Leaving pro-life literature, where is it legal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TraderTif
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“Abortion is no a longer dangerous procedure. This applies not just a therapeutic abortions as performed in hospitals but also to so-called illegal abortions done by physicians. In 1957 there only 260 deaths in the whole country attribute to abortions of any kind.”

Mary F. Calderone on "Lillegal Abortion As a Public Health Problem ,American Journal of Public Health, 50, 1960, P948-954

There are in fact fewer than 1500 total pregnancy deaths in this country per annum ,very few others could go undetected, and of these 1500 probably no more than a third are as result of abortion. Even the unskilled abortionist is evidently more skillful and or more careful these days. Although criminal abortion is of course to be decried, the demand for its abolition cannot reasonably be based upon 30-year-old mortality statistics

Robert E. Hall, Commentary, in David D. Smith,ed. , abortion And the Law. ,Cleveland Western Reserve University Press, 1967, page 228

Both Ms. Calderone and Mr. Hall were proponents of legal abortion.
 
**How much trash are our children seeing on TV, hearing from their peers, being taught in schools. Who’s complaining about that? **

Me, for one.

I am not advocating breaking laws, but don’t let anyone discourage you in your passion for justice in saving lives.

No one is advocating losing one’s “passion for saving lives,” simply that this is not the best way to go about it.

** Think the way the JWs and Jack Chicks do, leave them everywhere.**

By all means, use Jack Chick as a pattern card for behavior.There’s a name I would want to be associated with. Everyone respects Jack Chick and his message. :rolleyes:

What are you doing about the trash on TV and in schools? Can you give some examples? What actions have you taken? You seem to be spending a sizable amount of time debating the issue of pro-life cards. How would you send out the pro-life message?
 
Yes. And your task is to make a valid argument that it is morally wrong, which you have not done.

Something does not have to be morally wrong to be ineffective and counterproductive.

**This doesn’t address the rightness or wrongness of it. All it does is suggest it is imprudent. Which is completely debateable. **

I thought we were debating…

It is not at all like Jack Chick because Chick can be logically demonstrated as a disingenuous wing-nut.

Not at all like Jack Chick? Really? Here’s a sample of what he passes out on the subject. If you think such is the most effective way to garner public support for your cause, up to you.
chick.com/reading/tracts/1009/1009_01.asp

So what? This can just be chalked up to cognitive dissonance. Some people when they hear truth put their fingers over their ears yelling “LA LA LA!” The goal here is shining the light and not giving bad-argument roaches a shadow to scurry to.

Bad argument roaches???

One doesn’t exclude others. The pro-abortionists entire goal is keeping abortion as abstract as possible because they know when confronted with the reality of it, their support evaporates. So while these tactics are unpopular, they are essential.

But one can be much more effective in garnering support than another. I was not aware that crisis pregnancy centers and their like “kept abortion as abstract as possible.”
 
It is obvious you support the legality of abortion. A person who feels passionaltely that slaughtering our children should always be illegal would not give us paragraph after paragraph of why they arent going to answer the question. A any rate regardless of you protestations to the contrary one has to assume that you objection to this literature is it holds a view contrary to yours.
Actually I don’t support the legality of and use of abortion in all cases. I also do not support making it illegal in all and every case because it is simply sometimes medically warranted in ways that the Catholic Church does not accept.

This is not because it holds a view contrary to mine–our views on the subject are actually fairly close. I object to these kinds of tactics for their own sake, regardless of the cause they support.
 
What are you doing about the trash on TV and in schools? Can you give some examples? What actions have you taken?
We do not subscribe to cable tv nor have access to publicly available channels (we have a tv but it is exclusively for videos, has been for several years), we do our best to choose very carefully which movies we choose to attend or buy and products we choose to support, including in terms of books, clothes, toys, etc., either for personal use or for gifts. I homeschool my daughter. Letters to the editor, letters to companies at times. I pay attention to all the stances of and actions by those running for public office, including school board and do my best to vote my conscience (among the limited options available:shrug: ).

Basically do my best to use my economic and voting power to the best advantage.
You seem to be spending a sizable amount of time debating the issue of pro-life cards. How would you send out the pro-life message?
Not really. 24 posts over the course of 10 days is really not much time. I have done much more on other threads. Now do I spend too much time on the computer overall and do I have an inordinate fondness for debate? Probably 🙂 .

I tend to take the approach of supporting responsible sexual activity, including the use of contraceptives if such are not in opposition to the person’s religious beliefs. Note that I have repeatedly said it is not the message that I am calling into question or even the existence of these particular cards. It is this particular method of indiscriminate strewing of graphic images over the countryside without direction or care as to who they end up with. Have the guts to hand your card directly to me or to someone else.
 
Actually I don’t support the legality of and use of abortion in all cases. I also do not support making it illegal in all and every case because it is simply sometimes medically warranted in ways that the Catholic Church does not accept.
Finally the truth comes out. I can understand why you dont want your child to come across this literature. Better to indoctinate them on the necessity of abortion in an abstract way that let them find out what this aject evil is really all about.
 
Karen,

I simply don’t have enough finger energy to reply to everything you have posted in this thread but I will make it clear and concise as possible for you and others. I understand where you are coming from and I know you do but now let that view be challenged if you will.

First thing is that there are no medical reasons that a live baby should ever be aborted. Ask any doctor in the world and they will agree. Abortion is often advised strongly especially by poorly educated doctors who don’t want to bother with difficult situations. Always get a second opinion from a prolife doctor. I have explained this in another forum but I have a background in medicine and am more then adequately trained to state this accurately.

Karen… I used to believe as you do that graphic imagery was not the way to go, that was in 2003, now I’m part of the national leadership of prolifers who use this tactic mostly because not much else works, the proof is there and this is why we do it.

This parent in this photo was able to properly teach their child about abortion, perhaps she can be a role model to you: markharringtonlive.com/gallery/album33/aaq. Do you see that child crying in a fit or anything? No.

I want to give you two sources of information for you and others to take a look at. The first is my finished national prolife movie that is simply the talk given put to a movie for people who can’t attend that talk. It is located at:youtube.com/profile?user=cbrinfo. When you see that part 1 is up it is completely uploaded, I am doing so as I type this to youtube.

Incase you don’t want to watch the entire movie here is what you should read that hopefully will get you thinking:

***Prolifers against the showing of these photos will state that there are different ways of going about our message, that it creates a phinatical view, they will argue the delivery, the view of these so called prolifers completely contradicts the history of social reform that has proven effective. Most prolife people have no idea of the specifics of the history of social reform, they don’t understand that social reformers are never EVER liked and are always unpopular, because they are always confronting a culture that does not want to know more about an injustice for which they bare some responsibility, so this idea that we can be liked and effective is foolish at best and eerily similar to the aims of the prochoice movement- to be liked, being liked in the past has never been successful in overturning any other form of injustice, covering up abortion is not an effective way of convincing people that abortion is an evil that should be unlawful and always unthinkable. ***

***Feelings against these graphic signs aren’t enough. You need to provide evidence for making the bold claim that these images do more harm then good, especially in light of the evidence of changed minds, babies saved, and men and women brought to repentance all as a result of graphic images. And whatever evidence you have, it should be weighed against the following information:

The following statements were given by women who contacted CBR and told them that the only reason they did not have an abortion was because of seeing the graphic photos. We will only read a few tonight because of time constraints, these and many others are available to read on CBR’s website.

***. I am now pregnant and these photos have made me see that [having an abortion] is not a humane thing to do.
Age 17
  1. I used to think [abortion] was o.k. because the baby wasn’t born, but after seeing the pictures I wanted to throw up, because I have three children and with the third one I thought about abortion because it was too much, but I didn’t and I am so very glad, because every time I look at her I couldn’t imagine life without her.
    Age 25 from Pennsylvania
  2. I am 8 weeks pregnant at the moment and was considering abortion. There’s no way I could consider it now. I didn’t realize exactly what was entailed.
    Age 27, Cardiff,Wales (UK)
  3. Well, I was thinking of abortion because my children are gonna be less than 2 years apart but after reading everything and looking at the pictures I can’t do it.
    Age 19, Florida
  4. I am 9 weeks and 3 days pregnant. Several people were telling me to have an abortion. I will NOT have an abortion; instead I will give a life to this world. Thank you so much!
    Age 22, Dallas, Texas
  5. I’m a 22 year old Spanish girl. I got pregnant by my ex. He wants me to get an abortion and he says that he is not going to be responsible for my child. I was thinking on it because I’m in college and I don’t have anything done yet, but I was looking at the pictures and this is horrible. I don’t know how people can easily kill like this. I’m going to keep my baby; I know we are going to be happy.
    Edison, NJ

 
***If we avoid saving lives in order to protect feelings, that calls into question our very determination to save lives.
So the question we are left with is this: “If we don’t like abortion and we don’t want people to experience abortion, why not use an approach that we know will convince people not to abort?”

You may be relieved to know that we aren’t directly targeting children with our graphic pictures; therefore, we won’t knowingly go to an area where only children are present, such as a preschool or an elementary school. The reality, however, is that it is impossible to reach the masses in society where no children will ever be present. If parents with young children see the images, they can practice parental discretion and distract their children as they would if there was a dead deer on the side of the road, or they can seize it as a teaching opportunity. They can gently explain to their children that some people hurt babies but that the people driving the trucks are trying to stop that. Furthermore, parents can reassure their children that they will never be hurt like the babies have been hurt because “mommy and daddy love you and will keep you safe.” Those parents can also say that unfortunately there are people in the world that are mean and selfish who will hurt an unborn child in the womb and because she loves her children that she would never allow this to happen to their child, those parents can teach their children that violence is wrong and love is good.

Parents sometimes use their children as an excuse for why the images shouldn’t be shown. The reality is that they don’t want to see the images. They may have guilt from past abortions and they don’t want to come to terms with their mistake. After all, children have consciences and they love babies. When children see the images they see a hurt baby and they want to know, “Who hurt the baby?”
The parent’s reaction determines the child’s reaction. An irate, swearing, and guilty parent will have a frustrated and confused child. But a calm, rational parent will have a calm child. I heard of a case of a 5-year-old who saw graphic abortion images. Her teenage sister gently explained the situation and although the little girl cried, she was moved to pray during family prayer time “that the doctors will stop killing babies.” Another child, a 9-year-old, who saw a graphic abortion photo went directly to his mother and said, “Mom, I want to stop abortion.”
Children have functioning consciences. The question is: do we?
Saying that children are tramatized by photos of abortion is bogus and disingenuous, adults cry foul because so many of them have been complicent and complacent in the violent killing of unborn babies, they feel guilt and shame about this, they don’t want that amplified by being forced to look at these photos, people are coping with abortion by denial, they deny its a baby, they deny its an act of violence, they want to believe its a blob of tissue, they want to believe its the lesser of two evils, we can’t stop the killing but we can stop the pretending

 
A simple no,I dont think abortions should be illegal would have saved us all a lot of time reading the standard rationalizations as to why its ok to support people who enable the killing of our children.
well, my voting preferences are well documented on this board, so I didn’t want anyone trying to throw a “how can you be prolife if you voted for xyz” in my face,without all the info. So, yes, it was relavent. 🙂

As to my needing to read the literature, you have to know that both sides present their own literature which can be (and is often) biased.Both sides present conflicting information, so, really, I’d rather not go there.
 
At least now we know why you dont want people handng out pro-life literature. It would be nice if Karen was as honest as you…
Um, rather than try to assume something, you should ask. NO, that’s not why I don’t want people handing out pro-life literature. If that were the case, i wouldn’t mind when people pass out pro-choice literature. For the record, I disagree with that JUST as strongly.

SO, if you’re still interested in guessing my motive, try again. 😛
 
well, my voting preferences are well documented on this board, so I didn’t want anyone trying to throw a “how can you be prolife if you voted for xyz” in my face,without all the info. So, yes, it was relavent. 🙂

As to my needing to read the literature, you have to know that both sides present their own literature which can be (and is often) biased.Both sides present conflicting information, so, really, I’d rather not go there.
Im sorry-but there is no confilcting information-at least not for those who care to look for the truth…

And of course you cant be pro-life and vote for those aid and abette killing out children. Where would anyone ever get tha idea?
 
Sorry, but a candidate who supports the return of chattel slavery is an unacceptable candidate no matter how compassionate he is on other issues. The same with abortion because both are grave and intrinsic wrongs and voting for them amounts to cooperation with evil. It ain’t a balance sheet–that’s the proportionalist heresy. Support for a single intrinsic wrong poisons the whole candidate.
Well, we’ll definately have to agree to disagree on this one!
 
Well, we’ll definately have to agree to disagree on this one!
You disagree with the church also:

3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

Cardinal Ratzinger.


You have to ask yourself-do my politics form my faith or does my faith form your politcs?
 
You disagree with the church also:

3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

Cardinal Ratzinger.
Yes, I do. Although, my issues have more to do with programs for the poor, universal health care, etc., but that’s another thread! 😃
You have to ask yourself-do my politics form my faith or does my faith form your politcs?
Actually, my conscience forms my politics. I feel alright with God. Some would say that if I disagree with the church on some issues I should leave it. But I’m not sure I agree…
 
Finally the truth comes out. I can understand why you dont want your child to come across this literature. Better to indoctinate them on the necessity of abortion in an abstract way that let them find out what this aject evil is really all about.
Interesting twist to what I said. Not surprising, really.
 
Yes, I do. Although, my issues have more to do with programs for the poor, universal health care, etc., but that’s another thread! 😃

Actually, my conscience forms my politics. I feel alright with God. Some would say that if I disagree with the church on some issues I should leave it. But I’m not sure I agree…
You evidently don’t understand what primacy of conscience is all about. If your conscience tells you something contrary to what the Church teaches you conscience is wrong. 8,000 children have died since the hread began. That’s 8,000 children that won’t have an opportunity to have a health care of any kind or take advantage of any federal programs be they for the poor are not.

I don’t look upon this as a party issue. I voted against Kay Bailey Hutchinson because she is pro-choice and I will vote against Rudy Giuliani if Republicans are foolish enough to nominate him I voted against Phil Gramm in spite his pro-life credentials.

Nothing is more important than bringing abortion to an end in this country, Nothing. You can rationalize it all you want but supporting candidates who believe abortion should be legal is not going to solve the problem.

I don’t want you to leave the church. I want you to join us in ending this abject evil.
 
You’re right. Once I found you were pro-choice I was not surprised at all about the views you had.
What, then, are my views? What do you mean when you label me “pro-choice”? Specifics please.
 
What, then, are my views? What do you mean when you label me “pro-choice”? Specifics please.
I** also do not support making it illegal** in all and every case because it is simply sometimes medically warranted in ways that the Catholic Church does not accept.
 
We are in a battle of semantics here, it seems to me. Bob, do you not consider yourself “pro-life” even though you say: **" I also do not support making it illegal in all and every case." ** Then Karen should be given the same courtesy.

I would not be surprised at someone (here) calling YOU pro-choice. Please, let’s not jump to conclusions…and keep the labels out. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top