Posted on 02/15/2014 10:52:59 AM PST by NKP_Vet
Feb. 14, 2014 (MonicaKelsey) - When someone says, "I am pro-life except in the case of rape or incest," they are using an oxymoron to describe themselves. This is in essence describing themselves as pro-choice and shows they have a lack of understanding of what being pro-life is truly about. Glenn Beck, who my husband listens to almost daily, is a good example of someone who is highly intelligent, but lacks the understanding of what it means to be pro-life with no exceptions. Let me explain.
First of all, let me tell you about who I am. I am a medic and a firefighter from Indiana. Four years ago at the age of 37 I reconnected with my birth mother, who placed me for adoption at birth. The information she entrusted me with the day we reconnected has changed the course of my life forever.
My birth mother was brutally raped at 17 and as a result became pregnant with me. But in 1972 my life was protected by a law that said that my life had value. And even though the law was in place, protecting me, my birth-mother succumbed to the pressure of carrying a child conceived out of rape and found herself at a back alley abortion clinic at the advice of her mother.
While standing in front of the man who was going to take my life, my birth mother changed her mind. She left this clinic and never looked back. Her mother hid her from the outside world. She gave birth to me and never even looked at me. But she gave me the greatest gift I have ever received, on top of my life. She gave me an amazing family. And for that I will forever be grateful.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
Here is a solution. Yes, any abortion is wrong. Under all circumstances. But forcing a raped women to keep the child is equally wrong, should she choose not to want the child. So, rather than aborting, give the child up. This can be done on two ways: the child goes into the adoption program, or a lottery is held where any pro-life person is automatically in the lottery to receive and raise the child. The “winner” does NOT have the option of declining the child.
Before Glenn Beck achieved prominence, he was managing four local radio stations in Connecticut, including one where I was a substitute talk show host. I did not know Beck personally but we were all aware that he had a drinking problem and that he was then Catholic as many of us were. He claims that a Mormon helped him to overcome his problems with alcoholism and that he THEN became a Mormon.
See #123. Meant to ping you when I posted it.
You are simply illustrating that libertarianism and conservatism (and traditional Western Civilization along with conservatism) are verrrrry different things.
The baby's right to live also matters and matters even more.
In reality, it does not.
The mother’s decision is what matters, because it and solely it determines the outcome.
So seeing as that you cannot change existing law, it appears that the only viable course of action is to affect that decision.
In legal terms in America 2014, the baby’s right to life does not, in fact, trump the mother’s decision.
That is reality. What is occurring in this thread is people engaging in fantasy.
The idea of trying to pass any sort of a law REQUIRING rape victims to bear children in such cases is a formula for guaranteeing that the demoKKKrat party rules this land in perpetuity.
It doesn’t matter what led Glenn Beck and his wife to Mormonism half a decade after he quit drinking, but he is a proud promoter of the religion and has written a book about his conversion and the joy of his new religion.
From wiki: “He said he stopped drinking alcohol and smoking cannabis in November 1994, the same month he attended his first AA meeting.[35] Beck later said that he had gotten high every day for the previous 15 years, since the age of 16.[27]
In 1996, while working for a New Haven area radio station, Beck took a theology class at Yale University, with a written recommendation from Senator Joe Lieberman, a Yale alumnus who was a fan of Beck’s show at the time.[37] Beck enrolled in an “Early Christology” course, but soon withdrew, marking the extent of his post-secondary education.[35][38]
Beck then began a “spiritual quest” in which he “sought out answers in churches and bookstores”.[35] As he later recounted in his books and stage performances, Beck’s first attempt at self-education involved six wide-ranging authors, comprising what Beck jokingly calls “the library of a serial killer”: Alan Dershowitz, Pope John Paul II, Adolf Hitler, Billy Graham, Carl Sagan, and Friedrich Nietzsche.[37] During this time, Beck’s Mormon friend and former radio partner Pat Gray argued in favor of the “comprehensive worldview” offered by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an offer that Beck rejected until a few years later.[35]
In 1999, Beck married his second wife, Tania.[35] After they went looking for a faith on a church tour together, they[35] joined The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in October 1999, partly at the urging of his daughter Mary.[39][40] Beck was baptized by his old friend, and current-day co-worker Pat Gray.[35] Beck and his current wife Tania have had two children together, Raphe (who is adopted) and Cheyenne. Until April 2011, the couple lived in New Canaan, Connecticut, with the four children.”
I see the point you’re making, and I don’t think it’s a pro-abortion point. However, I think that its logic is weak because it isolates a case in theory that isn’t isolated in reality.
“A law that forces pregnant victims of rape to give birth” is simply “a law that makes abortion illegal.” It’s enforceable to the extent that it’s enforceable on the ground, irrespective of the reason an individual mother does not want to give birth.
For any law criminalizing abortion, the enforcement would, in all likelihood, be prosecution of abortionists. In the absence of easily accessible abortion facilities, the issue changes, in most cases, from “preventing abortion” to providing care for mothers, however they conceived, and homes for babies, however they were conceived.
You completely missed my point.
I wasn’t discussing a strategy for saving a particular baby in the present legal/political situation.
I wasn’t proposing a strategy for changing the legal/political situation.
I was discussing what is right and what is wrong. Killing a baby is wrong. It is a crime. No one should be allowed to do it. It should be punished.
I’m not familiar with the term “temple Mormon” or much else about Mormonism. I have always been very favorably disposed toward Mormons because Sen. Frank Moss of Utah lived on our street when I was a child, and they were the nicest, most generous people you could hope to meet.
Great. That is a very interesting opinion. But that’s all it is.
Reality its people are allowed to do it. Reality is people won’t be punished.
So how do you intend to effect a change in reality at all aside from posting what should be here on free republic?
I’m not aware of any pro-abortion Catholic politicians who give much of THEIR OWN money to the Church. But they do give taxpayers’ money to the Church.
The thing is though, Tax-chick, how do you stop a woman from running belly first into a wall and doing it herself?
This really is no different than does the law against committing murder stop people from committing murders?
In the situation of a rape pregnancy or any other pregnancy that may end in abortion, it boils down to convincing the mother not to do it.
Establishing a law that punishes the behavior after it occurs isn’t going to stop the behavior as is evidenced by every single other law.
As far as my faith being real. The priest and the nuns represented God so I figured He was really angry and did not like too many people.
I'm not a lapsed catholic. I am a Christian by choice. Now I know who God really is and what he expects of me. Over half the catholics I know are proabortionist and see nothing wrong with homosexuality. My daughterinlaw is a big liberal. I ask how she can go against her faith and what her bible says and she says the bible is outdated and not meant for today and wrong. She says her priest never talks about these things. The priest I know are democrats. They say feeding the poor is more important than abortion or homosexuality.
You sound really angry that I don't follow your faith. I know it's not my church that will get me into heaven. I know Jesus died for my sins and that He loves me. I did not know that until I was 26 yrs old.
The 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized a woman’s right to murder the baby she was carrying was the biggest judicial reach in the history of Supreme Court. There is no right to murder in the Constitution. From the moment of conception the mother is carrying another human being in her womb, awaiting for the birth of that person.
We are talking about two people from the moment of conception. A real breathing person. It is not a “thing” that the woman can murder at will. When Roe w. Wade is finally overturned, and it will be because most people now realize abortion is murdering another person, it will also include abortions of any types and yes that includes rape and incest.
If you want to murder someone if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, kill the SOB that brutalized her and got her pregnant, not the innocent child that had nothing to do with the way she/he came into this world.
A nation that murders it’s own is not fit to be called a nation.
“The idea of trying to pass any sort of a law REQUIRING rape victims to bear children in such cases is a formula for guaranteeing that the demoKKKrat party rules this land in perpetuity”
No it’s not. You throw abortion back to the states, where it should have never left.
You aren’t arguing any solution, you are merely fighting for abortions.
There are many approaches that can be taken to fight abortion, and many laws that can be passed in that struggle.
As we see with libertarians trying to move the right, to the left, you are clearly passionately raving against conservatives and pro-lifers, but you seem to be hiding the parts that would explain this dedication, one senses that a lot is not being said by you.
I think it's more accurate to say that illegality is not going to eliminate the behavior, but in all probability it is going to reduce the incidence, to an extent that correlates to some extent with the seriousness of the penalty and the likelihood of the penalty's being imposed.
That aside, however, a society either has a flourishing - "legal" or simply accepted - abortion industry, or it doesn't. If it does, abortions will be sold, and a person in the abortion business doesn't care why the customer is paying. If a country doesn't have a flourishing abortion industry, most pregnant women will give birth. Not all - some will drink lye or throw themselves down the stairs or in front of a truck - but most. The care of the most desperate is obviously something that should deeply concern every Christian.
The concept of "abortion is illegal except for Exceptions X, Y, Z" assumes a flourishing, walk-up abortion industry. In that situation, or "What's this we have now?" the so-called exceptions are, in actuality, the rule.
Beck has changed his conversion story so many time he’s forgotten why he became a morman. A few years ago he was interviewed and said he was raised in a nominal Catholic home, never practiced his faith much. He got married and said he had a bad drinking problem. He goes on to say that his daughter was dating a morman and she asked him would he go to one of the services with her and her boyfriend. He agreed to go and said he heard that mormans don’t drink and that appealed to him, so he became morman. Well goofball Beck, I know plenty of Catholics and baptists that don’t drink, and you didn’t have to join a faith started by Joe Smith to quit drinking, a faith that is indeed a cult and has bastardized the Word of God. The truth of the matter is Glenn “Conspiracy” Beck is a little strange and always has been.
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.