Anti-abortion as a cover for selfishness

[fragmentsofdreams]

First, to be clear, there are many people who are sincerely concerned about abortion. If you are one of these people, this post does not apply to you.

I've been having many political discussions lately, and I've noticed something that disturbs me. When discussing an issue where I feel Democrats would do a better job at addressing Christian concerns, a few people will try to shut me up by using abortion as a trump card over every other issue. While I can understand those who place ending abortion as their highest priority, what disturbs me is that some don't seem to place other things as a priority at all.

Does anyone else see this? Does it disturb anyone else?

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

First, to be clear, there are many people who are sincerely concerned about abortion. If you are one of these people, this post does not apply to you.

I've been having many political discussions lately, and I've noticed something that disturbs me. When discussing an issue where I feel Democrats would do a better job at addressing Christian concerns, a few people will try to shut me up by using abortion as a trump card over every other issue. While I can understand those who place ending abortion as their highest priority, what disturbs me is that some don't seem to place other things as a priority at all.

Does anyone else see this? Does it disturb anyone else?

Does the term 'priority' mean you put something above other issues?

If you say that abortion is just another important issue to be weighed with the others- then it ceases to be a priority?

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Does the term 'priority' mean you put something above other issues?

If you say that abortion is just another important issue to be weighed with the others- then it ceases to be a priority?

It's not that one issue dominates the rest that disturbs me. It is when I don't get any sense that the inability to achieve lower priorities is regretful that I begin to get disturbed. Sometimes I even get the sense that someone doesn't want to take any action on lower priorities and is using the abortion issue to provide cover for this, which is deeply disturbing.

I often get this impression when I suggest alternative methods of reducing abortions. Instead of saying that it won't work or that the current political situation forces us to choose between which solutions to pursue, some people will object primarily to the prospect that the program will raise their taxes. To me, this reveals that abortion is not their top priority and that keeping their material possessions trumps it. This makes me wonder if all of their talk about abortion is really just to cover for their selfishness.

Just to be clear, I do believe that many people are sincerely concerned about the fate of countless unborn. The disingenuous are the minority.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

It's not that one issue dominates the rest that disturbs me. It is when I don't get any sense that the inability to achieve lower priorities is regretful that I begin to get disturbed. Sometimes I even get the sense that someone doesn't want to take any action on lower priorities and is using the abortion issue to provide cover for this, which is deeply disturbing.

I often get this impression when I suggest alternative methods of reducing abortions. Instead of saying that it won't work or that the current political situation forces us to choose between which solutions to pursue, some people will object primarily to the prospect that the program will raise their taxes. To me, this reveals that abortion is not their top priority and that keeping their material possessions trumps it. This makes me wonder if all of their talk about abortion is really just to cover for their selfishness.

Just to be clear, I do believe that many people are sincerely concerned about the fate of countless unborn. The disingenuous are the minority.

The law must reflect divine law. I don't see any way to reconcile the creation or continuation of immoral law, like allowing abortion, with Church teaching. Democrats who are pro-choice, like Kerry or Pelosi are violating our responsibility within a democracy to create laws in accordance with divine law.

People often have a tendency to think those that are against big government social programs are 'selfish'. The truth is, there probably are a lot of people against them for that reason, but many and I think most people simply believe big government is not the way to tackle social issues.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

The law must reflect divine law. I don't see any way to reconcile the creation or continuation of immoral law, like allowing abortion, with Church teaching. Democrats who are pro-choice, like Kerry or Pelosi are violating our responsibility within a democracy to create laws in accordance with divine law.

I disagree. There is no inherent need for our laws to reflect Divine Law. In the case of abortion, what matters is reducing the number of abortions. When considering whether to pursue a ban on abortion, we must consider what the effect of the ban will be on abortion rates and whether there are alternative solutions that could reduce abortions more for the same amount of political effort.

People often have a tendency to think those that are against big government social programs are 'selfish'. The truth is, there probably are a lot of people against them for that reason, but many and I think most people simply believe big government is not the way to tackle social issues.

I agree. One can legitimately believe that a particular program won't work or is less effective than its alternatives. However, if someone criticizes a particular program primarily because of the prospect of raising taxes, it is reasonable to infer that the person places low taxes as a higher priority than the issue the program would try to address.

 

[Fantine]

The real problem is that national parties establish platforms, and often require candidates to support those positions as a condition for party support.

I think about Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy, Catholic nurse. We used to belong to the same parish when I lived in NY. Now I am about 110% sure she doesn't support abortion in her heart, but she felt the call to run for Congress to be an advocate for gun control when her husband was killed and her son partially paralyzed in a LIRR shooting.

Afterwards, she saw her Republican Congressman cozying up to the NRA, supporting and promoting laws that no sane Americans would want, the kind of laws that made it easy for the man who murdered her husband and wounded her son.

But the Democratic platform requires her to be publicly pro-choice, like it or not. And she has a cause, an important cause, to which she was called by the blood of martyrdom....

What's she to do?

I am sure that there are Republican lawmakers who are forced by their party to support positions that go against their personal morality, too. What's needed is to allow candidates to be more independent and genuine.

 

[Protinus]

many points are taken to heart. As a Catholic, I would follow Catholic Law, canonical law, as per abortion.
But ..

I stand as a practicising Catholic and we must define what we mean by quality of life and how we immerse ourselves in this element to answer.

Bless you fragment and Fantine

 

[homeofmew]

In some cases an Abortion may be necessary.
It is good having it legal because in the situations were people do try to do it illegally it would end up bad.

However

There are plenty of infertile couples that can not have children and toy don't put your child up for adoption?

I am personally was adopted myself and I am pretty glad I wasn't aborted

 

[Protinus]

home of yew: I would hope that that would be the case. But there are too many cases claiming moral sanctiy in the name of exposure to those who whould willing give their kids to giving families.

The issue IS, there are not enough giving families and society can not PROVIDE! We must transcend and provide for caring Christian mothers and families.