President addresses March for Life

[Shiloh Raven]

Do you feel the same way about the United States engaging in drone strikes that kill people who's only crime is living in a specific region?

Yes, I'm aware both Obama and Trump are responsible for this.

Apparently that doesn't count. I would say that the majority of the "pro life" conservatives I've met over the years wouldn't care if those people were killed. In fact, I'm rather confident they would have supported the drone strikes. It's astonishing how many "pro life" Republicans aren't really pro life. Not the majority of the ones I've met over the years because they are all pro war, pro death penalty, and gripe about how orphaned or fatherless children on welfare are a burden to taxpayers.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

I myself am amazed at how a short trip down the birth canal transforms a "Precious gift from God to our world!!" in to ""a burdensome creature, leeching off the blood and sweat of the American tax payer!!".
tulc(is just sayn')

Yeah, the concern for life seems to stop there with a lot of "pro life" Christians. I could take their preaching about being pro life if they were actually pro life concerning life outside the womb (see my post above). Anyway, I thought I would post the following meme again because this nun speaks the uncomfortable truth about so many people within the pro life movement.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

Trump and Paul Ryan are the biggest joke to me. They want women to be barefoot and pregnant if the family makes good money.

That sounds so ridiculous. I just wonder at times where do thoughts such as these come from?

M-Bob

 

[Desk trauma]

As always I don’t believe that the pro life movement believes what they say. They sure don’t conduct themselves as if they do.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

As always I don’t believe that the pro life movement believes what they say. They sure don’t conduct themselves as if they do.

No, they don't.

And most of them don't live up to other issues they preach about either.

 

[tulc]

That sounds so ridiculous. I just wonder at times where do thoughts such as these come from?

M-Bob

I'd guess it comes from honestly looking at the policies they're pushing and not paying attention to their propaganda?
tulc(thinks that seems like a reasonable conclusion to be drawn)

 

[Mountainmanbob]

What happened here while I was gone?
Something in the water?

Mind readers I guess?

I was warned by my (Christian) mentor regarding mind reading.

M-Bob

 

[Tallguy88]

Apparently that doesn't count. I would say that the majority of the "pro life" conservatives I've met over the years wouldn't care if those people were killed. In fact, I'm rather confident they would have supported the drone strikes. It's astonishing how many "pro life" Republicans aren't really pro life. Not the majority of the ones I've met over the years because they are all pro war, pro death penalty, and gripe about how orphaned or fatherless children on welfare are a burden to taxpayers.

I've opposed the drone war under Bush, Obama, and now Trump. At a minimum, they need to do a better job about confirming their targets before using them. I support the death penalty sometimes. I support social safety nets for poor people.

 

[Tallguy88]

We should all be celebrating March for Life. Abortion cannot be promoted anywhere on CF, so why are people attacking people who are willing to get out and march to end abortion? This is a great event and I've wanted to go for years, but haven't been able thus far.

 

[Fantine]

The President who (with help from a ghostwriter) wrote "The Art of the Deal" has obviously convinced Right-to-Lifers to make a Faustian deal with him.

It is one thing to want to criminalize abortion through political means in an attempt to end it. It is another to accept the help of a man who, first of all, has been tracked lying about 75% of the time, who reneges on promises regularly, who has never shown any interest in the right-to-life except as a way to get a few more votes from gullible people of conscience desperate enough to believe he will help them.

What did the marchers get in return for their trust? A rambling, disjointed monosyllabic rant that could be read better by a third grader.

And what did they lose? They lost their credibility. They lost their ability to convince fence sitters that they had integrity--because they headlined someone who behaves with no integrity.

I was invited to participate in a local Women's March yesterday, but begged off because I only agree with 99% of their aims. They only need 70,000 more votes nationwide to bring social justice back to our nation--and I believe that if they weren't so rabidly pro-choice they could get those 70,000 votes--and many more.

Especially with March for Lifers making a deal with Donald J. Trump's record on the many issues that encompass "life."

*Note: I took pains to address only the president's behavior without maligning his character.

 

[Mountain_Girl406]

And how exactly did that reduce abortions?

Are you saying woman use abortion as a form of birth control?

Proof would be nice

People use birth control for birth control. When access to safe, effective birth control is difficult, unplanned pregnancies are more likely to occur. Some of these end up as abortions sadly. If unplanned pregnancies rarely happen, there are fewer abortions

 

[Fantine]

The bishop of your diocese, Tallguy, refused to attend the March for Life in the state capitol because the Right to Life Committee had invited the Attorney General to speak, a woman who not only tried to push almost daily executions in the state last April but whose positions on immigration, the environment, and compassion for the poor are repugnant to any caring person.

He took a stand because giving people like the Attorney General and President Donald Trump a soapbox to promote their messages of cruelty and hate (along with a wink and a nod to the unborn) is hypocritical. He said two Masses for pro-life and presided at an Adoration service in the cathedral, but he could not stand beside a supporter of executions.

So if even the bishop is repulsed by the poor judgment of the Right to Life Committee, why aren't you?

 

[ViaCrucis]

People use birth control for birth control. When access to safe, effective birth control is difficult, unplanned pregnancies are more likely to occur. Some of these end up as abortions sadly. If unplanned pregnancies rarely happen, there are fewer abortions

Talk like that is downright reasonable. That doesn't belong here, we're talking about how awesome Donald Trump is because he gives lip service to anti-abortion advocates. Actually finding ways to curb or reduce the number of abortions is unacceptable.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[gym_class_hero]

evidently theres a doctor in San Francisco that is doing surgeries on unborn babies. He removes them from their mothers body, performs the surgery then places them back inside their mother.
so a guess the baby becomes a person outside their Mothers body yet goes back to not being a person when placed back in?
Seems to fly in the face of the abortion crowds "logic"...

 

[KCfromNC]

My initial assumption was that the increased access to birth control that happened under the Obama administration through Obamacare was a positive factor in reducing abortion rates. I think that birth control, good sex ed, and access to health care are all things that significantly lower abortion rates.

Plus a good economy.

 

[MoonlessNight]

It's amazing to me how many Christians are willing (perhaps literally) to throw innocent unborn children under the rug simply to score some cheap rhetorical points by claiming that the pro-life movement is not "really" pro-life.

Every single topic on any pro-life event that I have seen on Christians site has without fail been full of such people.

 

[tulc]

It's amazing to me how many Christians are willing (perhaps literally) to throw innocent unborn children under the rug simply to score some cheap rhetorical points by claiming that the pro-life movement is not "really" pro-life.

Every single topic on any pro-life event that I have seen on Christians site has without fail been full of such people.

...and the fact that every one of those sites has Christians on it saying the same thing doesn't give you pause in any sort of way? Perhaps, and I'm just throwing this out there to be thought about, the problem isn't with them?
tulc(as he said, it's just a thought)

 

[Tallguy88]

The bishop of your diocese, Tallguy, refused to attend the March for Life in the state capitol because the Right to Life Committee had invited the Attorney General to speak, a woman who not only tried to push almost daily executions in the state last April but whose positions on immigration, the environment, and compassion for the poor are repugnant to any caring person.

He took a stand because giving people like the Attorney General and President Donald Trump a soapbox to promote their messages of cruelty and hate (along with a wink and a nod to the unborn) is hypocritical. He said two Masses for pro-life and presided at an Adoration service in the cathedral, but he could not stand beside a supporter of executions.

So if even the bishop is repulsed by the poor judgment of the Right to Life Committee, why aren't you?

As you probably know, the death penalty and abortion are not equal issues in Catholic theology. If the Bishop felt compelled not to attend because Ms. AG was there, that's his prerogative. But Pope Benedict said we could disagree over the DP, but not abortion.

 

[Fantine]

The bishop was making a statement which is subject to interpretation.

Maybe he was telling the Right to Life Committee not to sleep with the enemy.

Maybe he was telling them not to settle for so little from cynical politicians who halfheartedly court their favor and spend most of their time courting lobbyists and stomping on the common good.

Maybe he was urging them to expand their vision of what "life" issues are.

He honored the anniversary of Roe v. Wade with two special Masses and an evening of adoration, but I am grateful that he did not give the attorney general his seal of approval by standing next to her while she gave a two-faced speech.

 

[MoonlessNight]

As you probably know, the death penalty and abortion are not equal issues in Catholic theology. If the Bishop felt compelled not to attend because Ms. AG was there, that's his prerogative. But Pope Benedict said we could disagree over the DP, but not abortion.

In particular the teaching of the Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church make it pretty clear that executions are licit in certain circumstances, but abortions are licit in no circumstances whatsoever.

We might disagree about which particular circumstances make an execution licit, but since such circumstances exist, we can't say that someone involved with an execution should be shunned merely for being involved with an execution. We would need an argument particular to that execution to say that it was illicit.

In contrast every abortion is illicit, and indeed one of the gravest sins against human dignity, so we can reject abortionists and those who support them merely because of their support. There's no need to look at particular cases here, since every particular case would be illicit anyway.