Democratic Ad: Catholic Church More Concerned About Abortion Than Poor

[JimG]

Would we be having the same argument if it were about politicians who promoted infanticide up to the age of 6 months, but whose positions were otherwise favorable? Actually, I’m afraid we might.

 

[dmelosi]

yeah, i know it is evil. i don’t know how many times i need to say that until you’ll get it.

but there is more to the issue than simply admitting that abortion is evil. most people on both sides of the debate already agree that abortion is evil. so you are simply not adding anything to the conversation by repeatedly saying so. you are basically sticking you fingers in your ears and saying “la, la, la, i can’t hear you.” and you aren’t helping the cause in doing so.

You are saying that democrats think abortion is evil?

 

[Rocinante]

Would we be having the same argument if it were about politicians who promoted infanticide up to the age of 6 months, but whose positions were otherwise favorable? Actually, I’m afraid we might.

obviously we should not support someone who promotes infanticide just as i’ve been saying that we should not support someone who promotes abortion. what i’ve been saying is that this is not the issue. no one promotes abortion as a good thing.

 

[Rocinante]

You are saying that democrats think abortion is evil?

yes.

Obama:
“No one is pro-abortion”

John Kerry:
“Too many people in America believe that if you are pro-choice that means pro-abortion. It doesn’t. I don’t want abortion. Abortion should be the rarest thing in the world. I am actually personally opposed to abortion. But I don’t believe that I have a right to take what is an article of faith to me and legislate it to other people. That’s not how it works in America.”

 

[estesbob]

yes.

Obama:
“No one is pro-abortion”

John Kerry:
“Too many people in America believe that if you are pro-choice that means pro-abortion. It doesn’t. I don’t want abortion. Abortion should be the rarest thing in the world. I am actually personally opposed to abortion. But I don’t believe that I have a right to take what is an article of faith to me and legislate it to other people. That’s not how it works in America.”

Quoting two of the most pro-abortion politicians in the country is not a good idea when trying to convince people that nobody is pro-abortion. Again we are seen the usual semantics game played by those trying to rationalize supporting evil.

It appears we’re falling back onto the old canard of “I don’t personally support killing my children but support the right of others to kill their children” -but of course that’s not supporting evil, correct right

 

[Rocinante]

Quoting two of the most pro-abortion politicians in the country is not a good idea when trying to convince people that nobody is pro-abortion. Again we are seen the usual semantics game played by those trying to rationalize supporting evil.

It appears we’re falling back onto the old canard of “I don’t personally support killing my children but support the right of others to kill their children” -but of course that’s not supporting evil, correct right

i think this sort of demonizing of the opposition to your view works against your dream of making abortion illegal and works against making abortion more rare. you only get women sticking their fingers in their ears and declaring, “my body. my choice” when they have already been told by people with fingers in their own ears that women are evil for thinking that women ought to have some say as to what happens to them and their own bodies (especially after having been raped or when the mother’s life is in danger because of the pregnancy).

the only way we are going to get anything done to reduce the number of abortions in the US is if we can all agree that abortion is evil (we already pretty much do) and if pro-lifers and pro-choicers stop thinking of one another as evil people (that can happen as soon as we choose to try to understand one another).

 

[estesbob]

i think this sort of demonizing of the opposition to your view works against your dream of making abortion illegal and works against making abortion more rare. you only get women sticking their fingers in their ears and declaring, “my body. my choice” when they have already been told by people with fingers in their own ears that women are evil for thinking that women ought to have some say as to what happens to them and their own bodies (especially after having been raped or when the mother’s life is in danger because of the pregnancy).

the only way we are going to get anything done to reduce the number of abortions in the US is if we can all agree that abortion is evil (we already pretty much do) and if pro-lifers and pro-choicers stop thinking of one another as evil people (that can happen as soon as we choose to try to understand one another).

I see now we’re falling back on the old “those who oppose abortion really cause it” that is, unless we show compassion and understanding for those supporting the slaughter of the innocents it is our fault when they slaughter the innocents. Again it should not be our goal to reduce the number of abortions, it should be to stop them. Millions of children have been slaughtered under the guise of " we are trying to reduce the number of abortions"

 

[Rocinante]

I see now we’re falling back on the old “those who oppose abortion really cause it” that is, unless we show compassion and understanding for those supporting the slaughter of the innocents it is our fault when they slaughter the innocents. Again it should not be our goal to reduce the number of abortions, it should be to stop them. Millions of children have been slaughtered under the guise of " we are trying to reduce the number of abortions"

how exactly are you going to stop them?

do you think there has ever been or will ever be a time when their were no abortions?

 

[estesbob]

how exactly are you going to stop them?

do you think there has ever been or will ever be a time when their were no abortions?

We make them illegal. Will that stop them? Of course not- no more than making murder illegal has stopped all murders. But it will drastically cut the number of abortions and will send the message that our society holds life sacred

 

[Rocinante]

We make them illegal. Will that stop them? Of course not- no more than making murder illegal has stopped all murders. But it will drastically cut the number of abortions and will send the message that our society holds life sacred

ok, so we agree then that the issue is trying to reduce abortion as much as possible. now what is the first step? do you really think that overturning roe is going to do much? because i think it’s pretty doubtful that it would.

it makes sense to consider the consequences of making abortion illegal, and they aren’t all good. it seems entirely reasonable to have a rational conversation about what the consequences would be or how to bring about the best possible outcomes under the current state of public opinion or how to change public opinion.

what will help in this issue is not a contest to see who cries the most tears over each abortion or uses the most emotional language in describing the horror that is abortion.

 

[JimG]

obviously we should not support someone who promotes infanticide just as i’ve been saying that we should not support someone who promotes abortion. what i’ve been saying is that this is not the issue. no one promotes abortion as a good thing.

But should we support someone who is pro-choice on infanticide? That may not be nearly as far fetched as I wish it were.

 

[estesbob]

ok, so we agree then that the issue is trying to reduce abortion as much as possible. now what is the first step?

The first step is outlawing abortion.

do you really think that overturning roe is going to do much? because i think it’s pretty doubtful that it would.

Although I would love to see Roe overturned that is just another step towards a goal of outlawing abortion. Of course nothing is possible in the war on abortion as long as people keep voting for pro-abortion politicians.

it makes sense to consider the consequences of making abortion illegal, and they aren’t all good. it seems entirely reasonable to have a rational conversation about what the consequences would be or how to bring about the best possible outcomes under the current state of public opinion or how to change public opinion.

Nonsense. None of the dire things people predict would happen if abortion were made illegal occurred prior to Roe be imposed on the country in 1972. We do not need to have a “conversation” about this. We need to stop this evil by all legal means possible. Thus far this “conversation” has taken place over the bodies of 50 million dead children

wha at will help in this issue is not a contest to see who cries the most tears over each abortion or uses the most emotional language in describing the horror that is abortion.

What will help the most is outlawing abortion. The quickest way to do that is to make sure those politicians who support it don’t get elected. You

 

[JimG]

The first step would be reversing Roe and Doe and returning abortion legislation to the States and the people.

The second step would be to take pro-choice advocates at their word, that abortion should be rare. Prohibit abortion past 20 or 24 weeks of gestation. Then, since the “hard cases” of rape, incest and life of the mother are those often brought up as requiring abortion, limit abortion to all except those instances. That would eliminate 98% of all abortion.

Provide for penalties to abortionists, not women.

 

[JimG]

Unfortunately, at this point it may still be a tossup as to whether the “abortion liberty” might ultimately be extended to infanticide. The same hard case arguments would be used: Nobody is in favor of infanticide, but what about the child who is born with an incurable defect and faces a life of disability?etc. The accusations will be similar: “You pro-lifers only care about fetuses and newborns. What about kindergarteners, adolescents, single mothers? Newborns aren’t even fully conscious yet.”

 

[markbrumbaugh]

obviously we should not support someone who promotes infanticide just as i’ve been saying that we should not support someone who promotes abortion. what i’ve been saying is that this is not the issue. no one promotes abortion as a good thing.

I think the issue is you want to be a Democrat and are looking for ways to justify your voting for Pro-Choice politicians.

 

[markbrumbaugh]

So in the last fifty or so years we have spent about 800 a year per person on the war on poverty last year we spent 2000 per person on the defense budget .

Here are some of the programs included in the fight against poverty: Medicaid, food stamps, supplementary security income, temporary assistance to needy families, child day-care payments, child nutrition payments, foster care, adoption assistance, and health insurance for children.(from the same website that came up with the 10Trillion number)

The poster apparently is against the Medicare that kept Schivaro alive, the food stamps that go to the working poor, the SSI for widows and children who lose a parent, adoption assistance and foster care that provide alternatives to abortion, day care that enables parents to work instead of collecting assistance. The WIC program that helps out the young mothers who don’t choose abortion and the other programs that help the least.

What a waste of money, give me a tank and a $600 toilet seat anyday .

Peace

I think your comment about a $600 dollar toilet seat proves my point well. Who do you think bought that toilet? Well, the US government did. They have to go out for bids to get the best price. If the best price proposal was $600, they had a whole buncha specs that are dumb.
Point is the US government does do anything very efficiently ranging from medical care to war to toilet seats. Rather than get anything improved, they just clamor for more money. Private charity and a booming economy where people can spend money on what they need and desire will help more poor people than taking from the rich and giving to the poor.
However, we have strayed off topic.
I am certainly more concerned about abortion than I am the poor. The Dems got this right.

 

[portarica]

I think your comment about a $600 dollar toilet seat proves my point well. Who do you think bought that toilet? Well, the US government did. They have to go out for bids to get the best price. If the best price proposal was $600, they had a whole buncha specs that are dumb.
Point is the US government does do anything very efficiently ranging from medical care to war to toilet seats. Rather than get anything improved, they just clamor for more money. Private charity and a booming economy where people can spend money on what they need and desire will help more poor people than taking from the rich and giving to the poor.
However, we have strayed off topic.
I am certainly more concerned about abortion than I am the poor. The Dems got this right.

No, the specs on the toilet seat are not dumb, it is the way overhead is allocated. Because overhead on defense items is such a large portion of the final price, when a one item order comes up (like a replacement toilet seat) the overhead allocation might be equal to 80% of the cost with only an hour of direct labor to enter the order. pick the piece, pack and ship it.

Just as your explanation of the cost of the toilet seat shows that you didn’t consider the real picture of cost, when we ignore the value of all of the least we ignore some of the required overhead of following Christ. It isn’t enough to say we will only treat some of the least like they may be Jesus, we are bound to treat all of the least like they may be Jesus.

Now I know that flies in the face of how the fundies perceive being able to be against the poor and still be 'good" Christians, but they also believe in the concept of once saved always saved, for Catholics Jesus keeps asking us if we fed Him when He was hungry.

Peace