Here is a very interesting article to read

  • Thread starter Thread starter RobHom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
bustedhalo.com/features/something-new-in-the-abortion-debate/

There are some very interesting comments made within the article which I think tend to dispel some of the information disseminated during the campaign…
I see nothing convincing or interesting about this article. It is disappointing.

Mr. Obama is not even president and he is already making plans on expanding stem cell research and funding international organizations who support abortion.
 
I see nothing convincing or interesting about this article. It is disappointing.
I will go out on a limb and guess that you read the article with a “jaundiced eye”…
Mr. Obama is not even president and he is already making plans on expanding stem cell research and funding international organizations who support abortion.
Rather than believe in political rhetoric…I prefer to take a wait and see position.

I think there were many interesting and illuminating points in the article…

And there are also many interesting facts in this document as well. Keep in mind…I am an NPA… I belong to neither party, but I have been reading and looking beyond rhetoric…and this paper says much that gives me comfort and hope, not only for the future but for the unborn.

catholicdemocrats.org/cfo/pdf/Catholic_Case_for_Obama_booklet.pdf

Its not a short read, but what is very illuminating is the comments from the US Bishops regarding “stem cell research”… You might want to read it.

As to other statements and allegations…we will have to wait and see. Much can change between now and then…

He was elected, and he will be the President. It is incumbent upon us to support him as the President, as well as work with the system to affect the changes we believe to be morally imperative as Catholics, Christians and humans.
 
I don’t really know where to start, but I’ll try.
  1. Barack Obama has stated and restated that he believes the woman’s right to choose is just that, a right.
I vehemently oppose this view. If you support a persons right to do something it will inevitably result in that right being exercised. That is problem Number 1. This view does not work for a Catholic.
  1. He is committed to passing legislation that will eliminate all state and federal restrictions on abortion. Only after this does he say he may support late term abortion restrictions.
Whoop-dee-do. BTW, Catholics believe life starts at conception, so OOPS, that view doesn’t work for us either.
  1. He does not support the Hyde Amendment, which makes it so taxpayers cannot pay for an abortion through medicare and NARAL itself has said this has restricted 50% of abortions simply because the mother could not pay.
I’ll start with these three. Let me know what you think about them.
 
“Those are all things that we put in the Democratic platform for the first time this year, and I think that’s where we can find some common ground, because nobody’s pro-abortion”

Are you kidding!?! This guy is the most pro abortion polition I have ever seen. During the debate, he said he would definitely use a litmus test for judicial appointments. He said he favors destroying a baby after a botched abortion (infanticide) and he is trying to come off as pro-life…Come on!
 
I do understand what you both are saying…and there is little argument that can be made. I am merely pointing out that the people that seem to have been the driving force to some extent have opened a dialogue that can very possibly lead to changes in the way things are currently done. Why not use the window of opportunity that is afforded?

The president of the Rutherford Institute did an article on how “Anti-abortion politics is failing”…and it made a great deal of sense. The man who wrote this article is definitely Pro-life, and is a Constitutional Lawyer…you can read the article here: rutherford.org/articles_db/commentary.asp?record_id=562

I think he made very good points. I heard him talk on the Catholic Channel…and so I looked it up. There is much truth in what he says…and I think he gives good advice. Take what you can get while you can get it! That’s what it says to me. If you can save 90% of the children, take the 90% and then work for the other 10%.

Ever since the Roe V Wade decision many years ago…the demands made by pro-life have been 100% or nothing in essence. In reality…that demand or ploy has failed. Very, very little has been done…even though the total number of abortions has decreased and is at its lowest point in three decades. The dynamics that drive abortion are many, and one point of focus is “finances”…

Regardless of what anyone thinks of Obama as far as abortion is concerned… I see many of his comments and speeches as being an open window of opportunity to work to change the situation as it stands. If we do nothing but stand back and bang on the gong and chant “words”…little or nothing will be accomplished.

There are many people working very hard to change things…and doing so without the power of “law”… like these people: time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1590444,00.html These are the kinds of people that we need to back with assets…not wasteful political campaigns that finance ads and salaries of people who accomplish little or nothing. Lets not forget the billion or more dollars that have been spent on “abstinence only” programs that have not worked. Why aren’t we doing more to help women…especially women who would want to keep their child or children if they could afford to do so?

How many children could have been saved with the money that has been spent that has produced little or nothing? I think many more than we can imagine.

We cannot afford to try to legislate morality…it does not work. It is far wiser to alleviate the problem at its source…than to try and prevent it with a law that can and will be circumvented.

Here are some facts as to why abortions occur:
johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html
johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/uslifetimeab.html

There is nothing to be gained by vilifying anyone or railing against a group with political rhetoric…it will only stoke the arguments further, and cause further distraction from attaining the desired goal.

We need to think outside of the box, put our money where it really counts. If you are truly “Pro-Life”…are you willing to spend your dollars by giving them to a group that is dedicated to helping real people to make a better decision that will save the life of an unborn child…or give it to someone who is going to promise something that has been promised for years…but never delivered??

I know where my money will go…🙂
 
So, what you are saying is the fight against abortion is not working by voting for pro-life candidates. We must instead vote for people who are more inspiring in other ways but are pro-choice with a plan to divert peoples attention away from abortion?

Is that the gist of the article and what you are presenting?
 
So, what you are saying is the fight against abortion is not working by voting for pro-life candidates. We must instead vote for people who are more inspiring in other ways but are pro-choice with a plan to divert peoples attention away from abortion?

Is that the gist of the article and what you are presenting?
Not at all!! This country elected Pro-Life" politicians And virtually nothing has been accomplished!!

But, if you can elect someone who can arrive at a solution that will actually divert people away from abortion in that it would prevent abortion…then YES, that would be a good thing. How could it not be a good thing. It is a fact that previous political moves have failed…and failed miserably…and yet millions and millions have been spent that could have been spent far wiser, and far fewer babies would have been aborted.

As the old saying goes, there is more than one way to skin a cat. You use what you have at hand and run with it. Failure to take what is possible at hand…is worse than doing nothing at all. When opportunity opens the door, embrace it, don’t curse it.

The election is over, the votes were counted. Bemoaning the outcome for the next 4 to 8 years is a waste of time and energy. It would be far better to put that energy to good use…and use the funds where they would best be used.

Many things in the history of this country have been accomplished by the people doing what is right, and by those who did not wait for the government to resolve the issue.
 
Not at all!! This country elected Pro-Life" politicians And virtually nothing has been accomplished!!
do you know what Bush has done and has not done for the fight for life?
But, if you can elect someone who can arrive at a solution that will actually divert people away from abortion in that it would prevent abortion…then YES, that would be a good thing. How could it not be a good thing. It is a fact that previous political moves have failed…and failed miserably…and yet millions and millions have been spent that could have been spent far wiser, and far fewer babies would have been aborted.

As the old saying goes, there is more than one way to skin a cat. You use what you have at hand and run with it. Failure to take what is possible at hand…is worse than doing nothing at all. When opportunity opens the door, embrace it, don’t curse it.

The election is over, the votes were counted. Bemoaning the outcome for the next 4 to 8 years is a waste of time and energy. It would be far better to put that energy to good use…and use the funds where they would best be used.

Many things in the history of this country have been accomplished by the people doing what is right, and by those who did not wait for the government to resolve the issue.
The problem starts with the government. The government in 1973 legalized abortion. With Roe v Wade they overstepped their bounds and morals in this ruling. It NEEDS to be reversed. This way, states will be allowed to rule for themselves, an arena where every persons voice can be more easily heard and taken into account. In the states the fight will go on but WE as individuals can do more.

Do you not agree?
 
do you know what Bush has done and has not done for the fight for life?
Virtually NOTHING!! He, and the Republican Party have essentially failed on the abortion issue. There has been virtually nothing done to change the law, and there have been zero challenges to Roe V Wade. All that he and Rove did was make promises…that’s all.
The problem starts with the government. The government in 1973 legalized abortion. With Roe v Wade they overstepped their bounds and morals in this ruling. It NEEDS to be reversed. This way, states will be allowed to rule for themselves, an arena where every persons voice can be more easily heard and taken into account. In the states the fight will go on but WE as individuals can do more.
The “government” is not responsible. It was a ruling by the Supreme Court. What you and others may not be able to understand and grasp is that the the decision was not solely about abortion, but individual rights vis a vis the 9th and 14th Amendments of the Constitution. They did not overstep their bounds, and as to morals…only they can answer that, though that judgment does not belong to anyone but they. We can opine as much as we choose, however, not being on the Supreme Court…we can but conjecture or muse.
Do you not agree?
To what I have responded to so far, no. My response shows that. 🙂

But, as to the fact that we as individuals can do more… I do agree. In reality, it is we the people who are the most guilty. We need to stop looking to the government to resolve all of these issues. The people dropped the ball by making these things “socially acceptable”. The tide needs to be turned. I don’t believe that the states will resolve the issue any better. Proof of that is this past election.

We as people have to find other peaceful, loving, and charitable ways to reach other people…especially those that are considering abortion…and offer them solid, sane, and meaningful alternatives to abortion. If we can’t do that…we’re in more trouble than we ever thought.

I am hardly a “Constitutional Lawyer”, but from my viewpoint as Rob the Citizen, with a moderate education… I cannot see how the decision can be “overturned”. The whole concept of the Supreme Court is contained within its name. As to the law of the land, its decisions are final and supreme. If another “Supreme Court” was to overturn the decision of a prior “Supreme Court”, especially if there was a significantly different political demographic of the members…it would fully destroy the very dynamic of the court. It would clearly send the message that “the Supreme Court is for sale to the highest bidder/political party”. It would become a very partisan tool. Additionally, in order to turn it back to the “states” would invoke sets of mayhem on the populace, and probably would only cause ceases in certain states, but that would not prevent much in the long run.

Correction of the issue must be done on a completely different level. The Churches and the people need to put their money where it will do the most good…and that is not by paying for TV ads, lobbyists, etc. There are many other ways…all of them sane and legal…we need to go there!

On this site, you will find interesting information. Every statistic on this page concerns an illegal activity…and every state in the nation has “laws outlawing these acts”…and yet…they still occur. disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

IF, every state was to outlaw abortion…making illegal, people would just leave the country to do it, or have it done like in the old days…

I do not support abortion, I abhor it, but I understand that this is not an issue that is easy to change. Past methods have failed, and violent methods have failed as well…so its time to reconfigure the ways of thinking and do some thinking out of the box…
 
From here:

[

Pro-Life Accomplishments Of The Bush AdministrationAppointed Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel AlitoReinstituted the Mexico City Policyannouncing early in his administration that he would veto legislation that threatened pro-life policy.
Signed the Born-Alive Infant Protection ActSigned the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban of 2003Signed Unborn Victims of Violence ActCut off all federal funds to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)Thwarted efforts at the United Nations to promote abortionIssued Executive Order banning the use of new lines of embryonic stem cells in federally funded experimentsSigned the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005Launched public awareness of adoption campaign****Established the first federal government and national website listing and showing children available for adoption across the countryIncreased the tax credit for adoption related expenses from $5,000 to $10,000Annually declared Sanctity of Human Life DayIssued a federal regulation allowing states to include unborn children in the federal/state S-CHIP program
](Pro-Life Accomplishments Of The Bush Administration)

continued…
 
  1. T**he Bush Administration did what it could to stop assisted suicide from taking further hold in Oregon. **The state of Oregon passed an assisted suicide law that allows doctors to prescribe federally controlled drugs in lethal amounts to certain of their patients who say they want to die. Federal law holds that federally controlled drugs may only be prescribed for legitimate medical purposes. During the Clinton Administration, Attorney General Janet Reno decreed that assisted suicide was a legitimate medical purpose in those states that permit it. During the Bush Administration, Attorney General John Ashcroft changed that ruling, saying that assisted suicide was not a legitimate medical purpose, thereby barring doctors from prescribing lethal drugs. A lawsuit was filed and ultimately, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of allowing the drugs to be used for assisted suicide.
  2. Signed legislation making it possible for a federal court to hear whether Terri Schiavo’s constitutional rights had been violated by being denied hydration and nutrition.
  3. Dramatically increased funding for abstinence education through the Department of Health and Human Services, although Congress did not approve the full amount the Bush Administration requested.
Let’s see Obama match that. Somehow, I suspect that he won’t; he’ll roll them back.

Ruthie, grumpy and ill.
 
Ruthie, while all of those things may appear to be “monumental” to some people…they amount to little more than “band-aids” on a scab.

The bottom line is…they have still accomplished virtually nothing.

There is a better way to do it, and that does not so much involve the government doing what society and parents should do themselves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top