IMO, to turn your back on truth is the same as turning your back on Christ.
Science is never "settled".
"Under certain circumstances, I think it is a good idea to murder the children of men who have violated the law ..."
Nope. Sorry. I just can't go there. I can't make those statements. I leave such pronouncements to the Liberals and worshipers of Moloch.
IMO, to turn your back on truth is the same as turning your back on Christ.Amen!
Thank you for posting this.
Let us never forget who gives us life. It is not our earthly fathers, be they wonderful parents, wife beaters, drunken scoundrels or rapists.
It is God, our Heavenly Father, who gives us life.
We are endowed by our Creator with life.
Life is the Gift that God gives each of us. To kill an innocent life, no matter how it is conceived is a grievous sin.
It is not a “choice” it is a child.
His comment about the relative likelihood of a raped woman conceiving was completely irrelevant to the question of an abortion option in the case of rape. COMPLETELY irrelevant. As in it was a non sequitur.
It is inconceivable to me why he brought it up or why people keep defending it, two days after he himself renounced it and begged to be forgiven for saying it.
The problem is moral bravado can lose elections. And after losing the election they have big fat ZERO power to change anything. Sharon Angle, Christine O’Donnell, Joe Miller,
Doug Hoffman, Ken Buck & JD Hayworth all lost elections and
result is they can’t change any laws to protect life.
OTOH smart candidates can get elected and help change laws.
Serious issues can not be changed overnight. The voting public must be brought along to accomplish real changes.
That said, babies are innocent. Period. Sometimes those innocent babies grow up to leave a strong impact on society.
Everything Counts in Large Amounts.
A 3% chance means millions of pregnancies when applied to hundreds of millions of sexual encounters.
A 3% chance per act would also mean almost every sexually active woman would be pregnant by the end of a year.
An excellent article.
I would point out that there are many ways to reduce the number of abortions without passing any laws. Even when abortion on demand is legal, we can offer support and counseling to pregnant women. Every issue has its “awareness” ribbons. How about one for pro-life? How about funding a charity like Planned Parenthood, except instead of providing abortions, this charity would provide counseling and adoption services and whatever other support a pregnant woman would need.
Those on the left are always clever and get support outside of the law. We should do the same. I’m not talking about violence. I’m talking about changing public opinion. If we can’t fight this battle in the voting booth or the legal system (and possibly we shouldn’t), we should fight it in the court of public opinion.
Even if abortion were illegal, there would still be illegal abortions performed or women would travel to countries where it’s legal. So there is still a need to change hearts and minds.
No federal funds to pay for abortions of any type but the states have rights to pass laws allowing it. This is how it should be.
Murder is murder.
while I know I am going to catch hell for this here..
If we could limit abortion to just rape and incest it would be a huge step in the right direction.
However, I would not stop there.
Many pro lifers (I am one as well) want a all or nothing fix to “legal” abortion.
I suggest we use the democrat play book and just take every small limit on abortion we can until we get to our ultimate goal. 100% outlaw of it.
YES! This whole thing is so sickening. It is as though the left is a religion with child sacrifice as it’s form of worship. Mr. Akin has done NOTHING wrong, yet the GOP hierarchy is so afraid of the hedonistic press which owns nearly all the airways that they caved to that hedonism themselves. This kind of thing has consequences for our society far beyond any election. These are evil times, run by evil people. God will have the last word here and innocent people will suffer along with the guilty.
thank you for this article! I am saving it on my computer and printing it out and putting it in my bible, too. As a former Catholic, I still abide with that Church’s teaching on life, and I am definitely pro-life. However, it is still very hard to come to terms with a child (a girl of 9 let’s say) bearing a pregnancy after rape or incest. The psychological damage of all of that (the rape/incest, the pregnancy) is huge, and it must be so heartbreaking! But, on the other hand, the innocent babe’s life is so precious, too.
Thank the Lord we have the power of prayer. That is usually the only thing that gets one thru any life issue.
Worth repeating.
The author is correct.
We MUST have perfection or nothing at all.
Anything less than perfection is unholy and must be opposed with every effort that can be mustered.
The issue here is NOT what constitutes the truth of post-rape pregnancy abortion.
The issue is the Missouri Senate election. Abortion after rape commands strong majority support. It’s the job of the pro-life movement to change that FACT, if they are able, by argument, persuasion, homiletics, and any other available means.
However, since the pro-life movement has not yet accomplished this necessary precondition to political change (and, BTW, never will IMO), the question becomes, is the greater good served by returning Claire McCaskill to the US Senate, where she will filibuster any Federal court nominee not strongly committed to abortion, or by replacing idiot loser Akin?