Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Posted on 07/03/2008 6:19:51 AM PDT by NYer
Overexposure to television news talk shows? ;-)
Over the years, I have see battles and wars break out in the Religion Forum. Some truly fascinating 'characters' were issued warnings and even given time out before being ejected. It's been faily quiet since the Mod set down some new rules. But there will always be that one person or group that enjoys stirring up the pot just to see how the Catholics will react. The best reaction is to remember the words of Jesus: "Love your enemy. Do good to those who hurt you. Father forgive them, for they know not what they do." Failing that, ignore them. But do not drop out of the forum! Promise me that.
I wish I had as much faith in our fellow Americans as you do. If Americans could be reached with logical arguments on abortions, there wouldn’t still be millions being performed each year. Either people are too easily persuaded by the empty arguments of the other side, or they just don’t care.
>> If Americans could be reached with logical arguments on abortions, there wouldn’t still be millions being performed each year. Either people are too easily persuaded by the empty arguments of the other side, or they just don’t care.
We’ve come a long way since Roe v. Wade. Radical feminism was big in the 60’s and 70’s ... today, its a relic (as are its proponents, both figuratively and literally). Support for abortion-as-birth-control is relegated to the fringe. Most abortion supporters are simply “rape, incest, life of the mother” supporters — which is a SMALL percentage of abortions.
The ONLY reason abortion-on-demand is still available is because we haven’t quite captured a majority on the Court. Left to democratic devices (i.e. if the state legislatures passed the laws, rather than the Supreme Court), abortion would be illegal throughout most of the country with the exceptions of rape, incest and life of the mother exemptions.
I’d say that’s a victory, and it should inspire confidence in the moral compass of the American public. One more vote on the Court, and the fight goes back to the State Legislators, where it should be — and where we’ll win easily across most of the country.
H
Well, that sort of shoots down the argument that we will only stop abortion when we change people’s hearts and minds. There are more abortions now than there was when Roe v Wade was first decided. And why don’t we have more Pro-life justices on the court? Because voters didn’t care when they elected Bill Clinton in 92 and again in 96. Perhaps instead of a Breyer and Ginsburg, we could have had 2 more conservative justices. But it “was the economy, stupid” and people voted with their pocketbooks and could have cared less about the killing of preborn babies.
>> Well, that sort of shoots down the argument that we will only stop abortion when we change people’s hearts and minds.
Hearts and minds are simply the first step.
>> There are more abortions now than there was when Roe v Wade was first decided.
There are also far more people in the country than there were in 1973. And, most abortionists are repeat offenders.
>> And why don’t we have more Pro-life justices on the court?
Several reasons. Some caused by voters, many completely out of voter control.
(1) A liberal President (Clinton nominated Ginsberg and Breyer);
(2) a couple of lousy nominations (Souter was a Bush nominee, Kennedy a Reagan nominee);
(3) one relic that just won’t leave (Stevens was nominated by Ford);
and — most importantly ...
(4) the ridiculous non-confirmation of Robert Bork. Bork, a rock-solid conservative, and legal genius, was replaced by Anthony Kennedy.
>> But it “was the economy, stupid” and people voted with their pocketbooks and could have cared less about the killing of preborn babies.
Few people vote based on a single issue. People also elected Ronald Reagan and George Bush consecutively — and watched Robert Bork get beat up and thrown aside, and Kennedy nominated in his place, and then saw Souter nominated by Bush. The people did their job — the nominees were just lousy, or thrown out by a partisan Senate.
H
Americans can be reached with logic. This story proves it. Here was this woman who was entrenched in the “compassionate” pro-choice viewpoint for years who was reached by logic. It’s just a matter at chipping away at the lies.
If a fetus truly was not a person, not a human being, not a precious child, what is the problem with abortion? If it really was just a growth, there should be no moral dilema. People have been taught this lie, indoctrinated. They teach it in the schools. They teach it in the streets. On television, on the internet, they spread this lie.
It is fighting through indoctrination of lies and deceit that are easy enough to believe if you get caught up in the emotional appeals. A first trimester fetus doesn’t look particularly human, especially in the first few weeks. It isn’t really tangible to most people, who haven’t seen ultrasounds, abortions, or pre-natal surgery. But it’s still a lie.
But just like the woman who wrote that article, they can be reached. It just takes time and patience.
Right on. And Humanae Vitae was absolutely the beginning of the conversation, from our perspective, that is, the truly pro life perspective.
Changing hearts and minds is not going to do it. If that was the case, then there would be no such thing as Partial Birth abortion, which was not around when Roe was first decided. There is no argument at that point that it is a baby that is being killed. When abortion became the law of the land, there was no huge demand for it. In fact, polls at the time showed that a large majority of people didn’t agree with Roe and wanted it overturned. Those poll numbers have steadily dropped over the years. As far as Supreme Court justices, why do we have Gingsburg and Breyer? Because abortion is not a high priority with voters, and they voted for Bill Clinton for 2 terms.
BTW, Kennedy voted with the conservatives on the bench when Webster was decided in 1989. It was Sandra Day O’Connor that screwed that one up. I know she was a Reagan appointee, but we were paying as much attention to court appointments at the time like we do today, or we would have ended up with Harriet Myers. This is where the National Right to Life should have done their job, and should have been monitoring who was being appointed to the bench and seen to it that Reagan nominate someone more conservative, like he did with Scalia and Bork. We got Scalia because the Senate was under Republican control at the time, and we could have had another Scalia or Bork instead of O’Connor as well.
Kennedy also voted with the majority regarding a recent decision, I believe it was last year, ruling against Partial Birth abortion. So far, I think he has voted with the conservative justices on abortion-related issues.
“If a fetus truly was not a person, not a human being, not a precious child, what is the problem with abortion? “
The personhood of the baby is no longer an issue. Partial birth abortion has wiped that away. If proving that the baby was indeed a living human being, then there would be no argument for PBA. The other side has already ceded that argument to us and now argues for the health of the mother.
That’s a very good point. I’m sure there are a lot of people who know it’s wrong and are just in it for the convenience, and a lot of people who feel the mother’s rights trump the baby’s. But still, I’m positive that there are many people just like Mrs. Fulwiler who buy into the lie that the baby is not a person, or even a baby. Those are the people we can and must reach with logic.
mark
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Thanks for posting this. I love her website.
Here is an update:
VITALS for Jennifer Fulwiler:
I’m 34 years old, have been married for seven years, and live in Austin, TX with my husband and five children: a six-year-old boy, and four girls ages five, four, two and newborn.
She is certainly pro-life now. ;-D
Am reading a great novel at the moment titled, Fatherless, by Brian J. Gail. A Catholic novel in nature, as it chronicles the lives of several Catholic families in a parish in Philadelphia in the 1980's.
The more fascinating stories deal with a family man who is working with a pharmaceutical company. He has just uncovered sealed files that expose birth control pills that are linked not only with aborting the egg on the uterine wall, but also creating cervical and uterine cancer in women. It opens the world of how society has changed since the emergence of the pill as a form of birth control. How it framed the debate of when life begins. Riveting novel.
A trilogy of three. The others are Motherless and Childless. The last novel tries to predict where we will be by the year 2040.
Absolutely moving and wonderful story! Thanks so much for sharing!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.