The Pro-Life Movement's Problem With Morality

The Washington Dispatch ^ | June 6, 2003 | Cathryn Crawford

[Cathryn Crawford]

I did. What's the problem?

[Ben Bolt]

Good luck .

[nmh]

"... - and doesn’t really care too much for the obnoxious neighbor who’s always preaching at him to go to church and stop drinking - may not be too open to a religious sort of editorial written by a minister concerning abortion. "

There they go again ... fabricating extremely ridiculous sterotypes of Christians who abhor abortion while trying to suggest that gays are "moral" and might agree with them. LOL! Gays are immoral. If they happen to get the abortion issue right (por life advocates) that's not by design but a coincidence.

[Cathryn Crawford]

Thank you.

[AnalogReigns]

One of the reasons we have abortion on demand is the horrible consequences of back alley abortions, a much more common occurrence when abortion was illegal than botched abortions when it is legal.

Actually, that's one of the multiple lies put forth by the (very) profitable abortion industry.

The MD who testified before congress of many "thousands" of back alley abortions before Roe v. Wade, now freely admits he made the figure up from whole cloth--and neither he nor anyone else has any reliable method of knowing. Use your head, "back alley" means secret, so how can we possibly know very personal facts, purposely kept secret--at a time when statics weren't nearly what they are today. Let say though he was right....that indeed THOUSANDS of back alley abortions used to occur in pre-Roe times. Assuming even a large percentage of these were botched, still compared to the 1,400,000 abortions that America is responsible for every year... its very probable that the number of "botched" legal abortions today, even if relatively small, far exceed the total number of botched illegal abortions of yesteryear. Simple numbers--more women are very likely to suffer today, due to the much (much) higher number of babies whom modern America kills now, compared to then.

I find it sad and very sick that more people, religious or atheist or whatever, aren't more troubled about the huge numbers of Americans who willingly kill their offspring--their children--simply to cover up acts they are ashamed of, or simply for convenience. Such blood spilling is the real shame of our land.

"Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that His justice can not sleep forever..." --Thomas Jefferson on slavery

[Clint N. Suhks]

Clint.. the logic was always "Avoid getting cancer, it can kill you".

Good so far

That particular bit of logic is still sound,

OK

only you can't apply it in this situation because abortion may not be linked to cancer.

Sorry, simple sophistry is still simple. Abortion IS linked to cancer. Logic by definition is reason or motive (a statement of justification) and in this case for NOT doing something, if the motive or reason changes then by its virtue the logic changes…you’ve simply reversed the definition to meet your own sophistry. Are you madg’s alter ego?

Nice try, but thanks or playing anyway. Did your professors actually teach you that bit of BS or are you just another casualty of liberal education?

[Ben Bolt]

Dont mention it .

[BOOTSTICK]

To think that the Religious right only uses the "you'll go to Hell" argument, shows ignorance of a collasal magintude. The author had a strict Christian, fire and brimstone upbringing?, well pity poo. Are dead fetus photos {seen at almost every anti abortion demonstration, since 1973} a "Morality" argument???????I think not, the Author needs to grow up.

[cgk]

Thank you for the ping, and for saying that. I've never used Hell or Purgatory or any other religious argument to back up my pro-life beliefs. I've always thought it odd that pro-lifers are labeled the "religious right" when many that I've met don't, as you say, bring that aspect up.

[Theophilus]

I noticed the difference but I thought you meant "humane" because "human" didn't make any sense to me. How does being "human" bind one person to another? To say that it does would be a denial of all of human history.

[Cathryn Crawford]

How does being "human" bind one person to another?

It seems pretty self-explanatory to me...

[luckymom]

As a counselor in a pregnancy center, what I often hear from clients is "I could never give my child away" but on the other hand, they consider aborting it. I had one say she would never have an abortion again since she had serious complications from her last one, but she would take the morning after pill... Who wants to talk LOGIC to these folks? It's more complicated than that, especially when the disgruntled mother-to-be is sitting right in front of you.

[Clint N. Suhks]

You're not too late mom, here's why.

Good for you and your common sense.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Question, who wrote the Book of Acts and Luke?

[Theophilus]

When we're bound together with God, morality becomes irrelevant

I disagree, God is law abiding: he never violates his own nature. A Christian does not become divorced from morality. His relationship to morality changes. A Christian is no longer an enemy to morality but a loving friend, not for what morality does (it cannot save) but for what it reveals. Abortion is first and foremost a sin against God. A sin with a dreadful and instantaneous punishment making the perpetrator a victim. It's despicably inhuman, inhumane and wrong and we should treat it as such.

Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law...Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good...For I delight in the law of God after the inward man...Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

[Cathryn Crawford]

Tradition says Luke, but the author of Acts is debated.

Evidence points to the author of both being Luke.

[Clint N. Suhks]

You missed a big hint.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Sorry, I meant to include this link.

[Cathryn Crawford]

Okay. I have a life. I've not going to play mind games all night.