Defunding Planned Parenthood

[mark46]

Yup! I favor exactly such a law. It's probably the best we can get. Scott Walker favors such a law here in WI and I applaud him for it.

Such a law is based on the time that a fetus is likely to survive outside the womb. If there were to be a significant number of births before 20 weeks, a new law might move the time to 19 or 18 weeks. The vast majority view is that a child should not be aborted (most would also consider whether the LIFE of the mother is at great risk). IMHO, the majority distinguish between a potential child and a child that can survive if birth would occur.

Obviously, the Catholic view is very different. We believe in stopping all actions that prevent life. Certainly that is the rationale for banning early abortions, the pills, and condoms.

It does little good in public discussion to compare using the morning after pill to soldier being killed by the Nazis. NO ONE is listening, including most Catholics. As has been demonstrated by many politicians, much can be done when one looks to common ground. This does NOT diminish our own faith.

Should we not have laws against murder because using the morning after the pill is not considered murder? Of course not!

 

[pdudgeon]

Such a law is based on the time that a fetus is likely to survive outside the womb. If there were to be a significant number of births before 20 weeks, a new law might move the time to 19 or 18 weeks. The vast majority view is that a child should not be aborted (most would also consider whether the LIFE of the mother is at great risk). IMHO, the majority distinguish between a potential child and a child that can survive if birth would occur.

Obviously, the Catholic view is very different. We believe in stopping all actions that prevent life. Certainly that is the rationale for banning early abortions, the pills, and condoms.

It does little good in public discussion to compare using the morning after pill to soldier being killed by the Nazis. NO ONE is listening, including most Catholics. As has been demonstrated by many politicians, much can be done when one looks to common ground. This does NOT diminish our own faith.

Should we not have laws against murder because using the morning after the pill is not considered murder? Of course not!

Obviously, the Catholic view is very different. We believe in stopping all actions that prevent life. Certainly that is the rationale for banning early abortions, the pills, and condoms.

the whole problem in this thread (and in life) is that we have Catholics arguing against the Catholic position. See post #281 above.

 

[mark46]

the whole problem in this thread (and in life) is that we have Catholics arguing against the Catholic position. See post #281 above.

I strongly disagree. You refuse to support laws that BAN partial birth abortions, and abortions after 20 weeks. It is your position that has DIRECTLY led to hundreds of thousands of abortions in the US. These abortions are preventable through legislation, as has been passed in some states, along with more support of women, before, during and after pregnancy.

Perhaps we should strike down our murder laws because they don't include the murdering of babies in the womb. That would be consistent with the position that you state.

 

[pdudgeon]

I strongly disagree. You refuse to support laws that BAN partial birth abortions, and abortions after 20 weeks. It is your position that has DIRECTLY led to hundreds of thousands of abortions in the US. These abortions are preventable through legislation, as has been passed in some states, along with more support of women, before, during and after pregnancy.

Perhaps we should strike down our murder laws because they don't include the murdering of babies in the womb. That would be consistent with the position that you state.

the only effect that such a law has is to force women and their doctors to lie and say that their pregnancies are not 20 weeks or further along in order to procure the abortion.
The Catholic church is still against abortion, so the only legislation to support in tandem with that belief is the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, which allowed abortion in the first place.

as for your charge that it is my personal refusal to support anything less than the overturning of Roe vs. Wade that has led to 'hundreds of thousands of abortions in the U. S.'
you are reaching.
It is the double effect of original sin upon the world, along with the refusal to recognize all life as God created and ordained, which combined with the assurances of a society that does not recognize nor place a value on human life while in the womb, which has led people to this state.

It is horrific that the same exact "tissue" which has no value to society in the womb does hold value and recognition as human once it is out of the womb, and the child's 'parts' can be sold.

Whenever a man-made law sets an arbitrary 'benchmark' against which an action will be judged to be acceptable, that law itself is liable to be set against God's law to be weighed and measured. It was the same in Christ's day, and by His words He said as much. Let me know if you need the citations.

 

[Fantine]

Roe v. Wade is a Supreme Court decision, and it cannot be overturned by legislation. It can only be overturned by a Constitutional human life amendment.

A Constitutional Amendment must be proposed by 2/3 of the members of both the House and Senate, and then it must be ratified by 3/4 of the states.

That's what you're talking about, so obviously incremental actions should be considered.

If Roe v. Wade were overturned, some states would still permit abortion. Currently 17 states pay for abortions through Medicaid (all state-funded) so there is obviously widespread support in those places. 32 states pay for a limited number of abortions through state-funded Medicaid, so there is probably support to keep it legal in those places, too.

Most of the 17 states are on the coasts, the states generally considered to be liberal. The travel costs would discourage abortions in other areas, certainly, but overturning Roe v. Wade wouldn't end abortion--especially since the coastal states are densely populated.

That's why my suggestion--showing people the value of human life by being compassionate in ways that the observers can see, hear, touch--i.e. to the already born, seems as effective, if not more so.

 

[WordList]

the only effect that such a law has is to force women and their doctors to lie and say that their pregnancies are not 20 weeks or further along in order to procure the abortion.
The Catholic church is still against abortion, so the only legislation to support in tandem with that belief is the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, which allowed abortion in the first place.

as for your charge that it is my personal refusal to support anything less than the overturning of Roe vs. Wade that has led to 'hundreds of thousands of abortions in the U. S.'
you are reaching.
It is the double effect of original sin upon the world, along with the refusal to recognize all life as God created and ordained, which combined with the assurances of a society that does not recognize nor place a value on human life while in the womb, which has led people to this state.

It is horrific that the same exact "tissue" which has no value to society in the womb does hold value and recognition as human once it is out of the womb, and the child's 'parts' can be sold.

Whenever a man-made law sets an arbitrary 'benchmark' against which an action will be judged to be acceptable, that law itself is liable to be set against God's law to be weighed and measured. It was the same in Christ's day, and by His words He said as much. Let me know if you need the citations.

Let's follow this argument to its logical conclusion:
We can't prevent all murder, so we mustn't try to prevent any.
We can't change the law globally to stop abortion, so we mustn't do so in the U.S.
We cannot feed everyone in the world, so we mustn't feed anybody.

 

[SolomonVII]

The one thing that Schindler would not do would be pat himself on the back at the end of the day for a job well done.

 

[WordList]

The one thing that Schindler would not do would be pat himself on the back at the end of the day for a job well done.

What?

 

[SolomonVII]

What?

Think about it.
It is not my job to make things easy for you.

 

[WordList]

Think about it.
It is not my job to make things easy for you.

Well, if you decline to clarify, the conclusion the reader draws may not be the one you hoped for.

 

[pdudgeon]

Let's follow this argument to its logical conclusion:
We can't prevent all murder, so we mustn't try to prevent any.
We can't change the law globally to stop abortion, so we mustn't do so in the U.S.
We cannot feed everyone in the world, so we mustn't feed anybody.

man tries to use logic, a construct of the mind, to justify the sin of the heart. but this is nothing new.
surely the priests of Jesus' day did the same thing in attempts to entrap Him.

the fallacy of the above argument is that it assumes that we are powerless to prevent murder--- but we aren't.
or that we are powerless to stop abortion---but we aren't.
or that we can't feed everyone in the world---but we can.

the only thing preventing these solutions are eyes that won't see, a heart that won't love, and a will that won't bend.

But if eyes were to see then the heart would melt,
the will would bend to God, and what had been closed will open;
what had been withheld would be offered,
and those who had seemed distant and apart from us would become our neighbors,
our brothers, our sisters, our mothers and our fathers.

 

[WordList]

man tries to use logic, a construct of the mind, to justify the sin of the heart. but this is nothing new.
surely the priests of Jesus' day did the same thing in attempts to entrap Him.

the fallacy of the above argument is that it assumes that we are powerless to prevent murder--- but we aren't.
or that we are powerless to stop abortion---but we aren't.
or that we can't feed everyone in the world---but we can.

the only thing preventing these solutions are eyes that won't see, a heart that won't love, and a will that won't bend.

But if eyes were to see then the heart would melt,
the will would bend to God, and what had been closed will open;
what had been withheld would be offered,
and those who had seemed distant and apart from us would become our neighbors,
our brothers, our sisters, our mothers and our fathers.

Um, it's your logic.

I'm happy to work to feed as many as I can, while pushing for more.

You're the one saying "no, we can't feed anyone until we feed everone" while knowing the latter is not about to happen.

 

[MikeK]

Um, it's your logic.

I'm happy to work to feed as many as I can, while pushing for more.

You're the one saying "no, we can't feed anyone until we feed everone" while knowing the latter is not about to happen.

What you're talking about is the sort of logic that some Christians have used since the beginning to excuse inaction. "We can't fix everything, there will always be evil, Christ said the poor will always be among us, might as well do nothing."

 

[Armoured]

What you're talking about is the sort of logic that some Christians have used since the beginning to excuse inaction. "We can't fix everything, there will always be evil, Christ said the poor will always be among us, might as well do nothing."

I read an interesting critique on that "the poor will always be with you" bit, apparently Jesus was referring to earlier Talmudic text that everyone in his audience would have understood, and in no ways justifies "ah well, can't help everyone" inaction.

 

[MikeK]

I read an interesting critique on that "the poor will always be with you" bit, apparently Jesus was referring to earlier Talmudic text that everyone in his audience would have understood, and in no ways justifies "ah well, can't help everyone" inaction.

It simply doesn't matter what Jesus meant, and it doesn't matter what Christians are called to lives of service - there exist soundbite Christians who will distort the Gospel to suit their lives. To them, faith is a hammer to control others with, not a call to love in every way.

 

[Armoured]

It simply doesn't matter what Jesus meant, and it doesn't matter what Christians are called to lives of service - there exist soundbite Christians who will distort the Gospel to suit their lives. To them, faith is a hammer to control others with, not a call to love in every way.

Oh, I certainly agree that there are "Christians" who twist scripture to mean what they like. I've even had a discussion with someone once who tried to say "render unto Caesar" was an injunction NOT to pay taxes!

I can't agree with you that it doesn't matter what Jesus meant, though. I mean, understanding and abiding by Jesus' message is kinda the whole point of the Christianity exercise, isn't it?

 

[MikeK]

Oh, I certainly agree that there are "Christians" who twist scripture to mean what they like. I've even had a discussion with someone once who tried to say "render unto Caesar" was an injunction NOT to pay taxes!

I can't agree with you that it doesn't matter what Jesus meant, though. I mean, understanding and abiding by Jesus' message is kinda the whole point of the Christianity exercise, isn't it?

I was unclear, sorry about that. I meant "to them" it doesn't matter. To those who seek to really follow Christ rather than pervert His teachings, of course it matters.

 

[pdudgeon]

Well, if you decline to clarify, the conclusion the reader draws may not be the one you hoped for.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oskar_Schindler

 

[classicalhero]

Such a law is based on the time that a fetus is likely to survive outside the womb. If there were to be a significant number of births before 20 weeks, a new law might move the time to 19 or 18 weeks. The vast majority view is that a child should not be aborted (most would also consider whether the LIFE of the mother is at great risk). IMHO, the majority distinguish between a potential child and a child that can survive if birth would occur.

Obviously, the Catholic view is very different. We believe in stopping all actions that prevent life. Certainly that is the rationale for banning early abortions, the pills, and condoms.

It does little good in public discussion to compare using the morning after pill to soldier being killed by the Nazis. NO ONE is listening, including most Catholics. As has been demonstrated by many politicians, much can be done when one looks to common ground. This does NOT diminish our own faith.

Should we not have laws against murder because using the morning after the pill is not considered murder? Of course not!

Why should it matter the child can't survive outside the womb? A child can't survive without the attention of it's mother or someone else, lest it die.

 

[mark46]

The clause that used to be protection for religious freedom from the unconscionable has been removed and changed and it did fall into the whole insurance change - accepted with the ACA changes.

So, you believe that ACA cannot pay a clinic or a doctor's office unless it provides abortion services?