Lies, Damned Lies, and Alyssa Milano

[JimG]

I can certainly agree that every newborn baby should be born into a loving family, with a mom and a dad who are married, and who have anticipated that marriage is a covenant in which babies are to be expected when engaging in marital relations. But for a number of decades this kind or family has been denigrated, sex has been separated from marriage and from babies. Abortion has been one of the many dystopian results.

My own parents raised five children. I never asked them whether they considered it to have been a huge burden, but they didn’t seem to give that impression. It didn’t take a village, but it did take the older children helping with the younger ones, since the births were spread over fifteen years. And they did end up with grown kids who could help them in their old age. Sometimes things even out.

 

[Wozza]

Should we also restrict cars, spoons, and fast food food as well then?

Should we also restrict cars, spoons, and fast food food as well then?

Spoons and fast food are relatively harmless. Cars are not. So there are restrictions on who can own one, when they are allowed to drive, and under what conditions. You need a license to operate one and that license can be removed if you prove yourself to be unfit to operate the car safely.

Don’t you think that’s a good idea?

 

[MamaJewel]

I believe most women would choose to give life if they had the support.

I agree.
But society does not want to put forth the effort to change the current system which punishes women when they have children. Mommy Penalty. Daddy Bonus.
The system is rigged against mothers and caregivers.

We say that paid family leave, free child care, flexible work schedules, etc are too costly for businesses and government to implement and we wonder why some demographics of women choose abortion. If a woman is barely making her living expenses or if she’s in school, she might be more apt to consider abortion if she’s been told her pregnancy is too early for a living human to be present.

On top of that, we have poor women who often live in crappy public housing with thugs, drugs, bugs, and dilapidated buildings. The infrastructure of their surrounding community is as bad as the housing. The schools might be under-performing and under-funded. The community may lack access to doctors, clinics (except for the abortion clinic), drug stores, grocers, farmers market, library, daycare, a safe park and many other places that the average American takes for granted. These women turn to abortion as a solution.

Who wants to bring a new human into the world where the plaster from the ceiling is falling on your head, the rats and roaches are running around, the roof leaks, plumbing is obsolete, and men folk are shooting each other up in the parking lot where the addicts are shooting up?

The scenario above was the absolute scene of public housing units that are located about 500 feet from a former abortion clinic and pro-life pregnancy center in my area. The pro-lifers didn’t have a clue about the misery of those apartments until a handful of young men got shot over a very short period of time. The mayor and police chief went in and demanded that code enforcement get the place habitable for the residents there. Every set of stairs to the upper floors were condemned and had to be refurbished. And code enforcement hadn’t even been to inspect the place for over 5 years.

Those women and children there deserved better. They are human beings, not animals.

(sorry 4 my rant)

 

[MamaJewel]

I can certainly agree that every newborn baby should be born into a loving family, with a mom and a dad who are married, and who have anticipated that marriage is a covenant in which babies are to be expected when engaging in marital relations.

You know, if the zero pop freaks had pushed this as an agenda or the norm, instead of contraception and abortion, the human race would be so far below sustainability that they would be paying the married couples to have babies.

Sadly, in America, the family as we once knew it to be is dead to many people. Hopefully it will make a comeback with the the post-GenZ kids. I have noticed an increased interest in Fertility Awareness Methods by young 20 to early 30 year olds, so maybe a better understanding of natural bodily functions will lead to lower rates of unwanted pregnancy and abortion.

 

[ConcernedConvert]

We already do that, not necessarily a license, but federal background checks for purchasing, a minimum age requirement and restrictions on what can be owned where. Also we take away gun rights for violent criminal offenders and felons. So we already do those things.

 

[Wozza]

We already do that, not necessarily a license, but federal background checks for purchasing, a minimum age requirement and restrictions on what can be owned where. Also we take away gun rights for violent criminal offenders and felons. So we already do those things.

Would you allow someone to buy a car in a private sale with no checks on their suitability to drive it? And allow them to use the car on the roads whenever and wherever they pleased?

 

[Magnanimity]

Yes it does seem impossible to care for a child when a mom has been abused and deserted and has no one to support her but as Catholics and Christians dont we have a spiritual and human obligation to help those who have lost hope?

Yes we do. And I know it’s difficult to establish what this looks like in the concrete, but it’s really necessary. If we’re telling women that they must have the babies that they’re carrying, a proper support-network must exist to assist these women. It’s not enough to take moral high ground and tell other people what they ought to do—we must be willing to get our hands and lives as dirty as necessary to assist vulnerable women. Again, it’s not so easy to spell out what this looks like in the real world, but so far, I don’t think the church has done an amazing job of convincing its members of this need. Marching for life, while great, just isn’t enough… it offers no practical, loving assistance to a vulnerable, pregnant woman.

 

[Elf01]

It is a solution, no doubt. But I wonder how many pro-lifers are signing up for that work?

Lets ignore that for the moment. I agree raising children is hard work. Should their parents be allowed to kill them until they turn 18?

 

[Magnanimity]

Lets ignore that for the moment. I agree raising children is hard work.

It can’t be ignored, not at any moment. The church ignoring (or downplaying) the fact that it truly does take a village to raise a child well, has been part of the problem of today’s pro-life movement. Too much moralizing, not enough actual assistance provided. Not enough willingness to take on the heavy burden of assisting someone in raising a child.

Should their parents be allowed to kill them until they turn 18?

I’ll agree with the overwhelming majority of the world’s population on this one and answer “no.”

 

[Elf01]

I’ll agree with the overwhelming majority of the world’s population on this one and answer “no.”

Why? You are right that raising a child is hard. That doesn’t stop when they’re born. And the older they get the harder it is to find adoptive parents.

It can’t be ignored, not at any moment.

Fine. Do you adopt or foster older children whose parents are struggling?

 

[Cirdan_XII]

How so? Restricting abortion works on those who seek abortions – men, women who love their children and so on would be unaffected.

But “gun control” works on everyone – except the criminals.

A gun can have many purposes, including sports, hunting, self-defence.

An abortion can, by definition, have no purpose other than to end a life.

 

[DeniseNY]

t can’t be ignored, not at any moment. The church ignoring (or downplaying) the fact that it truly does take a village to raise a child well, has been part of the problem of today’s pro-life movement. Too much moralizing, not enough actual assistance provided. Not enough willingness to take on the heavy burden of assisting someone in raising a child.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) Elf01:

https://catholicherald.co.uk/issues/february-17th-2017/a-worldwide-force-for-good/

 

[Powdercoater]

I would imagine that at least some of the people on the long waiting list to adopt are pro life.

 

[goout]

It can’t be ignored, not at any moment. The church ignoring (or downplaying) the fact that it truly does take a village to raise a child well, has been part of the problem of today’s pro-life movement. Too much moralizing, not enough actual assistance provided. Not enough willingness to take on the heavy burden of assisting someone in raising a child.

This is an old and very tired smear of the pro life community that has absolutely no basis in reality.

The pro life community are heavily immersed in doing the work to support human life, human dignity, provide beds, health care, adoption.
In my neighborhood for example:
One couple has adopted 3 children. And on the other side a couple has adopted 2 children from other countries.
Our parish deacon adopted 2 children and had 3 of their own.
Our coordinator of pro life ministries has adopted 7 children (yes 7), including 2 handicapped children.

The Catholic Church is the largest NGO charitable organization in the world and can be found providing assistance wherever it is needed, and that assistance has nothing to do with what you call moralizing. And you can add the many other Christian denominations to that in helping provide material support to the world’s needy.

Your accusation above of empty moralizing is baseless and betrays a prejudice.

 

[Jimbo]

But I think that the pro-life camp sometimes refuses to acknowledge the deep (and justifiable!) fears associated with mothering a child in a difficult situation (single-parent, poverty, no family nearby, etc).

Some do, of course. Though many are parents, single and otherwise.

I’m totally fine with trying to increase help to single mothers in this country; even if that means we have fraud and (sometimes staggering) economic inefficiencty, in order to save the unborn and maybe help the kids.

I think I see what you mean about the pro choice side… but I can’t help but think that gives them a way to sidestep the real issue: dehumanizing a group of people so that you can kill them is a human rights violation. Every time in our nations history we’ve done this it’s been evil and ultimately to our sorrow. It should be a historical check upon us ‘Wait, we’re saying living humans aren’t really people. This is a bad idea…’ but we don’t because ideology and sin get involved.

And the cognitive dissonance in many pro choice people I’ve run into is staggering. We all have it to some degree or another, but I’ve seen people describe female circumcision (FGM) as a human rights violation that harms the dignity of women, while at the same time being staunchly pro choice. It’s just hard for me to wrap my mind around that. For those who have life history or hardship that might explain it, I have sympathy. For those who default to it out of simple ideology (they link abortion with their party, or their view of 3rd and 4th wave feminism) I really don’t have a ton of sympathy. That may well be a character flaw on my part; but there it is.

 

[goout]

There is always more to be done. I am happy that the Catholic Church and other Christians are still showing the way, and doing it without a bunch of “moralizing”.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[ConcernedConvert]

Yes as long as they were of the appropriate age.

 

[Magnanimity]

Fine

I’m glad you concede the general point I’m trying to make.

Do you adopt or foster older children whose parents are struggling?

My own personal moral virtue (or lack thereof) hasn’t anything to do with the issues I’m raising. Since you and I are strangers to one another, I’m afraid I’ll have to forgo any urge I might have to give you such details.

 

[goout]

Elf01:

Fine

I’m glad you concede the general point I’m trying to make.

Do you adopt or foster older children whose parents are struggling?

My own personal moral virtue (or lack thereof) hasn’t anything to do with the issues I’m raising. Since you and I are strangers to one another, I’m afraid I’ll have to forgo any urge I might have to give you such details.

Ah, we see now.
You are simply moralizing to others (inaccurately by the way), but you have no responsibility.
Got it.

 

[Magnanimity]

This is an old and very tired smear of the pro life community that has absolutely no basis in reality.

You are overstating your case, and it isn’t necessary. I am in this pro-life camp you speak of. I have “smeared” no one. And yes, all of my points so far have a basis in reality. But if you simply want to deny this, there is no reason to engage me. Obviously, true dialogue requires being open to persuasion.

The Catholic Church is the largest NGO charitable organization in the world and can be found providing assistance wherever it is needed,

I know this. Again, I am in this church you speak of. I’m sorry my comments got you rattled, but you’re overstating your case. I’m not against anything you’re against. Rather, I’m trying to assist others in seeing the rationale behind some pro-choice stances. And yes, lazy moralizing occurs from both sides. Surely, we wouldn’t be so absurd as to suggest that being Catholic makes you immune to telling others how they should live their moral lives. Quite the opposite, from what I gather on CAF.