|
Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!
|
| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Lainey |
Posted - January 23 2003 : 01:07:49 AM
{A timely entry, I would say ...}
NARAL, Anti-Catholicism and
the Roots of the Pro-Abortion Campaign
By Robert P. Lockwood
The public debate over abortion was critical in a resurgent anti-Catholicism in the mid-1960s. With the cooperation of media, abortion became an ongoing battle waged in a war of words based on anti-Catholicism. The issue was quickly defined as Catholicism and its role in public life, rather than abortion itself. Pro-life representatives who happened to be Catholic would be grilled on their religious faith, rather than on their position on abortion. When the Catholic Church hierarchy took a strong stand on abortion, it found itself the target, rather than the position espoused. Quickly, the public issue of whether or not abortion should be fully legal in the United States descended into a cauldron of unrelated issues of separation of Church and State, the Catholic Church’s tax exempt status, the religious affiliation of abortion opponents, alleged "Catholic power," and the imposition of sectarian belief on American law. As one New York state legislator would thunder in the midst of abortion debate, "you have no right to come to the floor of this body and ask us to enact into law church doctrine."
Why did Catholicism become the issue in the abortion debate? It was through a planned effort by the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. Called by the acronym NARAL, the organization began as a collective of pro-abortion groups, nascent feminist organizations, illegal abortion referral services, and various Zero Population Growth zealots in the late 1960s. Its fundamental goal was to legalize abortion and to repeal any restrictions on the practice that were in place in every state at the time. Far more than Planned Parenthood in the 1960s, whose initial forays into the abortion issue were tepid at best (and whose founder, Margaret Sanger, was generally anti-abortion), NARAL was at the cutting edge of the abortion debate and would play a strong role in its legalization.
One of the primary motivations in NARAL’s abortion campaign was the anti-Catholicism of its founder and first executive director, Lawrence J. Lader. Lader would effectively harness and use anti-Catholicism as a fundamental aspect of NARAL in abortion politics, legislating, public debate and media coverage. Under the influence of Lader and NARAL, Catholicism would become the issue, as much as abortion itself. According to Dr. Bernard Nathanson, one of NARAL’s original members and a close confidant of Lader, this anti-Catholicism "was probably the most effective strategy we had."1
In his book "Aborting America,"2 Dr. Bernard Nathanson described an early conversation he had with Lader. Nathanson, who was still conducting "therapeutic abortions" when he wrote "Aborting America" with Richard N. Ostling in 1979, had operated the largest abortion clinic in the world. But by 1974, he had begun to seriously reconsider his support for legalized abortion. He would later become a leading figure in the pro-life movement.
According to Nathanson, he and Lader were discussing the overall strategy for legalizing abortion in the United States in October, 1967, six years before the Supreme Court would knock down all state laws that criminalized abortion in its Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions and two years before the formation of NARAL. After Lader described the need to activate feminist leadership to see abortion as not one of many issues but a foundational part of the feminist crusade, Lader – as recalled by Nathanson – "brought out his favorite whipping boy":
"`…(A)nd the other thing we’ve got to do is bring the Catholic hierarchy out where we can fight them. That’s the real enemy. The biggest single obstacle to peace and decency throughout all of history.’
"He held forth on that theme through most of the drive home. It was a comprehensive and chilling indictment of the poisonous i |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Lainey |
Posted - January 29 2003 : 12:11:11 AM
Adele,
quote:
Widespread abortion is a symptom, not a cause of a declining society, and if more energy were devoted to tackling the root cause(s), perhaps we would all have a better chance.
Interestingly, I think it's a bit of both. Widespread abortion has a cause & effect aspect, part of a vicious cycle that leads us spiraling downward rather than moving forward. Much like addiction; a primary underlying cause leads to the abuse, which in turn, causes further decline. And the more it's realized, the more it's desired & demanded, & the greater the devastation all around. A symptom of serious demoralization, it then becomes a cause of yet more.
This is very much related to the 'Slippery Slope' issues Diana had posted & it's folly to not recognize the relationship.
Example: (1998)
ABORTED FETUSES USED TO ASPHALT STREETS IN BERLIN
German Episcopal Conference Decries "A Terrifying Lack of Respect"
BERLIN, JUL 22 (ZENIT) - Based on the information gathered by the Spanish newspaper ABC, the remains of the almost 4,000 clinical abortions performed in Berlin last year were used as organic material for a granulate used to asphalt streets.
Sources in the company that processes "special" waste materials for Berlin hospitals indicate that this procedure is perfectly normal and well within legal boundaries. A spokesman for the German Health Department, however, disagrees. He indicated that this procedure is "ethically irresponsible," stating that the department had believed that the fetuses were incinerated. Those responsible for the Virchow Clinic, where the practice was first uncovered, also deny knowledge of the destination of the fetuses.
In fact, a large variety of organic waste materials meets the same fate, such as parts of dysfunctional organs or expired blood reserves. The organic matter is homogenized, sterilized, dried, and centrifuged. The resulting granulate is then burned and used as insulation or for resurfacing streets.
German law requires that fetuses weighing more than 2.2 lbs. be buried properly. Although parents have the right to have their child buried in a cemetery if they choose, statistics show that this does not occur often in Berlin. There are many reasons for this, including the emotional shock to the parents and the high cost of such a burial, typically over $1,000.
It is quite possible that this procedure occurs in other countries as well, unless the laws specify very clearly what may be done to dispose of the bodies. The current scandal has provoked various reactions, including that of the German Episcopal Conference, which labeled the practice as "a terrifying lack of respect" in the treatment of the unborn.
Judge Allows Euthanasia in Frankfurt
Another threat to the right to life in Germany is also brewing, this one affecting primarily the elderly. Responding to a request from her daughter, a Frankfurt court has permitted that an 85-year-old woman in a coma, the result of a stroke, be removed from life support.
According to the decision, "we are trying to resolve the conflict between the supreme right to respect for life and the also supreme right to respect for self-determination and the dignity of the person." The judges are aware that this is not "passive" euthanasia, but rather "an interruption of the necessary means for life, and thus a true help towards death." Pro-life advocates fear that this could be a first step towards legalizing euthanasia in Germany.
quote:
As far as contraception goes, perhaps we could start that subject in a separate thread, because I know I am most definitely on the other side of the fence from you Lainey, and I |
| Adele |
Posted - January 28 2003 : 02:31:05 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Lainey
Adele,
It's great to see you! Hope your visits will become an old habit again.
Your post was most welcome - not at all "disjointed" but very good, coherent thoughts. And your refusal to use 'soothing terms' is much appreciated for its frankness & "spot on" speech.
Your three factors & their contributions to the nearly routine practice of abortion; poor education, poor attitude, & easy availability ~ these things do explain how it is so many women/girls have fallen into such an abyss in life. Education, from my perspective, isn't an issue of contraception, but of life, obligations, mores, expectations, science, virtue, & dignity. The things once passed on within families & communities but which are now, it seems, simply passed away.
Attitude most surely is a key factor. We've created a culture that exalts & speaks more to moment than to permanence, indulgence than to sacrifice or restraint, & death than to life. The more we tolerate, glorify, or pursue what is essentially a death culture, the more we destroy & assault human dignity & the value of life. If we in the west do not reverse the trend, we are doomed. We have so devalued life it is increasingly harder to evoke what should be normal human compassion, empathy, charity, & tears for human suffering. We're becoming numb. Too numb to fully respond to tragedies, too numb to volunteer without praise, too numb to cry over another's sorrow or loss, too numb to resist apathy. We don't care if we don't care ...
Availability has had the effect of sanctification. The same way many build their sense of morality on 'news' & 'law' many also build their most basic concepts of 'normalcy' & 'correctness' on frequency & accessibility. If society places no restriction or taboo then it must be a good, normal, or tolerable thing. We no longer have many societal taboos & that is a bad thing. (Availability also reveals much about the eugenics/racism that permeates the "movement." In the US you will find dense clusters of abortion clinics in neighborhoods of minorities and/or poor. You won't find them peppering Beverly Hills.}
Your friend's abortion; understanding why she chose to abort & what she was seeking in that decision, & empathizing with your feelings regarding not prolonging her suffering, I see this so differently.
Knowing her daughter would not survive more than hours after birth, or that she would likely be stillborn, her long term suffering would more than likely been lessened, or comforted by carrying her child those last two months, spending time with her, knowing it was grieviously limited, & holding her daughter. She has no pictures or memories now, both of which have enormous capacity for healing parental grief. Instead, she's probably magnified her pain & aggravated her loss.
I don't know her so I can't say if it's further injured her heart, but it would seem that denying herself that time & those memories would do much more harm. And it's likely she will struggle with the added burden of grief/guilt over her decision.
{I don't have to explain I am not judging nor criticizing here; I can only imagine the depth of her anguish.}
Also sensitive to your thoughts regarding the fear of a disabled child's future without the love & protection of a parent, & understanding the thoughts & reasons you rightly point out, it seems this underscores the need to rebuild the humanity of the world. It wasn't too long ago that societies understood any child was everyone's child, & the task of loving, nurturing, caring, guiding, & teaching was readily accepted by all.
The decline or erosion of morals & basic values are still the greatest obstacle to rediscovering the value & dignity of life, and the once great western civilization.
Ilse, please translate those statistics. The rise being among teenage girl |
| Lainey |
Posted - January 28 2003 : 02:14:07 AM
Adele,
It's great to see you! Hope your visits will become an old habit again.
Your post was most welcome - not at all "disjointed" but very good, coherent thoughts. And your refusal to use 'soothing terms' is much appreciated for its frankness & "spot on" speech.
Your three factors & their contributions to the nearly routine practice of abortion; poor education, poor attitude, & easy availability ~ these things do explain how it is so many women/girls have fallen into such an abyss in life. Education, from my perspective, isn't an issue of contraception, but of life, obligations, mores, expectations, science, virtue, & dignity. The things once passed on within families & communities but which are now, it seems, simply passed away.
Attitude most surely is a key factor. We've created a culture that exalts & speaks more to moment than to permanence, indulgence than to sacrifice or restraint, & death than to life. The more we tolerate, glorify, or pursue what is essentially a death culture, the more we destroy & assault human dignity & the value of life. If we in the west do not reverse the trend, we are doomed. We have so devalued life it is increasingly harder to evoke what should be normal human compassion, empathy, charity, & tears for human suffering. We're becoming numb. Too numb to fully respond to tragedies, too numb to volunteer without praise, too numb to cry over another's sorrow or loss, too numb to resist apathy. We don't care if we don't care ...
Availability has had the effect of sanctification. The same way many build their sense of morality on 'news' & 'law' many also build their most basic concepts of 'normalcy' & 'correctness' on frequency & accessibility. If society places no restriction or taboo then it must be a good, normal, or tolerable thing. We no longer have many societal taboos & that is a bad thing. (Availability also reveals much about the eugenics/racism that permeates the "movement." In the US you will find dense clusters of abortion clinics in neighborhoods of minorities and/or poor. You won't find them peppering Beverly Hills.}
Your friend's abortion; understanding why she chose to abort & what she was seeking in that decision, & empathizing with your feelings regarding not prolonging her suffering, I see this so differently.
Knowing her daughter would not survive more than hours after birth, or that she would likely be stillborn, her long term suffering would more than likely been lessened, or comforted by carrying her child those last two months, spending time with her, knowing it was grieviously limited, & holding her daughter. She has no pictures or memories now, both of which have enormous capacity for healing parental grief. Instead, she's probably magnified her pain & aggravated her loss.
I don't know her so I can't say if it's further injured her heart, but it would seem that denying herself that time & those memories would do much more harm. And it's likely she will struggle with the added burden of grief/guilt over her decision.
{I don't have to explain I am not judging nor criticizing here; I can only imagine the depth of her anguish.}
Also sensitive to your thoughts regarding the fear of a disabled child's future without the love & protection of a parent, & understanding the thoughts & reasons you rightly point out, it seems this underscores the need to rebuild the humanity of the world. It wasn't too long ago that societies understood any child was everyone's child, & the task of loving, nurturing, caring, guiding, & teaching was readily accepted by all.
The decline or erosion of morals & basic values are still the greatest obstacle to rediscovering the value & dignity of life, and the once great western civilization.
Ilse, please translate those statistics. The rise being among teenage girls I would expect but the immigrant factor surprises me. Do you have a general breakdown of the immigrant ethnicity? I am assuming Holland's largest immigrant popula |
| Ilse |
Posted - January 27 2003 : 6:00:14 PM
Theresa, yes, it is the "Zeitgeist" of the moment, isn't it? Selfish times.
I spent the evening checking facts and figures on abortion in Holland. And what I feared is true. Though relatively it's still low (about half of the US for example, as stated in these studies), it has been rising steadily over the last couple of years. That coincides with all those tendencies in society we're talking about.
I've downloaded some stuff with statistics and possible explanations, but haven't yet looked closely at it. It's all in Dutch too, so I'd have to translate some of it. But if you guys are interested, I can give you a summary. First glance: it's up from 5.2 (1981, the year of legalization) to 8.0 (2001). The rise is mostly found among immigrant women and teenage girls.
Great post, Huggy! Nothing appalling about it.
|
| Adele |
Posted - January 27 2003 : 5:46:19 PM
Sorry...coming in very late on this discussion...so apologies if what I say seems a little disjointed.
Of all the issues we discuss, this is the one which gives me the most internal struggle, for obvious reasons. However, ultimately, if I have to jump onto one side of the fence or the other, I would have to say that I was pro-abortion (am not prepared to hide behind the various soothing terms such as 'right to choose'). Abortion is abortion, no matter how you describe it. Having said that, I feel that there are very few circumstances where I would judge an abortion to be justifiable. I can think of only two circumstances whereby I would even consider an abortion - and lack of finances, bad timing or 'unwantedness' don't even bear mentioning.
There are three major factors that make abortion such a dreadfully widespread act...poor education, poor attitude (I think someone mentioned a throw-away society earlier, which I felt was spot on) and the ease of availability.
A friend of mine had a perfectly legal termination at 7 months. Shocking, right? At 7 months pregnant she discovered that the precious little angel she was carrying had anencephaly, and such a severe form, that effectively, this child had almost no brain. She was offered a choice. She could carry the brain dead child inside her for another two months or so and await delivery. It was likely that the child would be still born, but if she wasn't, the doctors would be compelled to do everything possible to keep her alive, despite the fact that she would have no quality of life whatsoever. The other choice was to have the life terminated inside her, and then have the dead baby induced and delivered. She chose the latter. Her decision was based on the fact that she did not wish to prolong the agony of carrying a child who was certainly not going to live very long, and what life she did have, would have no quality at all. Her daughter did not suffer in any way, but my friends suffering was not prolonged any more than it had to be. I find it impossible to criticise or judge her decision.
I come across a lot of parents of children with a wide range of disabilities, some so serious and tragic, that I have heard one or two whisper with this appalling mixture of desparation, guilt and gut-wrenching emotion, that they would rather their child was dead, than to have to live in a world without the love, care and selfless devotion of their parent. It is a thought that crosses all of our minds, what would our child do without us to love them, care for them, protect them and fight for them. A normal child will grieve, mourn their parent, but will come through it, hopefully cared for by another family member. The child with a serious disability may not be able to do any of those things, and may have no-one to care for him/her because no-one, but that childs parent, could do the job. The prospect of one's child left alone and unprotected in a world without you, is truly terrifying and heart breaking. If I knew that I was carrying another child with a serious disability, I could not put my hand on my heart and say that I wouldn't consider an abortion. Selfishness plays a part, but it is not entirely about the cost to oneself. If we lived in an ideal world, I would know that I was facing raising that child with support and care for both of us, but unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world.
To me, the very worst aspects of abortion, are the lateness at which you can have one, and the ease with which women can choose to have one. Which came first, the ease of being able to have an abortion, or the ease in which some women can make that decision, and live with it? I know if I was ever faced with that choice, for whatever reason, it would be the most momentous moment of choice in my life, and that were I to go ahead, it would haunt me for the rest of my days. Not so for some, and that is the scariest part of all.
The key to preventing abor |
| Theresa |
Posted - January 27 2003 : 5:12:43 PM
quote:
To me people have shed all responsibility for their own lives. They do well, then that must be their own doing. They do not do well; someone or something else must be to blame.
Well put, Ilse. I know that in my school (5th and 6th grade) we touch on sex education a bit (including a segment on aids) and we are also required to teach abstinence as a preventative. We know that we have students that are already sexually active at this age (11 and 12 years) and that scares the hell out of me. We have also seen students pregnant at this age. So much is NOT taught in the home and most of the time there in lies the problem for these kids. Some come from the worst home situations and it sickens me to see the parents of these kids not give a damn. It is an endless cycle that all of us as U.S. tax payers will never see resolved.
|
| Lainey |
Posted - January 27 2003 : 02:10:43 AM
Anthony, the 'war question' is issue-baiting since it implies an hypocrisy of those who are pro-life and still support the war. They are separate issues. You can't equate the violence of war with the violence of abortion. But since you asked; no, I do not support the Iraqi war that's coming. I adhere to the just war principles (which are very difficult to meet, as it should be) which the Iraqi situation does not present.
"Basically, I don't think sexual education is really a job for schools, it's a parents' responsibility."
I agree with you completely, Ilse. In fact, returning it to the home, I suspect, would impact favorably on the pregnancy/abortion rates amongst teens. It is the parents' responsibility & it's high time 'they' stepped up to the plate.
"The cultural aspect you mention is very interesting, because it has been on my mind since this thread started.This is only about western culture, I stress. I feel our culture has so much individualized, so much into fast satisfaction and easy pleasure, people have become lazy. TV ads tells us "you are worth it". In my country too, so it will be interesting to see the fluctuations in the number of abortions."
Ah! Ilse, is this not the heart of the matter? Self-absorbed peoples who, once buying the adore thyself pitch of self-pleasure which fosters an attitude of non-compassionate recklessness, take the fast & instant way out, the solution to the problem; abortion as a remedy to inconvenience? Of course, there are still many young girls, young women who do feel trapped, scared, helpless, etc. & don't know what else to do. Outreach needs to grow ...
"To me people have shed all responsibility for their own lives. They do well, then that must be their own doing. They do not do well; someone or something else must be to blame."
And it's seen in other aspects of post-modern western culture as well. The 'victimology syndrome' - the 'disadvantaged syndrome' - the 'woe is me' syndrome. 'Fix it!!!' syndrome ...
This thought is not found in eastern cultures, generally, where people are still taught to take responsibility for their own actions.
(Notable exceptions; China & N Korea - countries that routinely carry out forced abortions. In China, the "One Child Policy" was crafted & pitched successfully by Planned Parenthood & "generously" funded with American dollars. Racist? Fascist? You bet! Choice? No way!)
"In this case, the right to abortion implies the obligation for people to avoid that at all costs. We enjoy the rights, but do we still remember the obligations?"
In the US, I believe, there is a general breakdown of a sense of obligation or responsibility, which has buttered the bread of abortionists very well. It is BIG business.
Returning to an earlier point; "safe & legal" vs "unsafe back-alley" abortions. This is one of the greatest myths of the abortion debate. There is no such thing as a "safe" abortion. Never, no matter where or by whom, is it a safe procedure.
It isn't at all safe for the child who will die so the adjective should never be used in connection with abortion on that reality alone. But it's never safe for the girl/woman either. The claims against "back-alley" abortions are incredibly deceptive. Once it was decriminalized (not legal - not being a just law, it's not valid; not being legislated in the US, but imposed by the will of judges, it's actually null & void), the much maligned 'back-alley butchers' simply moved to Main Street. The same voices that condemned the 'butchers' applauded them once they were openly operating. Same butchers, new digs, better lighting. And ... the procedure itself inflicts such violence upon the woman/girl that it amazes me so many survive it. Not all do, though. It won't make many headlines, but hundreds & hundreds of young girls (12, 13, 14 years of age), young women, mothers of young children, thirty to forty-five year old women, etc. have died from "legal, safe" abortions performed at clinics and |
| Ilse |
Posted - January 26 2003 : 7:10:57 PM
quote:
You've raised an interesting point, here. Why is it higher in the US?
Do you think it's really an issue of awareness of consequences of actions, a deficiency in understanding human sexuality & lack of education, or a disregard of the consequences. Based upon American culture in general, I'm inclined to think it's the latter. For many it remains always a thing to fall back upon & therefore the actions are not given great consideration. Quite frankly, we've become a throw away society in many ways; this is merely another manifestation of disregard & disrespect. Is this possibly why there is a higher number (1.3 million annually) in the US?
I don't know why it's higher in the US, but without having any kind of factual evidence: I feel taboo on sexuality is stronger in the US than in Holland. Maybe that has something to do with it. Basically, I don't think sexual education is really a job for schools, it's a parents' responsibility.
The cultural aspect you mention is very interesting, because it has been on my mind since this thread started.This is only about western culture, I stress. I feel our culture has so much individualized, so much into fast satisfaction and easy pleasure, people have become lazy. TV ads tells us "you are worth it". In my country too, so it will be interesting to see the fluctuations in the number of abortions.
To me people have shed all responsibility for their own lives. They do well, then that must be their own doing. They do not do well; someone or something else must be to blame.
In this case, the right to abortion implies the obligation for people to avoid that at all costs. We enjoy the rights, but do we still remember the obligations? |
| securemann |
Posted - January 26 2003 : 5:44:28 PM
I'm pro-life and not too hep on this war so far.I'm all for self defense when done in self defense.Abortion is always wrong because you are killing the innocent no matter which way you cut it.All the people who had a story to tell (nurses)about the savageness of the partial birth abortion,were blocked by Clinton.Instead, he had his own hand picked people to twist the truth in order to make it sound like a normal medical procedure.All he had to do was to let the real witnesses up there to tell the truth,but he didn't.Clintonese at its best. |
| Lainey |
Posted - January 25 2003 : 8:15:17 PM
quote:
Is it only about ignorant women then? What about the ignorant men? Maybe you have forgotten them in your sex ed, and that is why it's not working.
I don't know, Ilse. I didn't think it was ignorance in the first place. As I said, sex ed has become quite anchored within the American educational system. Some school districts have even demonstrated the point by having KINDERGARTENERS practice putting condoms on bananas. That sure does include the male in the equation. Selfish men, perhaps? Selfish women, perhaps? Irresponsible culture, perhaps?
quote:
What I am objecting to here, is the notion that if you ban abortion, the practice will disappear. It will not; it will simply go underground and that will have it's consequences.
No, I did not say it would disappear. I never thought law to be an absolute power. However, if something is wrong or if something is contrary to human rights & human dignity then law has no business sanctioning it & society has no business embracing it, no matter how underground it might become. That is the point as far as its decriminalization or prohibition. It is unethical - period.
quote:
The legality of abortion has no effect on the number. Holland and the US can serve as a simple example. Abortion is legal in the US; the rate is relatively high. Abortion has been legal for about the same time in Holland; the rate is relatively low.
You've raised an interesting point, here. Why is it higher in the US?
Do you think it's really an issue of awareness of consequences of actions, a deficiency in understanding human sexuality & lack of education, or a disregard of the consequences. Based upon American culture in general, I'm inclined to think it's the latter. For many it remains always a thing to fall back upon & therefore the actions are not given great consideration. Quite frankly, we've become a throw away society in many ways; this is merely another manifestation of disregard & disrespect. Is this possibly why there is a higher number (1.3 million annually) in the US?
What are the numbers in Holland? What is the medical community's position? Is it supportive across the board, or is there disagreement?
|
| securemann |
Posted - January 25 2003 : 7:25:45 PM
I definitely agree with you Ilse when you stated: educate,educate,educate. When the abortion procedure in all its gore ( not al gore) is shown on national T.V.,only then the abortion mentality will dissipate from people.I doubt very much that will ever happen because the media is 100% abortion and know if they employ such educational methods,it will be the end of the abortion industry.Educate,educate,educate! Right on! |
| Ilse |
Posted - January 25 2003 : 5:37:08 PM
Lainey said:
quote:
Is the world filled with ignorant women now?
Is it only about ignorant women then? What about the ignorant men? Maybe you have forgotten them in your sex ed, and that is why it's not working. |
| Ilse |
Posted - January 25 2003 : 5:25:52 PM
What I am objecting to here, is the notion that if you ban abortion, the practice will disappear. It will not; it will simply go underground and that will have it's consequences.
The legality of abortion has no effect on the number. Holland and the US can serve as a simple example. Abortion is legal in the US; the rate is relatively high. Abortion has been legal for about the same time in Holland; the rate is relatively low.
It is not connected. What is connected is awareness, realizing the consequences of your actions, and availability of contraceptives. In Holland, awareness is high and contraceptives are cheap and easy to get. Some are covered by public insurance.
Therefore, I don't see any results coming from making abortions illegal except the practice becoming more rotten. Educate, educate, educate! That is where I think the gains are.
As for the more ethical aspects, Rich, I support the right, but when it comes to me making a decision like that.... I don't know. However, I make it 100% sure I will not ever get to that point. |
| richfed |
Posted - January 25 2003 : 06:38:09 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Ilse
If you want to eradicate the practice of abortion you better educate how to avoid being faced with that choice.
Hey Ilse! 
Gotta disagree ... "lack" of quality & meaningful sex education might be a reason for so many unwanted babies - or, should I say "pregnancies"? - but, surely it's not a justification for legalized and willing murder of innocents! To simplify it in that manner is to ignore all the more profound reasons why it is a sign of moral decadence in today's world that Lainey so clearly defined above.
Look, I've been there - long ago - one reason, perhaps, that some decry anti-abortion legislation is that they themselves have had, or financed, an abortion. Many, many have - good people ... How does one reconcile within themselves that they just "snuffed out" a budding life? Never gave them a chance to realize the potential they had? It's tough. But, it has to be faced. One has to look themselves in the mirror; realize that they made this "choice" out of pure ignorance and/or selfishness, and vow to speak out against it so that it doesn't continue to happen. That's the "choice" in my opinion. Does one continue to allow this atrocity to occur right before their eyes & do nothing? Or does one try to "enlighten" [beginning with themselves] and allow God's greatest gift - life - to flower? Not much of a choice ...
Look, two events - recent events - have drastically altered the way I think & feel. One was September 11, 2001. The other was the birth of my daughter, Sophia. Sophia ... a little girl, struggling with life itself, has never been in her [my] home, never uttered a word, yet she holds this power over me and is all I think about. She is precious. She was born at a stage when many babies are legally killed. This little baby has a will to live! No one can convince me otherwise. To have snuffed out this little being from her right to life, would have been nothing short of murder. I can't even imagine ...
|
| Lainey |
Posted - January 24 2003 : 10:46:09 PM
quote:
What I am so sorely missing in this non-discussion is the topic of sexual education.
If you want to eradicate the practice of abortion you better educate how to avoid being faced with that choice.
As long as that is not the case, the right on abortion is to me a human right for women so they can have some influence in what their lives will look like.
Where is there a grand absence of sex education? It's taught from elementary grades on up; right up there with the three R's. I'm sure it is in Holland, as well. Obviously that's not the problem, or the cause, or the remedy. Is the world filled with ignorant women now?
There is no lack of sex ed so what remains?
Has the 'choice' of abortion bettered women's lives or empowered their futures?
As for this 'non-discussion' - should the few who have posted self-dissent? |
| Ilse |
Posted - January 24 2003 : 9:59:17 PM
What I am so sorely missing in this non-discussion is the topic of sexual education.
If you want to eradicate the practice of abortion you better educate how to avoid being faced with that choice.
As long as that is not the case, the right on abortion is to me a human right for women so they can have some influence in what their lives will look like.
|
| securemann |
Posted - January 24 2003 : 9:50:09 PM
You know what I can't understand is that the media has shown all kinds of graphic documentaries on T.V. from the holocaust to many other human rights issues.Geraldo Rivera and all the "others" who go out to get the stories and then expose them did not once tell or show any horrific details of an abortion.They will show all the broken and mutilated bodies of the holocaust and every other human injustice but will never show a partial birth abortion or any other abortion on T.V. Why? |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - January 24 2003 : 7:32:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by securemann
Watch a real abortion on video.Any human being would be appalled at the murder that just took place.The video,"Eclipse of Reason" would be a good one to watch.I took it to work years ago and showed it to hard core abortion rights people and they could not believe what they saw.What were they thinking? Did they think the procedure was only equivalent to a dental cleaning? They were upset to say the least.Truth is Truth.
Securemann, I once described the procedure used for a Partial Birth Abortion... in graphic detail... to someone who had informed me that "no man was going to tell her she had to carry a baby"! I wish I could have videotaped her face as she listened. The horror that spread across it... she simply had no clue! Too many people have no clue. |
| Lainey |
Posted - January 24 2003 : 5:39:11 PM
Hi, Anthony,
First ~ I am not at all offended by your posts on this topic (nor should anyone be). I agree that the Trumps & Douglas's & all other self-absorbed, self-indulgent, wealthy elitists have no excuse for exercising their "right to choice," but the "choice" argument, which you supported, contradicts your point. The mantra is "no one tells me what to do with my body." Well, if that is so, then you have nothing to say to the Trumps or Trumpettes of the world. It's simply "their choice" - right?
I do not agree that those less wealthy or less empowered DO have the right or excuse for this "choice."
This thread was actually about the political machinations & deceptive campaign of NARAL & other eugenic proponents & how they waged a massive war of destruction by falsely framing this as a "Catholic issue," how they succeeded in their objectives by courting the underlying anti-Catholicism of American culture that is as old as the English colonies (the only sense of it being a 'Catholic Issue' is in that Catholics & Catholicism are daily targets of hateful slander, accusations, & suppressed rights - so much so that were it ANY other group there'd be outcries of horror & demands for HATE-CRIME charges), & how they achieved such absolute political/social power that Supreme Court judges have quoted from their unscholarly, bias saturated, non-factual writings without shame, media has unabashedly engaged in irresponsible yellow journalism & behaved more like NARAL Ad offices than objective reporters (Party at my place after the rally!), politicians trip over themselves to grovel before their NARAL masters (every Democratic presidential candidate attended the other night's NARAL event, each declaring & professing himself as more 'pro-choice' than the others), & much of the general public refuses to reflect or question the merits or facts of the abortion reality for fear of ostracization, retaliation, guilt, or humiliation. (You know ... who dares say 'the Emperor is wearing no clothes!')
It's not a religious issue; it's an ETHICAL issue.
However, the abortion issue itself; it isn't a 'republican' thing, as you suggest. There are Democrats who are pro-life & there are MANY pro-choice Republicans, including almost ALL presidents. I'm not a Republican. The only definitive statement you could make regarding political affiliation & abortion is that the Democratic Party is so deeply in the pocket of Abortion Rights organizations that they will NEVER consider a pro-life candidate. Never. The Republicans, on the other hand, have nominated & elected both pro-choice & pro-life candidates (far more of the former). Therefore, Anthony, you can't really call it a Republican issue & I'd challenge you to step out of that mental prison & return to questioning the merits of why it was you once opposed abortion.
'It's MY body'~ No, it isn't. Old canard #1. The fatality, which is the objective of abortion, is suffered by the child; a completely separate body, a completely separate person. The question isn't whose body it is, the question is 'does anyone have the right, under any circumstances, to destroy another innocent life?'
The arguments in favor:
1) Since the separate life, the child, is dependent upon the mother's body in order to grow & survive, the mother should reserve the right to allow or disallow that child's survival. Since the child's existence impacts greatly upon the mother physically, emotionally, & financially, it is her right to cooperate in the life process or terminate the life process.
This position violates every ethical, medical, social, theological, lawful, & historical truth associated with the essence of humanity. It could be rightly argued that this position, & the act itself, is barbaric. Every culture, historically, has been judged & judged itself by the degree in which it protected its most vulnerable, & this has always included the youngest members. T |
| securemann |
Posted - January 24 2003 : 4:50:39 PM
Watch a real abortion on video.Any human being would be appalled at the murder that just took place.The video,"Eclipse of Reason" would be a good one to watch.I took it to work years ago and showed it to hard core abortion rights people and they could not believe what they saw.What were they thinking? Did they think the procedure was only equivalent to a dental cleaning? They were upset to say the least.Truth is Truth. |
| Lainey |
Posted - January 23 2003 : 4:18:53 PM
You're right, Anthony. It always was class warfare & racist eugenics at play. I guess it backfired.
{Yeah, Jim. I remember that cold night. You're still good company!} |
| securemann |
Posted - January 23 2003 : 1:15:27 PM
Hey Rich, Who you calling an alien?! Duh,just kidding,lol. |
| securemann |
Posted - January 23 2003 : 1:12:09 PM
We are with you guys on this one.Hey Lainey,remember our trip to D.C. years ago to protest? We were standing on route 22 in the cold at night waiting for the Evangelical Express to pick us up.I believe Joan Lempka,her husband,and their little girl were there too.We were the only Catholics on the bus.I think that was the last time I went.Can't sit too long or walk or stand like the old days.Oh well. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - January 23 2003 : 08:24:26 AM
You certainly did not alienate me! As I posted once before, I feel very strongly about this issue, right along with you. 30 years ago yesterday (Jan 22) began one of the most horrible chapters of this nation's history, and it must be ended.
I remember when I was pregnant with my first child at age 34, my OB/GYN asked me if I wanted to have an Amniocentesis (a test to determine if the baby has any birth defects). I looked him right in the eye and said, "No Thanks! If my baby has something wrong, we will keep it, love it and take care of it to the best of our abilities!"
I think of our Lord, with his arms around young children, looking down upon us with tears streaming down His face... and I cry. 
(BTW, I have no intention of debating this subject. For me, there is nothing to debate. Besides, Lainey will do a much better job of it than I!)
WW
|
| richfed |
Posted - January 23 2003 : 05:37:46 AM
At the risk of alienating half the board's population ...
A baby is a baby ...
Murder is murder ...
Murdering a baby should not be a "choice" ...
|
|
Around The Site:
~ What's New? ~
Pathfinding
|
Mohican Gatherings
|
Mohican Musings
|
LOTM Script
|
History
|
Musical Musings
|
Storefronts on the Frontier
Off the Beaten Trail
|
Links
Of Special Interest:
The Eric Schweig Gallery
|
From the Ramparts
|
The Listening Room
|
Against All Odds
|
The Video Clips Index
DISCLAIMER
Tune, 40, used by permission - composed by Ron Clarke
|
| The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!] |
© 1997-2025 - Mohican Press |
 |
|
| Current Mohicanland page raised in 0.22 seconds |
 |
|
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
