What do you think must occur to realistically overturn Roe v Wade?

  • Thread starter Thread starter HeWillProvide
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
One statement I saw from a Catholic Newsbot on Newt’s Conversion, that for every 1 convert to Catholicism, you lose 4 to Protestantism. The vast majority of Protestants are more pro-choice then anti-choice. Protestants are winning the Conversion Wars. Maybe one’s efforts should be steered toward keeping Catholics Catholic instead of having an air of tunnel vision on the abortion issue.
 
Understand the frustration…the Mass is the greatest force on earth against evil…as we pray, we believe. The revision was necessary, but I don’t think alot of people were listening during the campaign, more drawn to his personality than anything. They are regretting it, and ambiguities in the healthcare bill are also drawing heat with the loopholes regarding abortion…it isn’t stated directly, but there are ways to work around parts of the bill to then have taxpayers cover abortion expenses…In the meantime, more Americans are against abortion, and the healthcare providers are now wanting to stop the use of ultrasound for parents who want to see their preborn baby. Opinion is changing and people are drawing back to their traditional pro life roots in this country.

Washington state was the first state to have abortion legal through the will of the people. But the truth is people thought they were voting against abortion, only to see reading meant opposite.

We need to draw on the Holy Spirit to lead each one of us as to what we can do, and the primary cause is principalities…which the Mass confronts through the sacrificial and mystical offering of Christ.
 
With the exception of prayers and b_i_t_c_h_i _n_g and moaning about the murder of innocents, what are you actively doing today to set the process in motion on overturning Roe vs Wade?
 
The faith of the Protestants is fragmenting. The evangelicals do good, and some are starting to build bridges with devout Catholics. I took a fundamentalist to our women’s Mother’s Day luncheon. After we finished she said she could now understand our devotion to Mary. We have prayed together, the Lord is the same. I find them very closed to any discussion many times, but I think devotion to Mary and keeping in relationship with evangelicals can some day bring more open communication.

I read the other day the protestants are finally admitting the defects of Sola Scriptura and the 34,000 sects…Only in America…
 
Tram,
If you are single, you should study the Gospels, get young adults with you and go out into poor neighborhoods and begin making friends, helping them. Conversation to God will eventually come if you are sincere and love them from your heart.

Teaching others always draws one to study one’s own faith more. Just learning about faith in a class is superficial…if you are a beginner or searching, try to put into some things draw you in Sacred Scriptures…

See my previous post…#37? I believe…
 
First, make the law irrelevant…educate women that there are other alternatives to abortion, back up what we say with what we do. Most pro-choice people erroneously think pro-lifers are hippocrits because we want to end abortion but we don’t want to help them take care of the children (incorrect because almost every pro-lifer I know gives time/money/resources to pregnancy crisis centers. We know better, but they are blinded by their thirst for choice.

Change the laws that say abortion protestors cannot get so many feet close to an abortion clinic. Allow them to peaceably hand out information about alternatives, but then the pro-lifers HAVE to behave respectfully toward the women.
 
I agree some Caholics’ attitudes do not reflect all Catholic attitudes. But the percentage of Catholics who say abortion should be generally available, limited, or prohibited very closely mirror the general population.

Millions do follow the Church, but we can see most have abandoned it on artificial birth control, and only 28% say abortion should be completely prohibited.
pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

The Church will probably continue on, but society will go in a different direction.
Probably the society is going anywhere - from a demographic point of view, I mean. Human diversity and dynamism is now located far from old Europe and ageing America. It is vibrant in Africa, Latin America, some parts of Asia. That’s precisely where the new christians are being born, without abortions to stop their lives at the outset. I my country some African and Asian priests are starting to replace the old European ones.
 
Probably the society is going anywhere - from a demographic point of view, I mean. Human diversity and dynamism is now located far from old Europe and ageing America. It is vibrant in Africa, Latin America, some parts of Asia. That’s precisely where the new christians are being born, without abortions to stop their lives at the outset. I my country some African and Asian priests are starting to replace the old European ones.
You can expect abortion to follow increased prosperity and more opportunity for women in those regions.
 
"We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer."
What an absolutely deceptive and cowardly thing to say! If I fired a high-powered rifle into a crowded stadium with my eyes closed, not knowing whether I would hit a human being or not, they would have had no difficulty in “speculating” to my guilt of manslaughter (at least) if I did hit and kill someone.
 
You can expect abortion to follow increased prosperity and more opportunity for women in those regions.
Altogether possible, assuming they become as materialistic as we are. But that might or might not be a good assumption.
 
Aside from a lot of prayer, what specific steps do you think must be taken by society, pro-lifers and/or otherwise, to have Roe v Wade overturned and have abortion outlawed?

Do you think those who want two gay people to get “married” are taking a bigger stand on that issue than we pro-lifers are taking on abortion?

Reversing legislation that allows abortion is useless unless there is some kind of provision for the unaborted. Preventing abortion is hollow, if the only result is to increase the number of the poor. Measures to reverse present legislation would be immoral, if the result was to give anti-abortionists a warmer glow of satisfaction, while the unaborted were living in destitution.​

If the unaborted are to be properly looked after, this could require social adjustments that many would find (as they so often say) “socialist”. Several million abortions since 1973 can hardly help causing social changes - and abstaining from abortion can hardly help causing social changes. Babies need feeding & clothing & much more - so who is going to pay for all those babies once they are born ? Someone is going to have to. So where are they going to find the money ? Touch one issue - and you touch many more. Is the US ready for such a change ?

One of the main reasons for the Abortion Bill of 1966 was the occurrence of “back-street abortions”. If abortion were illegal again, they would occur again. What are people in the US going to do about those, if abortion ceases to be legal ? It would be irresponsible to have no answer at all, because such things happen, so any teaching that ignores such realities is self-condemned as inadequate.

BTW, shouldn’t discussion of abortion in the US include consideration of what led to the passing of the legislation in 1973 ? The problem for anti-abortionists is that they are trying to put the genie back in the bottle; if responding to (say) feminism - of whatever kind - was one of the causes of the legislation, what sort of response will be given to feminism - of whatever kind - if the legislation is cancelled ?

These issues surely must have been considered a thousand times; so what solutions to them, however vague, do anti-abortionists have ?

This seems to be one topic which raises some at least of the same general problems in the UK (where we have had abortion since 1967) as in the US.

One things Catholics might do, is get together with like-minded Christians of other Churches - **if **they don’t already (which is hard to believe).
 
If you truly care about reducing the number of abortions (as they will never be entirely eliminated, whether legal or not), you can start by understanding the root causes and trying to alleviate them. Women don’t have abortions for fun, and most don’t have them repeatedly and uncaringly as a primary form of birth control. Most of the women I know who have had abortions had them because they felt they had no other options available. So if you want abortion rates to go down, start by providing real options.

Many women who have had or are considering abortions are living in poverty or are financially dependent on someone (their parents, their boyfriends or even husbands) who would threaten or cut off support if they knew about the pregnancy, or would use the pregnancy to keep the woman in what may be an abusive situation. Single women who continue with a pregnancy also risk social stigma, employment and housing discrimination, and have to consider all of these factors while dealing with what may very well be the worst thing that could have happened to them (the pregnancy). An easy answer is to blame the women and say they shouldn’t have had sex, but this doesn’t take into account those who are incest or rape victims - including marital rape - or have been trafficked. And in the cases of women who had consensual sex, saying that puts you in the position of judging the woman (God’s job, not ours) rather than treating her with compassion (as I suspect Jesus would want us to do).

If you want the abortion rate to go down, help address the problem of how many women and children are living in poverty. Help reduce the stigma that society places on unwed mothers - and, even more unjustly, on their children. Provide resources so that women can keep their children if they choose to do so, and help reform the adoption system so that it is a more viable option for those who decide to give birth but not become a parent. Help by being part of a real solution, and going beyond just pointing out the problems. Create a society where young women from all socioeconomic backgrounds are valued and their self-respect is nurtured. Educate yourself on issues like human trafficking which targets young women, especially those who are economically disadvantaged or otherwise vulnerable, and teaches them that their bodies are not sacred but are for the use and abuse of others and that their sexuality is not a special gift, but a commodity for others to benefit from. (And if you’re asking yourself what this has to do with abortion rates :confused: … please feel free to message me.)

Those who call themselves Pro-Lifers and those who call themselves Pro-Choicers are never going to agree no matter how loudly each side shouts, because they are having two different arguments. Pro-Lifers care about children and their lives - and hopefully their quality of life. But that doesn’t mean that Pro-Choicers don’t care about children too. Pro-Choices care about women and their sexual health and the quality of their lives. And so should Pro-Lifers. What is important to realize is how much common ground we have. Both sides can care about women. Both sides can care about children. And both sides can work together to create a society with better resources for women and children.

Scare tactics and anger and bomb threats and harassment and trying to shame women who are already hurt enough is never going to reduce the abortion rate. I would love to see all of the Pro-Lifers who normally picket abortion clinics spend that same time and energy and money doing something to help women and children instead. And I would love to see the Pro-Choicers who spend so much time, energy and money ardently “defending the right” to abortion spend that same time, energy and money trying to make societal changes that would greatly reduce the demand for abortions. If you want to really do something about abortion, this is how you start. And if you’d like more information, please check out www.feministsforlife.org and find out why these Pro-Life Feminists “Refuse to Choose” because “WomEn Deserve Better.”
 
As someone else said, there are many Christians helping the poor, the young mothers married or not…

And even if abortion is returned to the status of infanticide, abortions will still happen, just as there are women who die in doctor clinics having an abortion…

But what is needed more than anything is a society that affirms and codifies that human life is sacred, fidelity in marriage, the family as basis of society, where young and old alike are cared for…and that also is a statement against casual sex, pornography, and contraception.

I live in a state where trees and nature is highly protected venerated, but the human body is not…the dignity of the human person is degraded in the explicit proliferation of pornography in family neighborhoods who have no rights and have to live with it, and the growing vice that comes with these sorts of places. Or the support of euthanasia when many who do so are clinically depressed and need treatment.

Being a caring person does not require having alot of money. I have found the poor to be the most open and generous with what little they have…always able to provide a place at the table for another person.

May be the best remedy for our country --that would also help increase vocations --would be that we enter into a great economic correction again, where we don’t have the money to buy the alcohol and drugs, the contraceptions, that people will practice greater self control and not be so self-indulgent.

I mean, may be we need to be poor again to rediscover God and our own dignity.
 
When women who are planning to abort their children see up-to-date ultrasound images of their babies, 90% change their minds and choose life. When abortion was illegal, there were probably one-tenth as many abortions per year (Confession of an Ex-Abortionist), and probably around 200 women per year died from abortion, compared to fairly similar numbers today. Indeed, in his book Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, Randy Alcorn cites an estimate that as many as one in a thousand women undergoing legal abortion in today’s USA dies from complications, which makes 1,400 maternal fatalities:(. This is one of the higher educated estimates, but it jibes with my experience of coming near death from mine, and a loved one going through the same thing.
If states could ban abortion, and require anyone leaving the state for abortion to view an ultrasound, even if only half of abortion-minded women simply refrained because of the law and of the other half, half that number stopped to see the ultrasound just to be law-abiding, that would stop about 95% of the abortions that would otherwise happen. Because of risk equivalence, an unknown degree of reduction in unwanted pregnancy would happen in the first place. So the number of “unwanted” newborns would not increase by the full 95% of 1.4 million per year, but by some smaller number – well within the ability of the current waiting approved adoptive parents to adopt. That’s my personal prediction.
 
Survive,
Agree…with your comments…and did you know that this past week on the news, there are those coming out who want to ban ultrasounds for parental viewing? …it is dangerous to the unborn…for flimsy reasons…technicians who use them say their equipment is safe…

My unborn of 4 months had an extra heartbeat, the doctor saying it was common at that time of gestation, but to have an ultrasound. When I went in, the technician was zooming in, and the first pictures I saw showed a beautiful baby, well formed. I was 41 and they also wanted to do an amniocentesis check for Down’s Syndrome. I refused when finding out. I had him 1 week before my 42nd birthday and they said he was among the healthiest babies born.

My sister-in-law was pregnant and they did some test on her and said her baby could be a Down Syndrome one so have an abortion. She refused. Her daughter is in a genius school. There is so much lies…so many people growing up in the abortion culture have been taught the baby is not a person until it is born. Great denial. Like the secular culture is teaching people to live in delusion, and it is no wonder so many go to drugs and alcohol…a culture of lies and death and no love.
 
It does not seem credible to me that a society is likely to “change its mind” about abortion on demand as long as it is enshrined in the law as a “right”. That is precisely what trivializes it in many peoples’ understanding.

It seems to me that all of the “alternative” suggestions for limiting abortion are really avoidance of the real issue, and adds to that trivialization. It’s killing, nothing more and nothing less. When we say “oh, we’ll stop the killing by making it less desirable to kill”, all we’re doing is turning our faces away from the nature of the act itself.

That’s particularly so, it seems to me, when we resort to the “suffering” its unavailability would impose on women as our justification for it. People suffer for a million reasons. Some are related to conduct, as is abortion nearly always, and some are related to chance. Some, like pain, aging, sorrow and death, are inevitably part of the human condition. But there ought to be limits on what we will do to enhance our own comfort and sense of well-being and that of others, particularly when our conduct and its known consequences have led us to where we are. Those limits should fall well short of killing other, and totally innocent, human beings.

It has long seemed to me that we’re very unlikely to reverse Roe and its progeny without utterly disestablishing its political allies, and for a sufficient period to impress on them that support for abortion is not politically advantageous. In short, voting against every abortion-supporting politician and party, no matter what, until such time as the party realizes it is an unsuccessful strategy.

Right now, that would mean voting against all but a handful of Democrats, (is the count of prolife Democrats in Congress up to four now?) no matter what else they might espouse. Anything else is going to be futile and, in fact, promotes abortion. Voting for, or otherwise supporting an abortion supporter is to become complicit in the killing of human beings. There is no other way to see it.

Those who want us to remain confused like to point to some little thing or other; or some waffling done by a Republican, in order to make it seem despair is our only alternative. But the reality is that right now most Republican officeholders and potential candidates oppose abortion on demand. It would be nice if there was a “Prolife Party”, capable of winning elections, but there isn’t one. So we have only one recourse, which is to oppose all Democrats (except the four or so) until the party gets the message. And I say that as a lifelong Democrat. The party has wed itself to evil, and is in great need of purgation.
 
Ridgerunner, also see the entrenchment of the right to abortion in our present culture.

But I also think it best to take the high ground and begin a new evangelization…the Franciscans have a very good way of rebuilding the Church by living the gospel more deeply, living a more penitential life, a more deeply fraternal life…and seeing Christ standing at the door of all hearts…irregardless of the political affiliations.

I see a new, neighborhood evangelization, in Mary’s way as well, best personified with the love like Mother Theresa of Calcutta, who even she could not turn abortion backers away from their convictions.
 
Ridgerunner, also see the entrenchment of the right to abortion in our present culture.

But I also think it best to take the high ground and begin a new evangelization…the Franciscans have a very good way of rebuilding the Church by living the gospel more deeply, living a more penitential life, a more deeply fraternal life…and seeing Christ standing at the door of all hearts…irregardless of the political affiliations.

I see a new, neighborhood evangelization, in Mary’s way as well, best personified with the love like Mother Theresa of Calcutta, who even she could not turn abortion backers away from their convictions.
Never would I disagree with what you are saying. But neither would I, in any way, affirm the political actions of one who, by those actions, supports the killing of the unborn.
 
So correct…we must always speak for the unborn…

I was on Newsvine for awhile and it apparent that those contending with me would refuse to look at the reality of what abortion is…or make remarks the pictures we saw were fetuses so very tiny…as if size or appearance determined human life…or the justifications of late term abortions for medical reasons, while other mothers with the same conditions would endure anything for their children to survive and live.

So I saw the greatest defenders of abortion also having issues of not being able to deal with harsher realities as well. Their opinions were very narcissistic, and one revealed on another post she was heavy into the Los Angeles sex parties. Molochs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top