"What is (pro-) Life?

[st_lucy]

It’s not “Pro-Abortion” and this is exactly what I am talking about. People who are pro-choice are not gung-ho about abortion, and they don’t like them any more than you do. Most people who are pro-choice want the choice to be there, and for people to be able to make that choice, but are also trying to look for ways to reduce the need for it. They want every child to be wanted and loved.

Does this make any sense? They want the choice to be there? Stop and think about what that choice is. You are saying they want the choice to be able to kill their child. KILL THEIR CHILD! Is that really a choice?

Reduce the need? You want to be able to reduce the NEED to kill ones own child? REALLY!

 

[Timbothefiveth]

I strongly dislike the democratic party’s view on abortion, but their social policies are more likely to save the unborn then destory them

You mean repealing the Mexico city policy or attacking the Stupak ammendment?

To me, being Pro-Life is more then just wanting to save the foetus, its about saving the mother. If we give her stronger social supports, better finanical security, if we give free ante-natal, maternity and post-natal care, if we protect her from discrimination in the workplace, if we ensure she can continue her education while pregnant, if we can protect her from abuse from a partner, then we will save the foetus.

But why do that when we could line the pockets of those who help with our campaigns?

 

[Solo1959]

It’s not “Pro-Abortion” and this is exactly what I am talking about. People who are pro-choice are not gung-ho about abortion, and they don’t like them any more than you do. Most people who are pro-choice want the choice to be there, and for people to be able to make that choice, but are also trying to look for ways to reduce the need for it. They want every child to be wanted and loved.

If someone is “Pro-Choice” then they will allow a baby to be aborted. Maybe they’d prefer the baby lived, but they are in favor of the choice to have the abortion. They’d just stand back and allow the abortions to happen. The “Choice” these people favor is the option to have an abortion. They would allow abortion. They are pro-abortion because they would allow abortion and are in favor of continuing laws that permit it. Pro-Life would never allow an abortion at all.

 

[dmelosi]

It’s not “Pro-Abortion” and this is exactly what I am talking about. People who are pro-choice are not gung-ho about abortion, and they don’t like them any more than you do. Most people who are pro-choice want the choice to be there, and for people to be able to make that choice, but are also trying to look for ways to reduce the need for it. They want every child to be wanted and loved.

Are you trying to tell me that if someone thinks it is ok to have an abortion, you don’t call that pro abortion?

The choice you are talking about is the choice to kill another human being. You are doing a lot of harm trying to say it is anything less.

 

[Eris_Discordia]

Are you trying to tell me that if someone thinks it is ok to have an abortion, you don’t call that pro abortion?

The choice you are talking about is the choice to kill another human being. You are doing a lot of harm trying to say it is anything less.

Maybe people don’t think it’s “OK”. Maybe those who are for having abortions don’t like it any more than you do. I don’t think it’s fair to paint people who are pro-choice with the same brush, just like it’s not fair to paint all pro-life people with the same brush.

 

[dmelosi]

Maybe people don’t think it’s “OK”. Maybe those who are for having abortions don’t like it any more than you do. I don’t think it’s fair to paint people who are pro-choice with the same brush, just like it’s not fair to paint all pro-life people with the same brush.

Do you not think that it is a matter of life and death?

 

[Sonny1954]

To take another issue as an example, I think it’s “okay” for people to smoke, but I also think it’s a filthy habit and I wouldn’t do it, and I regret a love one doing it. Should fouling up one’s lungs and the lungs of those around them with cigarettes be a punishable offense? No. Am I “pro-smoking?” Certainly not. (Now,I can almost “see” people on the other side chomping at the bit to say “grave matter…grave matter…” ) Well smoking and lung cancer are grave matters. The “matter” is different but the principle identical.

And more importantly to me…I read precious little from anti-abortion people about the health and well-being of the woman. Nothing. SHE is the post-natal person most affected by this…not me, not you, not the Pope; SHE is most affected. But I’ve heard the quips (not necessarily on this board but by anti-abortion people) about “she got herself pregnant” (If she can do THAT, she should be on late-night talkshows) and “it’s not a man’s problem” (well, it’s past time that it BECAME a man’s problem!)

I believe that someone in the “Catholic world” has to stand up and ask “how do we care for HER?” And she deserves a more articulate spokesperson than the likes of me.

 

[dmelosi]

To take another issue as an example, I think it’s “okay” for people to smoke, but I also think it’s a filthy habit and I wouldn’t do it, and I regret a love one doing it. Should fouling up one’s lungs and the lungs of those around them with cigarettes be a punishable offense? No. Am I “pro-smoking?” Certainly not. (Now,I can almost “see” people on the other side chomping at the bit to say “grave matter…grave matter…” ) Well smoking and lung cancer are grave matters. The “matter” is different but the principle identical.

And more importantly to me…I read precious little from anti-abortion people about the health and well-being of the woman. Nothing. SHE is the post-natal person most affected by this…not me, not you, not the Pope; SHE is most affected. But I’ve heard the quips (not necessarily on this board but by anti-abortion people) about “she got herself pregnant” (If she can do THAT, she should be on late-night talkshows) and “it’s not a man’s problem” (well, it’s past time that it BECAME a man’s problem!)

I believe that someone in the “Catholic world” has to stand up and ask “how do we care for HER?” And she deserves a more articulate spokesperson than the likes of me.

I think the example that you give shows what the real problem is.

Those that are anti-life (you used the word anti-choice) try to compare a life and death issue to anything else.

Your claim that the Catholic world does little is simply silly. Have you done a search to see how different Catholic organizations help new mothers? You would not be able to read all of it. Start with Catholic charities.

 

[st_lucy]

To take another issue as an example, I think it’s “okay” for people to smoke, but I also think it’s a filthy habit and I wouldn’t do it, and I regret a love one doing it. Should fouling up one’s lungs and the lungs of those around them with cigarettes be a punishable offense? No. Am I “pro-smoking?” Certainly not. (Now,I can almost “see” people on the other side chomping at the bit to say “grave matter…grave matter…” ) Well smoking and lung cancer are grave matters. The “matter” is different but the principle identical.

And more importantly to me…I read precious little from anti-abortion people about the health and well-being of the woman. Nothing. SHE is the post-natal person most affected by this…not me, not you, not the Pope; SHE is most affected. But I’ve heard the quips (not necessarily on this board but by anti-abortion people) about “she got herself pregnant” (If she can do THAT, she should be on late-night talkshows) and “it’s not a man’s problem” (well, it’s past time that it BECAME a man’s problem!)

I believe that someone in the “Catholic world” has to stand up and ask “how do we care for HER?” And she deserves a more articulate spokesperson than the likes of me.

Smoking compared to killing another person? Really?

Abortion also causes post-natal syndrome. What I don’t see are pro-abortion people doing is running to the ad of those women who are suffering from this after having an abortion. I do see help from those who are anti-abortion. Rachels Vineyard, just to name one.

I think that you need to wake up and see how much those in the “Catholic World” and other pro-life groups do for “HER” and now ask yourself what do those in the pro-choice do for “her” beside telling her it is okay to kill her child and walk away.

 

[Timbothefiveth]

It’s like saying “I’m not pro-slavery, I’m pro-property”. “Sure, I don’t support slavery, but I support keeping it legal”.

 

[neiacatholic]

Both sides need to sit down and talk, and actually listen to what the other is saying. I know plenty on both sides who refuse to talk, and will hurl insults at the other. These debates get ugly, and there needs to be some kind of middle ground to reduce the need for abortion.

It’s funny how we can say and read things and not follow them.

and there needs to be some kind of middle ground to reduce the need for abortion (that quote from above is exactly what some are talking about) they may not agree with abortions but they want to find ways to reduce them.

When neither side on this board can find middle ground is it any wonder it will never happen in Washington on this topic or any other.

 

[dmelosi]

Both sides need to sit down and talk, and actually listen to what the other is saying. I know plenty on both sides who refuse to talk, and will hurl insults at the other. These debates get ugly, and there needs to be some kind of middle ground to reduce the need for abortion.

It’s funny how we can say and read things and not follow them.

and there needs to be some kind of middle ground to reduce the need for abortion (that quote from above is exactly what some are talking about) they may not agree with abortions but they want to find ways to reduce them.

When neither side on this board can find middle ground is it any wonder it will never happen in Washington on this topic or any other.

You are showing your pro choice views with this post.

By middle ground, do you mean that it is ok to go against God’s law and kill the babies if the mother chooses to?

There are more comments on here by the true pro life posters on how they help to reduce abortions while also working to make killing these most innocent human beings illegal.

What is rare is to have pro choicers criticize their party for so openly promoting abortions.

 

[neiacatholic]

I am not pro choice.

But after reading this thread – both sides are arguing for the sake of arguing and not really reading and listening to the other.

Both sides are talking about wanting to reduce the dependence on abortions.

Yet, neither are agreeing even on that.

 

[dmelosi]

I am not pro choice.

But after reading this thread – both sides are arguing for the sake of arguing and not really reading and listening to the other.

Both sides are talking about wanting to reduce the dependence on abortions.

Yet, neither are agreeing even on that.

You are incorrect in your assessment.

1 side says killing the most innocent is ok, the other says it is against God’s law and is not ok.

It is as simple as that, no matter how you try to make it something else.

 

[Corki]

It’s not “Pro-Abortion” and this is exactly what I am talking about. People who are pro-choice are not gung-ho about abortion, and they don’t like them any more than you do. Most people who are pro-choice want the choice to be there, and for people to be able to make that choice, but are also trying to look for ways to reduce the need for it. They want every child to be wanted and loved.

If that’s where it ended, the title “pro-choce” might be appropriate. However, there are many who don’t stop there. CAFCG are in the latter group. Once you (and I don’t mean you, personally) go from “allowing” to promoting, you have crossed a line. When you spend tax dollars at home and abroad to promote access to abortion, when you attack the work of pro-life organizations, when you support policies that advance the abortion industry, when you conceed to the end of conscience protection for those who chose not to participate in abortion, you are no longer “pro choice”. You may not like the term “pro-abortion” but I feel the term “abortion advocate” is much closer than pro-choice. When you discount the rights of ANY group of people, including the unborn, you are not “pro-life.”

 

[SugarMagnolia]

The fate of the fetus is one central part of abortion, certainly. So is the health and well-being of the pregnant girl/woman, and lastly that of other loved ones. What makes me pro-choice and not pro-abortion is an awareness that two lives are directly involved and affected. Were it only the life of the pregant female that mattered, then I would be “pro-abortion.” The apparent fact that the well-being of the female is never overtly considered by those who wish to criminalize this procedure leads me to conclude that they not truly pro-life, but simply “pro-birth.”

It’s a shame pro-life usually means anti-woman. The author of the article cares about women and already born children as well as the unborn but everyone is attacking him for caring about born-life as well as unborn life.

 

[Corki]

and there needs to be some kind of middle ground to reduce the need for abortion (that quote from above is exactly what some are talking about) they may not agree with abortions but they want to find ways to reduce them.

When neither side on this board can find middle ground is it any wonder it will never happen in Washington on this topic or any other.

While looking for “middle ground” sounds good, it rarely works when the middle ground amounts to removing the rights of some people for the benefit of others. Read up on the Missouri Compromise for a historical example of the failure of trying a middle ground solution to solve a grave moral evil.

 

[dmelosi]

It’s a shame pro-life usually means anti-woman. The author of the article cares about women and already born children as well as the unborn but everyone is attacking him for caring about born-life as well as unborn life.

I challenge you to find one, just ONE place in this thread where anyone attacked him for caring about born life?

I am trying to understand your motive for post such an untruth?

 

[Eris_Discordia]

I am not pro choice.

But after reading this thread – both sides are arguing for the sake of arguing and not really reading and listening to the other.

Both sides are talking about wanting to reduce the dependence on abortions.

Yet, neither are agreeing even on that.

This is what I have been saying since I came in on this thread.

 

[Corki]

I challenge you to find one, just ONE place in this thread where anyone attacked him for caring about born life?

I am trying to understand your motive for post such an untruth?

I raise your challenge. Can SugarMagnolia find even ONE comment in this thread that is remotely anti-woman?