 |
I would bet big bucks Katie doesn't plagerize this piece for her blog... |
Posted on 05/21/2007 11:09:19 AM PDT by ventanax5
"Safe and legal abortion is every woman's right."
"Who decides? You decide!"
"Abortion is a personal decision between a woman and her doctor."
"Who will make this most personal decision of a woman's life? Will women decide, or will the politicians and bureaucrats in Washington?"
"Freedom of choice – a basic American right."
In one of the most successful marketing campaigns in modern political history, the "abortion rights movement" – with all of its emotionally compelling catch-phrases and powerful political slogans – has succeeded in turning what once was a heinous crime into a fiercely defended constitutional right
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
It is still a heinous crime.
I’m “pro-choice.”
Let the voters of each state CHOOSE (perhaps by their elected state reps) what their laws will be on this very controversial issue.
I asked my friend if he knew what partial-birth abortion was. He said he thought it was abortion after the first trimester. When I explained partial-birth abortion to him, he was appalled, and couldn't believe that it was ever legal.
|
I would bet big bucks Katie doesn't plagerize this piece for her blog... |
Guess I should’a known they were lyin’...
Actually, ventanax, the period of time over the Church’s history in which abortion has been considered a “heinous crime” is pretty small. In the 1200’s, one of the Popes established that abortion was not homicide if it occurred before “quickening.” That position has shifted around since then, sometimes being accepted and sometimes viewed with suspicion, but the idea that conception is an immediate trigger safeguarding a fetus’ “personhood” is a pretty modern notion. It may be a good idea, it may be a bad idea, but we shouldn’t for one moment believe that it is so self-evident that not believing it is a sign of moral decay, or the work of Planned Parenthood’s propoganda.
That may be so, but I believe conception is the only line of demarcation we have that can be scientifically measured and verified.
The case as presented to the SC was a ruse anyway.
‘Jane Roe’ was purportedly raped by her uncle (IIRC).
She was not raped, not by her uncle or anyone else.
BTW, ‘Jane’ has become a pro-life advocate.
(Don’t recall her real name)
just looked her up, Norma McCorvey
So, a law of the land was created via a fictitious ‘crime’.
ping
“..conception is the only line of demarcation we have that can be scientifically measured and verified.”
You are correct.
And, while I admire the pope and catholics in general for holding fast on some issues while the rest of the once-christian West decays, I never put any pope’s opinion (or any ‘church’ rules) above God’s word. So, whatever previous pope’s thought about the life issues is secondary. The Lord is quite clear (old testament and new) that He considers a soul to be alive while in the womb.
My favorite example is how John the baptist leapt in the womb as he came into proximity with the recently conceived Jesus as Mary came to visit John’s mother.
“..‘Jane Roe’ was purportedly raped by her uncle..”
Neither rape nor incest would be a valid moral excuse for abortion anyway.
Planned Parenthood Threatens to Sue Student
Planned Parenthood Los Angeles (PPLA) has threatened to file a lawsuit against Lilia Rose, a student journalist at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). The suit stems from an undercover investigation in which Rose recorded herself going into a PPLA clinic in Santa Monica, Calif., posing as a 15-year-old pregnant girl accompanied by her 23-year-”old boyfriend.”
A 23-year old having sex with a 15-year old would be considered statutory rape. In addition, the clinic would be required to report an abortion provided to a 15-year old.
Rose covertly video taped the encounter. The tape revealed that she was advised by PPLA employees to lie about her age, making her situation appear legal. On the tape, a PPLA employee is heard saying “If you’re 15, we have to report it. If you’re not, if you’re older than that, then we don’t need to. You could say 16…well, just figure out a birth date that works. And I don’t know anything.”
Caught breaking the law, PPLA sprang into action. A letter from Mary Jane Wagle, CEO of PPLA, threatened to sue Ms. Rose unless she “immediately relinquished to PPLA the original and any copies of tapes evidencing any wrongdoing by PPLA employees you have recorded without their consent.”
“Our organization’s ability to carry out its mission depends upon complete and total confidentiality,” the letter went on. “We cannot act aggressively to relieve young girls of unwanted pregnancies if we have to worry that people like you are prying into our business. There is no need for you or anyone else to know what goes on behind closed doors between patients and our staff.”
Wagle pointed out that Planned Parenthood is a $900 million-a-year operation and “would not be swayed from our course by a puny college student. We will crush you if that it what it takes to make an example that will deter others of a similar ilk from meddling in matters that don’t concern them.”
read more...
http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens1.htm
Nonsense! The penumbra to the Bill of Rights CLEARLY and ARTICULATELY states:
"...whereas we the people of the various states abhor the practice of abortion, nevertheless -- for no plausible reason -- give up the power to restrict this abomination."
I'm sure its really, really, really there. Its just that us dogmatic conservatives haven't been willing to take enough mind altering substances to see it as of yet.
True, but one of the arguments was whether she was entitled to the State picking up the tab for her abortion.
The rape ruse was tacked on to afford her 'victim' status.
A marketing campaign forced the SC to rule in favor of abortion?
"forced"?
Did the article imply the SC was "forced" to make this ruling? Seems the premise is that the marketing merely gave the SC ruling political cover.
But certainly the marketing was in play when future judicial nominees were fought over in congress.
The marketers also sold abortion on the theory (presented as absolute fact) that spousal abuse would be a thing of the past when a woman becomes legally able to abort an unwanted child that makes her man feel trapped...
So was Lawrence v. Texas.
Is that really what Planned Parenthood said? It looks like a parody. Did they really say that stuff?
“We will crush you if that it what it takes to make an example that will deter others of a similar ilk from meddling in matters that don’t concern them.”
They really said that? No!! Really?
Of course the link has some crazy quotes from Pelosi that just seem crazy to. Is this parody or are the librals really that crazy?
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.