R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Would you, though? That was the era in which baby boomers were at their most prolific. To draw any conclusions, one would have to know a lot more than I think anyone knows.
- Status
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Except that it took time to erode people’s consciences. So the increase didn’t happen until later (and is now falling, thank God)
L
Lily_Bernans
Guest
He said exactly, almost word-for-word, something I said in an earlier post:
“This doesn’t excuse the woman’s wrongdoing; rather, it is the same principle by which the state grants immunity to a small-time drug user in exchange for information leading to a big-time drug dealer.”
The woman is a murderer as well, just one who has been granted immunity so she will give up the name of the abortionist.
R
rmartensjr
Guest
And there, then, is the answer to why we don’t punish women.
C
Crossbones
Guest
I don’t know for sure. There seems to be a significant drop in birth rate in the 60s. That may be due to widespread birth control. Or maybe abortions or as you suggest demographics. But you don’t see the big changes in births around Roe v Wade that you might expect. I am making a hypothesis that it is because there was no great change in the number of abortions.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
However,your stance has been that the woman as a murderer should receive the same punishment as anyone else who murders
L
Lily_Bernans
Guest
Well, I posted that pages and days back! LOL Guess you missed it.And there, then, is the answer to why we don’t punish women.
R
rmartensjr
Guest
No, I saw it, but you were arguing differently. I thought maybe YOU forgot. In any case, I assume you won’t be asking THAT question any longer.
L
Lily_Bernans
Guest
I think they should; they are murderers, but I don’t think it would happen should abortion ever become illegal. But I don’t believe abortion will become illegal for many, many years. Not in my lifetime. Not in the lifetime of anyone on this board.
L
Lily_Bernans
Guest
WHAT question? No idea what you’re talking about.No, I saw it, but you were arguing differently. I thought maybe YOU forgot. In any case, I assume you won’t be asking THAT question any longer.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
But that isn’t what Fr.Pavone,Pope John Paul or the Church as a whole believe
R
rmartensjr
Guest
Whatever…WHAT question? No idea what you’re talking about.
L
Lily_Bernans
Guest
Fr. Pavone believes the women are murderers; he believes they aren’t punished so they will give up the name of the illegal abortionist. Shutting down an abortionist is better than putting one woman in prison, but he doesn’t cut the women any moral slack, he doesn’t say, “Oh, they were coerced!”
J
jediliz
Guest
Slave owners probably were hoping slavery would go on forever. It did not.
Abortion WILL end. People will realize that abortion does not solve ANYTHING and does more harm than good. We are missing doctors, teachers, scientists, mothers, fathers, maybe even some priests and religious. 50+ MILLION are missing from this country.
People often wonder why we don’t yet have a cure for cancer or parkinsons or Alzheimers. Well, I think GOD’s answer would be…“I sent them, but you aborted them!”
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
R
rmartensjr
Guest
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
J
JimG
Guest
Under canon law, abortion is a sin, and also a crime. The two categories are not coterminous. It is the canonical crime of abortion which incurs automatic excommunication. Canon lawyer Dr. Edward Peters has said that he doubts that any woman has incurred automatic excommunication for the sin of abortion.
“The pope’s statement seems to assume that the sin of abortion and the crime of abortion are concomitant realities. I, however, and I’ll wager nearly all other experts, hold sin to be distinguishable from crime, and that this crime is rarely, if ever, committed by women (again, as opposed to abortionists).”
–Dr. Edward Peters
Source
C
Crossbones
Guest
Estesbob said abortions went from 40K before to 1M+ after. There was no change of 1M.
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Not immediately. Check the numbers after 10 years, I’d say.
- Status