Posted on 01/24/2011 5:47:51 AM PST by Kaslin
Saturday marked the 38th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court decision establishing abortion as a constitutional right throughout the United States. Perhaps coincidentally, that anniversary capped off a week in which news events offered some hard truths about the moral compromises that abortion has forced upon Americans.
Chinese President Hu Jintao’s visit to The White House drew enormous coverage. Some of the most widely-reported news from the State Dinner included President Obama’s toast hailing the “beloved giant pandas” from China, which will remain at Washington’s National Zoo. Deemed significantly less newsworthy were House Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) colloquy with Hu about forced abortions in China – and Hu’s denial of any forced-abortion policy in response to a written question from Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL).
The juxtaposition is jarring. How would reporters and other Americans have reacted had there been credible reports that cute and cuddly pandas – like the ones at the zoo – had been forced to abort? One suspects that animal rights activists, environmentalists and others would have been up in arms – even though many of those same Americans (including President and Mrs. Obama) maintain a discreet silence about forced abortion of human beings by the Chinese. Could the President and First Lady have believed they had to stay silent in the face of a life-and-death human rights abuse – where “choice” plays no part for either mother or unborn child -- in order to avoid compromising their avidly pro-abortion-rights convictions?
Compared to the Pennsylvania Department of Health, however, the Obamas look like profiles in courage. Last week, it was also reported that for 17 years, the Pennsylvania department had simply ignored an abortion house of horrors within its jurisdiction – even as poor, predominantly minority women were badly injured by ghoulish abortionist Kermit Gosnell, who routinely performed third-trimester abortions, using scissors to kill babies born alive (according to the grand jury report, Gosnell kept in jars the feet of the babies he aborted). The Pennsylvania Department of State likewise ignored notices that many of Gosnell’s patients were hospitalized – some with perforated uteruses, bowels and and cervixes, often with infections and fetal remains still inside them. The state Board of Medicine likewise had declined to take action against Gosnell, despite repeated complaints.
Had poor, minority women been victimized by some other kind of criminal businessman who, like Gosnell, collected $1.8 million yearly at their expense, the response would be universal, widespread outrage -- and rightly so. Yet, because the exploitation occurred in the context of abortion, there’s a strange silence from many of those who routinely pride themselves on their disdain for “the rich” and their support for the oppressed. One well-known left-wing blogger, Amanda Marcotte, even went so far as to blame pro-lifers for the Gosnell atrocities.
Thirty-eight years after Roe vs. Wade, it’s clear that the decision has starkly divided many Americans – in fact, some say that the abortion debate is an area where it’s impossible to find any common ground. But that’s not really true. Surely, just as pro-lifers should outspokenly denounce the murder of abortion providers, pro-choicers should likewise be willing to object loudly to forced abortions – and agree (at the very least) that the “doctors” who perform third-trimester abortions, murder newborn babies, and maim their mothers are monsters.
Yes, the right to abortion found by the Supreme Court has caused heated, ugly and sometimes violent, debate on both sides. But if we are to conclude that even those who disagree with us do so in good conscience, then decent people on both sides of the abortion debate must refuse to allow evil to flourish, conveniently unremarked-upon.
Actually, I don't get sick ... you simply don't have that kind of power. I do pity you, though.
No. No there can’t be common ground on murdering children. Anyone who thinks there can be is delusional.
The only common ground is the ground in which abortionists bury the bodies...
Cheers
I see no evidence to make that case. They can all make the "I had no idea" excuse and go on happily (and lucratively) with their lives.
Not even that ...
We bury aborted children in consecrated ground, in established cemeteries.
Abortionists flush the evidence of their crimes down the drain, or throw it in the dumpster.
That is your problem, not mine. Emphasis added to indicate the source of the problem.
The abortion issue is one reason I can say without a doubt that a true (born again) Christian absolutely cannot be a democrat. Abortion is the sacred cow of the democrat platform. Abortion is murder. Where there is growth, there is life. Pulling the lever in the ballot box for even one democrat is a travesty, even if that particular democrat is pro-life. If that democrat wins an election it increases power to the party as a decision-making block. Then the party goes on to destroy America, as it is happily doing at this very time.
A true Christian would not tolerate the character assassination and lies shamelessly spewed from democrats’ mouths.
A true Christian wouldn’t tolerate making excuses for democrats’ sexual escapades. When it happens in the GOP, the person is ousted ASAP, but dems continue in their respective positions.
A true Christian wouldn’t look past the thievery by people such as Charlie Rangel, William Jefferson, et al.
How many commandments completely shattered here? Murder. Adultery. Bearing false witness. Stealing. Praying for a revival in America.
Abortionists flush the evidence of their crimes down the drain, or throw it in the dumpster.
Most women who miscarry in this country just flush the "tissue" down the toilet. I've never been to a funeral for a "miscarriage". We don't treat the unborn seriously at all in this country.
The term “in good conscience” refers to not violating one’s own conscience or doing something without feeling guilty.
It does not address whether the person is right or wrong in feeling this way.
Libertarians are like Sasquatch- sightings are rare. My friends who are “pro-choice” invariably want to control my diet and thermostat.
And aside from impotent ranting and railing on an internet forum, what are you doing about it?
Our Repubs aren't great shakes either. How is busted-with-a-prostitute Vitter still a Senator? How is my-folks-paid-hush-money-to-my-mistress Ensign still a Senator?
That's the problem... even the Repub party is morally compromised...After 30 years of mostly Repub POTUS and Repub Senate, Roe vs. Wade is no closer to repeal. The current D.C. crowd is hopeless...
I refuse to let people get away with hypocritical nonsense under any circumstances... especially at a site that purports to stand up for values..
Wow ... that's so noble of you.
How much is Planned Parenthood paying you?
That's true. If, for example, a pregnant woman wanted to insure the life of her unborn child, receiving a payment if she miscarried, someone could probably be found to take the contract, at a premium based on the individual woman's projected likelihood of carrying to term, considering her age, health, reproductive history, etc.
However, if the baby died, the woman claimed the benefit, and the contractor refused to pay, it's probably that a judge would declare the contract unenforceable and award a return of premiums, at most, especially if the loss occurred early in pregnancy. The Knights of Columbus provide a cash benefit to members who lose a baby after 20 weeks, not because they don't believe it's a person before 20 weeks, but because states won't issue a death certificate.
I wonder if there has been any litigation in this area in surrogate-mother contracts. When an individual or couple hires someone to gestate a baby, can they insure the life of the baby? Do they not pay the woman if she doesn't carry the baby to term and deliver safely?
How do you find common ground with those who agree with, promote and sell Murder?
I conclude no such thing.
The only single common ground there is on abortion should be that we need to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, and that is it.
After conceiving then it is the most black and white issue there ever could be, how could you find common ground with the choice of life or death??
I understand what you’re saying. I am saying that this view indicates a false understanding of “conscience,” which has to be based in an accurate of reality, at the very least. A good conscience requires accurate knowledge, not just positive feelings.
Lloyds of London would find a way to make it work. Football players have insured various body parts through Lloyds.
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.