I haven’t heard of ‘Rachel’s Tears’ but I can imagine that it is a cyber gathering place for women who cannot reconcile with themselves that they’ve had abortions.
The feeling stays with you forever-—every girl I have ever known who’s had one can’t quite ever get over it.
Not so oddly, it sometimes spurs them on to have MORE children , once they get to a point of maturity where abortion is ‘not an option’, after they’ve given birth at least once.
HOWEVER, one can make just as strong a pro-life case WITHOUT bringing sin or transgression or any religious considerations into the argument.So I would invite the Episcopals to deal with the controversy WITHOUT resorting to the ‘my religion said/your religion said’ dichotomy.
Wow, you are WAY off...
Rachel's Tears was a book about Rachel Scott, the girl at Columbine who was shot point-blank b/c she would not denounce her Christian faith.
In the context of this article, the Episcopal "priest" said she was disturbed that abortion was considered sinful in the book, Rachel's Tears.
Next time, try Google or Wiki before jumping to conclusions.