P
pennsylvan
Guest
Sorry, your friend’s anecdote doesn’t establish “most”.
Can you please answer my question. What penalty should the state impose on women when it outlaws abortion?
- Status
Can you please answer my question. What penalty should the state impose on women when it outlaws abortion?
S
savienu
Guest
I never said my friend’s anecdote established “most.” But it’s not hard to notice that ALL The pro-choice movement says is “lump of cells” and “product of conception.” Look up the definition of an abortion on a secular website. You’ll see the lies for yourself.
As far as the penalty the state should impose? I really don’t know. I would imagine it would be like any other criminal activity, and it would depend on the circumstances. I’m not in the business of helping to determine what appropriate penalties are when ANYONE breaks the law, so I’m not going to try and say what I think the penalty should be.
O
Ockham
Guest
At this point I don’t think any imprisonment needs to be applied to the mother. If abortion was made illegal and any medical staff performing one resulted in loss of license then many lives would be saved. However, to be consistent, charges to all involved could apply.
Ultrasounds and heartbeats should change many minds considering aborting, but I’d also like to see the ex-mother bear the responsibility of funeral arrangements. The “products of abortion” should be returned to her for burial.
The issue of abortion was hijacked by the radical feminist movement in the sexual revolution, the age of aquarius. Norma McCorvey (a.k.a. “Roe”) never went through with her abortion, converted to Catholicism and is now a pro-life spokesperson. She describes herself as a pawn used by two lesbian lawyers to make political gains.
Rather than consider the issue a matter of life or death, it became known as sexual equality. Women needed this option to advance in the business world, take charge of their bodies, not be victims of male repression and end patriarchy. While all those are worthy goals it has come at the death of over fifty million babies.
If you ask most pro-choice people for an explanation on their postion they will say a woman needs the right to choose what to do with her body. If you dig a little deeper and ask who gets to make choices of the child’s body or when life begins, they either don’t have an answer or pick some easily defeatable arbitrary date like week ten. This leads me to conclude most people haven’t thought much about abortion and when you think about it honestly, objectively, free of political spin and special interest propaganda, pro-life is the only conclusion.
Ultrasounds and heartbeats should change many minds considering aborting, but I’d also like to see the ex-mother bear the responsibility of funeral arrangements. The “products of abortion” should be returned to her for burial.
The issue of abortion was hijacked by the radical feminist movement in the sexual revolution, the age of aquarius. Norma McCorvey (a.k.a. “Roe”) never went through with her abortion, converted to Catholicism and is now a pro-life spokesperson. She describes herself as a pawn used by two lesbian lawyers to make political gains.
Rather than consider the issue a matter of life or death, it became known as sexual equality. Women needed this option to advance in the business world, take charge of their bodies, not be victims of male repression and end patriarchy. While all those are worthy goals it has come at the death of over fifty million babies.
If you ask most pro-choice people for an explanation on their postion they will say a woman needs the right to choose what to do with her body. If you dig a little deeper and ask who gets to make choices of the child’s body or when life begins, they either don’t have an answer or pick some easily defeatable arbitrary date like week ten. This leads me to conclude most people haven’t thought much about abortion and when you think about it honestly, objectively, free of political spin and special interest propaganda, pro-life is the only conclusion.
F
fix
Guest
The same penalty that would apply to other similar offenses.
Is every case of homicide treated eaxctly the same? Is every circumstnace exactly the same? Is every participant equally culpable in every case?
P
pennsylvan
Guest
T
twb1621
Guest
That’s not my position, that is the way the law stood before it was legalized… However, A woman who seeks and receives an abortion must answer to God for that choice and it is between her and God alone. It would be almost impossible for the law to prove one person did not have adequate knowledge while another did to prosecute a woman for receiving an abortion. I would have to say that in many cases, the average woman, (often times a young girl) does not have the maturity or full understanding or facts as a medical doctor does and in that case there is no excuse for the doctor whereas there may be ignorance on the part of the expectant woman or girl. This is not an excuse, but a consideration.
P
pennsylvan
Guest
You’re right. That’s why the state should stay out of it.
O
Ockham
Guest
The penalties for infanticide are significantly less in other Western nations. Although the condition is usually associated with mental illness, I contend that any mother wanting to kill her own child is suffering terribly and should receive psychological care.
The state gets involved in crimes against its citizens. To suggest the state should stay out of abortion is the saying it should also stay out of homocide.
The state gets involved in crimes against its citizens. To suggest the state should stay out of abortion is the saying it should also stay out of homocide.
T
twb1621
Guest
I have been waiting since the first page of the thread for your response to my posts to you but you haven’t done so. I ask you these two questions;
In order to justify voting for Obama and “disregarding” his position as a proud pro abortion candadate, what was the fruit of greater evil that his oponent would have introduced regarding the threat to life that made it acceptable to support Obama?
secondly Perhaps you can blame this on the Church for being to opinionated also;
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I dedicated you, a prophet to the nations I appointed you.
(Jeremiah Ch 1: 4-5)
Thus says the LORD,
Your redeemer, who formed you from the womb: I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens; when I spread out the earth, who was with me? (Isaiah Ch 44: 24)
5 For your own lifeblood, too, I will demand an accounting: from every animal I will demand it, and from man in regard to his fellow man I will demand an accounting for human life. 6 If anyone sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; For in the image of God has man been made. (Genesis CH 9: 5-6)
I also refer to what Jesus proclaimed to the apostles when they attempted to stop the Children from approaching Him.
Throughout the OT and the NT for that matter, it has always been recognized as a BLESSING OF GOD for a person to have children. All references to the Baptized are made comparing them to children and I submit the following verses as well;
Mark CH 10; 13 And people were bringing children to him that he might touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. 14 When Jesus saw this he became indignant and said to them, “Let the children come to me; do not prevent them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15 Amen, I say to you, whoever does not accept the kingdom of God like a child 2 will not enter it.” 16 Then he embraced them and blessed them, placing his hands on them.
Luke CH 9; 46 An argument arose among the disciples about which of them was the greatest. 47 Jesus realized the intention of their hearts and took a child and placed it by his side 48 and said to them, “Whoever receives this child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me. For the one who is least among all of you is the one who is the greatest.”
Luke CH 18; 15 34 People were bringing even infants to him that he might touch them, and when the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. 16 Jesus, however, called the children to himself and said, “Let the children come to me and do not prevent them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 17 Amen, I say to you, whoever does not accept the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it.”
1 Corinthians CH 7; 10 To the married, however, I give this instruction (not I, but the Lord): 7 a wife should not separate from her husband 11 - and if she does separate she must either remain single or become reconciled to her husband - and a husband should not divorce his wife. 12 To the rest 8 I say (not the Lord): if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she is willing to go on living with him, he should not divorce her; 13 and if any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he is willing to go on living with her, she should not divorce her husband. 14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy through the brother. Otherwise your children would be unclean, whereas in fact they are holy.
1 Timothy CH 2; 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 Further, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and transgressed. 15 But she will be saved through motherhood, provided women persevere in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
So how is it again one can claim justification in voting for Obama?
F
fix
Guest
For first degree murder, but that does not mean it applies in each case.
The penalty will vary as it does now according to the law, circumstances, and intent.
What is your point?
The civil law recognizes variations in culpability and consent.
T
Traditional_Ang
Guest
Rico:
Have you heard of Catholics for Choice? Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi? Senator Ted Kennedy? Senator John Kerry? Vice President Joe Biden?
Rico, before the election, I ran into a woman who was a Mass attending Catholic who claimed that voting for John McCain (who had an almost perfect Pro-Life voting record) was worse than voting for Barack Obama (who supports all forms of Abortion & opposed the “Baby Born Alive Act”) and refused to listen when I tried to bring up the subject of Abortion. and, 35% of Catholics who attend Mass weekly voted for Barack Obama in spite of the fact that there are NO issues today in our country that are proportionate to Abortion either alone or in combination with other issues.
Rico, unlike in days past (even as late as the early 1980’s) you can’t be in a position of authority in the Democratic Party today and be actively Pro-Life - You won’t be Nominated to run for National Office, allowed to speak at Democratic National Conventions in Prime-time, or asked to actively campaign for other Democratic Candidates in most areas of the country. That’s in spite of the fact that Catholics who attend Mass at least once/month voted for the “Pro-Choice” Democratic Candidate during the last election.
Catholics may not defend Abortion or say that it’s OK, but they acted as if it is during this last election. That’s actually worse.
Your Brother and Servant in Christ, Michael
T
Traditional_Ang
Guest
Penn:
Am I to understand, that since Abortion is the intentional killing of innocent human life, the State should also stay out of it when one person murders another? What makes Abortion different than that? What makes the intentional killing of an innocent unborn baby by a medical doctor different than when that doctor murders his wife for her insurance policy? or, The killing of an unborn baby by that same doctor different than if he murders his adulterous wife and her lover? Geography? Development? Speech? The baby’s lack of funds versus the wife’s insurance policy? That baby’s innocence versus the guilt of the wife and her lover?
This isn’t a religious debate - According to Medical Science and Biology, Human Life starts AT CONCEPTION, not at birth. and, Once we decide to not to protect innocent humans from being killed because we feel they don’t have have rights we have to recognize, it’s inevitable that we will allow the killing of other humans because we feel they don’t have rights we have to recognize - This has happened before - Several times. Study your History!
When we defend the rights of the Unborn, we defend our own - It’s the same as when we defend any of the rights of others. In like fashion, when we fail to defend the rights of the Unborn, we fail to defend our own. That’s something we do only at our own peril…
I hope this makes it clear.
Your Brother and Servant in Christ, Michael
T
twb1621
Guest
The state, the country stands (and it is written) for “life”. When this country was governed with morals (instead of mass greed and materialism) it was illegal to perform an abortion. A person was ashamed for anyone to know they even thought about it. It has been immoral since the beginning of Christianity and outlawed by the Church. I repeat the quote I offered earlier;
Church Fathers
Apostolic Constitutions, Book Seven
You shall not slay your child by causing abortion, nor kill that which is begotten; for everything that is shaped, and has received a soul from God, if it be slain, shall be avenged, as being unjustly destroyed.
Now, lets put religion aside for one second and show a comparison;
Mice are know to rip off the head of a baby or babies that it can not feed because it has too many, thw baby is weaker than the others or that is “defective” in some way. Perhaps you should watch some of the methods and results of abortions yourself and then tell me how in today’s society we are better than mice.
It is disgusting to think any Catholic or Christian of any belief system, could, let alone would, accept abortion or a candidate who promotes it and they would not IF Christians stood together against it. It IS ON US.
One final question; I am not saying one way or the other that Obama is of the devil, however, if a person was a son of satan, how do you think he would win over the masses while at the same time bring people to sin? keep in mind a person has to know and elect to commit the act for it to be a sin… Wouldn’t he use all the material and physical attractions of this world as his bait? But to have the chance for it all you would have to choose him, wouldn’t you?
A
alacoque
Guest
IMHO, Catholics who are “pro-choice” just remind us all that, as a material/immortal being, made in the image and likeness of God and to whom He offers His Kingdom, we have not (in many ways) come very far at all from those ‘first days in the garden’.
In those first days, we preferred and opted for ‘independence’, we rejected our dependency on Love, itself and thought we could do better.
It’s the ‘same old’, ‘same old’. We still, all of us, have to fight the same battle against evil and the evil one. For a contingent, created being to claim or maintain ‘independence’ is lunacy! And yet, we do it, daily.
That’s what ‘pro-choice’ Catholics tell ME…nothing new under the sun…
In those first days, we preferred and opted for ‘independence’, we rejected our dependency on Love, itself and thought we could do better.
It’s the ‘same old’, ‘same old’. We still, all of us, have to fight the same battle against evil and the evil one. For a contingent, created being to claim or maintain ‘independence’ is lunacy! And yet, we do it, daily.
That’s what ‘pro-choice’ Catholics tell ME…nothing new under the sun…
T
Teelynn
Guest
The Bill that you are referring to was up before the legislators in Illinois just a few days ago, BTW. They tabled it from further discussion or a vote. What they are now voting on however, is the FOCA in the state of Illinois. THAT they want to pass, but they DON’T want the mother to view her unborn baby!!!
What does that tell you of the motives of our government, state or federal either one? Totally infuriating to me!
T
twb1621
Guest
Of course…The Bill that you are referring to was up before the legislators in Illinois just a few days ago, BTW. They tabled it from further discussion or a vote. What they are now voting on however, is the FOCA in the state of Illinois. THAT they want to pass, but they DON’T want the mother to view her unborn baby!!!
We all must realize that the politicians when running for office will support or repudiate based on those interests of the public that are most popular because they WANT THE OFFICE. So when someone comes along and says, “its not my fault a pro-abortion supporter was elected to office” because “I am pro life but only voted for him or her for other reasons”, that person is wrong and they are responsible, period. No politician is going to run for an office basing his support for issues that are unpopular to the majority. Christians need to live a Christian life or stop claiming to be Christian, one or the other. God’s word is not flexible. We are responsible for who we vote in and what issues are popular.
O
Ockham
Guest
Detroit, Mich., Mar 21, 2009 / 12:32 pm (CNA).- Archbishop of Denver Charles J. Chaput delivered a speech on Saturday reflecting on the significance of the November 2008 election. Warning that media “narratives” should not obscure truth, he blamed the indifference and complacency of many U.S. Catholics for the country’s failures on abortion, poverty and immigration issues.
He also advised Catholics to “master the language of popular culture” and to refuse to be afraid, saying “fear is the disease of our age.”
The archbishop’s comments were delivered in his keynote address at the Hands-On Conference Celebrating the Year of St. Paul, which was hosted at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit.
Having been asked to examine what November 2008 and its aftermath can teach Catholics about American culture, the state of American Catholicism and the kind of Pauline discipleship necessary today, Archbishop Chaput said:
“November showed us that 40 years of American Catholic complacency and poor formation are bearing exactly the fruit we should have expected. Or to put it more discreetly, the November elections confirmed a trend, rather than created a new moment, in American culture.”
catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=15439
He also advised Catholics to “master the language of popular culture” and to refuse to be afraid, saying “fear is the disease of our age.”
The archbishop’s comments were delivered in his keynote address at the Hands-On Conference Celebrating the Year of St. Paul, which was hosted at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit.
Having been asked to examine what November 2008 and its aftermath can teach Catholics about American culture, the state of American Catholicism and the kind of Pauline discipleship necessary today, Archbishop Chaput said:
“November showed us that 40 years of American Catholic complacency and poor formation are bearing exactly the fruit we should have expected. Or to put it more discreetly, the November elections confirmed a trend, rather than created a new moment, in American culture.”
catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=15439
G
GodLovesTheSpek
Guest
People are created so that they will come to know the Lord and live with HIm in His Kingdom for eternity. That which stands in the way of this Truth believes in the Lie from The Liar.
F
Fiyero3305
Guest
Two of my friends are Church-going strong Catholics, but are pro-choice. I’ve been discussing the issue with one of them and she is beginning to see that she has no foundation for her support of abortion (and in fact, hates when I tell her she is supporting abortion) and may be on the way to a breakthrough, hopefully then we can help the other one as well.
- Status