise that stopping abortion must begin with the building block of society - the family. If you go back and read L.'s initial post, and my responses you will see that my premise is the same as yours. In fact, I believe I stated this:

“L. I agree with you on this. Love and Responsibility needs to be fostered with families and after it is nurtured and instilled into individuals after many years they carry it with them and can make good judgments henceforth.” see post #142

I also agree that marital embrace comes with responsibility, needs to be respected, and is ordained for those who are married.

However it appears you have parsed one of my statements and used it to form you subsequent disagreement. The fact that I stated ‘the killing fields need to close’ did not negate my initial point.

Let me explain my self again, please tell me where you misunderstood me or disagree with me and lets go from there…

L. had initially made a post that love and respect need happen before things like abortion can be taken off the table.

My response (distilled down) was that the intention was good but the means of getting there is 180 degrees off - we need to end abortion if we want to restore love and respect to the family.

Hoping for love and respect to be restored while abortion continues unabated is essentially flawed. That would be like me making the following statement back in 1941:
*Before we can even shutdown the gas chambers and stop the Third Reich from killing people, we need to foster love and respect among the among the German youth. Because truthfully - how can we expect love and respect to be established if we merely turn off the gas spikits and abandon the gas chambers, that would be ridiculous wouldn’t it? You see what we need to do is keep the gas chambers open, keep the lines moving, and sooner or later the German youth that are desenthised to the acts they are committing will sooner or later wise up and grow in love and respect, then the killing will eventually stop…naturally. *

My response to the above as I presume yours would be: Shut down the gas chambers first - the German youth aren’t going to catch on to the love an respect idea while the murder continues unabated… My statement for L. was the same: Shut down the abortion mills if you want to begin restoring love and respect to society.

The idea that closing all the abortion mills would have little effect on the abortion rate is flat out wrong. We can discuss this point later. But you have an idea of where I am coming from.

 

[newbetx]

I too listen to lighthouse Catholic media, however I’ll have to get my hands on the specific CD you are referring to so that I can better understand where you are coming from.

From your response, it appears we are in agreement on the premise that stopping abortion must begin with the building block of society - the family. If you go back and read L.'s initial post, and my responses you will see that my premise is the same as yours. In fact, I believe I stated this:

“L. I agree with you on this. Love and Responsibility needs to be fostered with families and after it is nurtured and instilled into individuals after many years they carry it with them and can make good judgments henceforth.” see post #142

I also agree that marital embrace comes with responsibility, needs to be respected, and is ordained for those who are married.

However it appears you have parsed one of my statements and used it to form you subsequent disagreement. The fact that I stated ‘the killing fields need to close’ did not negate my initial point.

Let me explain my self again, please tell me where you misunderstood me or disagree with me and lets go from there…

L. had initially made a post that love and respect need happen before things like abortion can be taken off the table.

My response (distilled down) was that the intention was good but the means of getting there is 180 degrees off - we need to end abortion if we want to restore love and respect to the family.

Hoping for love and respect to be restored while abortion continues unabated is essentially flawed. That would be like me making the following statement back in 1941:
*Before we can even shutdown the gas chambers and stop the Third Reich from killing people, we need to foster love and respect among the among the German youth. Because truthfully - how can we expect love and respect to be established if we merely turn off the gas spikits and abandon the gas chambers, that would be ridiculous wouldn’t it? You see what we need to do is keep the gas chambers open, keep the lines moving, and sooner or later the German youth that are desenthised to the acts they are committing will sooner or later wise up and grow in love and respect, then the killing will eventually stop…naturally. *

My response to the above as I presume yours would be: Shut down the gas chambers first - the German youth aren’t going to catch on to the love an respect idea while the murder continues unabated… My statement for L. was the same: Shut down the abortion mills if you want to begin restoring love and respect to society.

We can discuss this point later. But you have an idea of where I am coming from.

I can see your point. But to believe that making abortion illegal makes it non-existant would be incorrect. Long before it was “legal” abortion existed and will continue to exist.

The idea that closing all the abortion mills would have little effect on the abortion rate is flat out wrong.

I never said that making it illegal would not reduce them. It would and that would be applauded. However, please don’t believe it would go to zero as you stated.

My bone of contention is the apparent “line in the sand” at abortion. I think we’ve taken that as far as we can. To make a bigger dent in the issue we have to start driving the line back. To what is taught to our children in the way of “safe sex” or what is portrayed on TV as “normal healthy behavior.”

An addition to your analogy would be to consider a battle front. To win a war, one can not do that by fighting only in one place. We didn’t enter the war to just stop the concentration camps while the rest of the Nazi reign of terror was allowed to continue. No. We attacked the WHOLE thing. That is my point. We have a much larger war to fight.

My point is that right to life must have a multi-faceted approach to the problem. Like the current Health care protest from the perspective of abortion. Nothing mentioned about restricting health care from the elderly. This is very disturbing yet understandable. Abortion is clear. It’s easily fought. But what do we dare say to the majority of Catholic women that are on birth control? What do we say to those that think it is their right to view porn? What do we say to those who think our faiths beliefs on sex are “outdated?” We have much work to do to help ensure that the battle line never again approaches where it is.

I don’t mean to belittle the tremendous gains that the Pro-Life movement has generated. They ARE tremendous and worthwhile. My opinion is that unless we start a larger effort to work on the flanks of the pro-choice movement, we will eventually loose the abortion battle.

I think we are together on most fronts but we disagree on which is the cause and what is the effect. I think either effort will affect the perspective of people. If we teach enough people about the true meaning of sex, we will get enough of a majority to finally shut down the abortion mills. If we shut down the abortion mills, maybe more people will be open to understanding the true meaning of sex. Sounds like a win-win.