After Roe v. Wade Is Overturned

After Roe v. Wade Is Overturned June 30, 2018

With Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy retiring at the end of July [1], and with President Trump making the appointment to replace him, with a Republican Senate prepared to back his choice, it seems, to some, all but certain that there will at last be a majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Your humble servant is not so certain this is so, but there is a distinct possibility that Roe will soon lose its status as the law of the land.

There’s no mystery as to what Catholic social teaching has to say on the matter of abortion, and what the government is obligated to do about it.

“The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

“’The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death.’

“’The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights.’” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2273) [2]

That’s clear enough. Killing innocent human beings should be against the law. Therefore, abortion should be against the law. Otherwise, the very idea of the rule of law is undermined.

But overturning Roe won’t make abortion illegal. It will simply allow the states to make abortion illegal if they want to do so. This isn’t to say that removing Roe from the legal landscape won’t be a good thing. But the fight against abortion will not be over.

There are currently eight states that have the “right” to an abortion enshrined in their own law. [3] Those laws won’t magically disappear. And even where state law is more restrictive than Roe allows, it is not always the case that human life is protected from the moment of conception. Iowa and North Dakota ban abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, and Arkansas bans it after twelve weeks. Others provide exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

The only way we could ensure a nationwide legal ban would be by constitutional amendment, and that would require two-thirds of both houses of Congress and three-fourths of the states. [4] Alternatively, two-thirds of the states could apply for the calling of a convention to propose amendments, which, again, would have to be accepted by three-fourths of the states.

So, overturning Roe will not remove the abortion atrocity from the land. It thus appears that once Roe is gone, we’ll need another strategy. Moreover, we should keep in mind that we should want to do more than simply make abortion illegal; we want abortions to actually stop. That means that we need to, as a country, remove as many incentives for abortion as possible.

There is good reason to believe that economic considerations are a major factor in choosing to have an abortion [5], and this is one area of concern where the most straightforward remedies are available. Constructing a society where every citizen has the assurance of a livable income, and access to medical care would doubtlessly go a long way toward de-incentivizing choices to have an abortion.

There are other reasons women choose abortions, of course. But the point here is that each of these reasons should be evaluated and responded to if we are going to reduce abortions to the lowest number possible. The goal is to end abortion, not simply make it illegal. The protection of innocent human life is too serious a matter to do otherwise.

 

The icon of St. Joseph the Worker is by Daniel Nichols.

Listen to Christian Democracy on live internet radio on Tuesdays at 10:30 p.m. Eastern time at WCAT Radio here, or listen to the podcast here on the Christian Democracy Patheos blog.

Please go like Christian Democracy on Facebook here Join the discussion on Catholic social teaching here.

"“The Church relies on charity and not coercion.”For the greater part of her history, that ..."

A Kind of Theft
"I'm not interested in Catholic moral teachings, so I'd keep it simple: If a company ..."

A Kind of Theft
"No. You've bought the lie. Taxes are not theft. They are not coercion. Stop believing ..."

A Kind of Theft
"If quoting Popes encyclicals is putting my opinion over that of the Church then yes ..."

A Kind of Theft

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Kathy

    Roe vs. Wade will never be overturned. It is foolish to keep wasting money and votes on this. I’ve been involved in the pro life movement since the ‘70’s. Attended each March for Life in DC, prayed at abortion clinics from New York City to Washington, DC. I have watched Ronald Reagan and a Republican controlled house and senate do nothing but talk. Don’t waste your time in thinking abortion can be stopped by law, it can’t be. Every election the same pony is trotted out to win votes of those against abortion. We have been had by a system that is using us to just have power.

  • Martha Arenas

    Not to mention that the Supreme Court cannot simply up and say, “this is no longer valid.”
    The Supreme Court does NOT make laws, it has to wait for a case to be presented before her and THEN, her members will have to make arguments for their decisions that are in accordance with the constitution.

  • Judgeforyourself37

    Whatever side of the abortion issue you stand, and I am sure that most people on this site are Pro-Life, please know that it will be years, if ever, before Roe could be overturned.
    Seventy per cent of citizens want Roe to stand. That includes some Catholics whom I know.
    Furthermore, making abortion illegal never stopped abortions, it only stopped safe abortions for poor and middle class women.
    Wealthy women, both Catholic and Non-Catholic, have had safe abortions, by going out of the country or finding a cooperating doctor. I worked in an OR in the 50s and 60s and assisted at many a D&C that was an abortion. Abortions will be done safely if the females were wealthy or know “the right” doctor and unsafely if they were poor or middle class and did not know the “right” doctor.

  • This isn’t to say that removing Roe from the legal landscape won’t be a good thing. But the fight against abortion will not be over.

    Why are you approaching this backwards? You should be focusing on the demand: unwanted pregnancies are the almost exclusive reason there are abortions. Why aren’t you focusing on that? Even if abortion were illegal, it wouldn’t be gone. Look at abortion rates before Roe v. Wade–they were arguably substantially higher per capita than they are today.

  • douglas kraeger

    Hopefully the LAW will not change, and by that I mean the Supreme LAW of the land, the Constitution as the Founders intended it to be understood. Unfortunately, for many decades, the courts and legislators and Presidents and the PEOPLE, have not cared about the basic , original intent of the founders. Just as most people do not care enough about their “faith” to have a serious impact on how they vote and live their lives. We all have our entertainments that are the love of our hearts, and we cannot serve two masters.

    Until there is a moral revival in most Americans hearts, they will not want to make the effort to change their behavior, or to endure others changing the “laws” because others making efforts to do what they think is morally right and should be done, will make most Americans self-conscious about the fact that they do not want to make any such effort (because they do not really care about what is really right and wrong) and this will embarrass them.
    Therefore, I believe, what is needed now is efforts to get members of all religions to agree that we need a moral revival and to publicly agree on certain basic aspects of it and in doing this, they will help all the “luke-warm” believers make a few, small steps in the right direction.
    To that end: Does anyone see any reason why all Jews, Christians and Muslims SHOULD NOT AGREE with the following prayers?
    “Dear God because we can do no good without your mercy and grace, we cannot be people of good will, willing good for everyone, we cannot be sorry for all sins, and we cannot build or maintain any of “our” good habits, or break any of our bad habits, and even if we have the correct, living faith, we cannot have reasonable hope, except by your grace and mercy,
    1. please God in your infinite mercy give us what we desperately need and cannot truly merit, a pure act of God whereby You deign to always give me, my family, friends, enemies, everyone the graces to believe in you and then the graces to continue to believe in you with a living faith, to be people of good will, willing good for all, the graces to have reasonable hope and true charity (true love) characterized by our always desiring to voluntarily sacrifice more and more by your grace which we pray for so that we may be always eager to do Your will and thereby any good we can to cooperate with You, to “hasten” everyone’s conversion of heart to your infinite love by your mercy and grace, and the graces to be always, truly sorry for all sins of commission and omission and to ask every day (minute) for your mercy for all and for the graces to be truly thankful for Your perfect providence in all the blessings You give to all, including the crosses given and not given;
    2. The graces to want to pray ever more perfectly and then the graces to pray ever more perfectly, and not to rely only on their own efforts to “rediscover the wheel concerning praying ever more perfectly” for themselves, but rather, honestly investigate and test, retaining the good, test what others suggest on websites and on blogs as possible steps in the quest to pray ever more perfectly
    3. The graces to want to know and believe all the truths that You want everyone to want to know, believe and understand the way you want us to understand them and to reject, based on verifiable evidence, sound reasoning and Your grace, to reject anything contrary to Your Truths.
    If we can have a certitude of Faith that an infinitely merciful God must count in His Kingdom all who honestly and perseveringly pray the above from the heart, should all Jews, Christians and Muslims publicly encourage all to pray such? Should you pass this on if that is a possibility? If not, why not?

  • The main things needed to lower the number of abortions is economic security, comprehensive sex education and access to contraception. This has been proven in multiple European countries.

  • Jon

    The right to an abortion was firmly in place at the time of the founding of this country. If the Founding Fathers wanted to have taken that right away from women, then they missed their chance.

  • Judgeforyourself37

    Robert, I sincerely hope that anyone who does not want to become pregnant uses contraception. That being said, having worked in a hospital in the 50s and 60, when contraception was illegal and therefore many of those D&Cs were abortions. Today we have reliable contraception, covered by most insurance policies. That is great, also, there are clinics that dispense free contraception. This is why the number of abortions have dropped exponentially. However, there are contraceptive failures, women whose lives would be in danger if they were to become pregnant due to a contraceptive failure. Women who cannot afford a child or another child and had a contraceptive failure. The IUD is a good as it gets for contraception, but it is not 100% effective, very effective, but still subject to failure.
    One more point to ponder, Robert, is that you are a man and as such will never become pregnant, so perhaps you would be wise not to comment on this issue.

  • Adrienne Reda Regnier

    The main thing needed to lower the number of abortions is that man stop putting their penises in women’s vaginas. Why is this NEVER mentioned? This is certainly the duty of every man who is anti-abortion; his penis should never be anywhere near any woman’s vagina.
    This is a very simple and viable solution. There are other, less selfish and dangerous ways to experience sexual pleasure. Any self-respecting Christian man should do AT LEAST this much if he wants to stop abortions.

  • Good_Samaritan

    Men are allowed to have opinions.

  • heidi jo bean

    Just imagine if men were 100% responsible with their ejaculate… there would be no need for a government to control a woman’s reproductive organs.
    This is patriarchy in a nutshell. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/96e2c227c5ddcd1e7d7b5e7316bb738274988a25ba2074ec317cbb585ce9109e.jpg

  • james warren

    Every student of human history knows full well that after abortion is outlawed, abortions will never be practiced again.
    Uhm, right.
    Got it.

    Our hysterical fixation on the fetus has triumphed!

  • Marina

    In North America, christians refuse to teach their children sex education, they refuse to talk about sex, rape, incest or anything else which could come close to enlightening young people. They refuse to enlighten, educate, and EMPOWER their daughters, they refuse to educate their darling boys that they have no right to take what is not theirs to take. They insist on living in the dark ages, and all that “quiver-full” garbage. The woman is always to blame for everything. By merely breathing air she is “tempting” all those poor innocent men who apparently can’t control themselves for a nanosecond. What are you, animals? Maybe you should be in cages if you can’t control your penis?

    If you want less unwanted pregnancies, you must start to educate your young people properly. I know many christians and was raised a catholic, and I’m shocked how even the parents don’t know the most simple basics about sexuality and reproductive health. Teen pregnancies are rampant in christian America, but almost unheard of in countries like the Netherlands were proper education begins in grade school (age appropriate to begin with, and advanced as the student gets older). Also, instead of cutting social aid programs and cutting medical coverage for the poor, and refusing women birth control, and trying to close down one of the few places they can go to get proper medical care for a variety of health concerns, including contraception and education – Planned Parenthood – you want to ban that as well.

    And finally, if you want to reduce or eliminate abortions, how about fathers, priests, male teachers, uncles, male family friends, rapists and pedophiles keep their dirty hands off children and women. You keep talking about the rights of the fetus, but you speak about women like they’re just blobs of meat who are expected to have the children of their rapists, including in sadly too many cases, their father. I’ve worked with women who have been horribly abused in various ways by their own fathers, their own families, I’ve seen too many women pregnant by their catholic priest and or step-father or family friend or relative. I’m sick of hearing women talked about as though they have no feelings, no emotions, no right to dignity and respect for their situations. I’m tired of seeing them treated as second class citizens in this world.

    If you want to end or at least drastically reduce the need for abortions, educate, educate, educate! Don’t think you’re keeping your daughters safe by keeping them ignorant and innocent. Ignorant and innocent makes you a prime target for those with harm in mind. Please! Educate and empower your girls, educate and teach respect to your sons, help women in cases of poverty to get proper reproductive care. You can’t have it they way you want it – you can’t have no birth control, no education, a just say no to sex before marriage policy that has proven itself woefully ineffective and even catastrophic, and then insist that women are banned from having an abortion no matter the heinous circumstances. Wake up! If you insist on this route, you are sentencing women to back alley abortionists, horrific internal injuries, and even death. But then again, what I’ve also noticed about christians who are so eager to protect a non-viable fetus, is they don’t seem to care one whit about a woman dying by abortion, or a woman being raped, or young men and women being slaughtered in their unnecessary wars. They don’t care one whit about what happens to that fetus once it is a viable child with health care needs or education needs or living in poverty or abusive situations. Then, as the republican party shows us every day, it’s all bets are off, you’re on your own, and if we can possibly make it any more difficult for you, we will be only too delighted to do so. The majority of christians are hypocrites. I hate to say that, but I’ve been watching this for 60 years now, and I’m ashamed FOR you. I’m ashamed at how far you have strayed from the word of God. I too am a christian, and I’m ashamed now to call myself that.

  • you are a man and as such will never become pregnant, so perhaps you would be wise not to comment on this issue.

    If I were a man determined to deny women the right to choose for themselves, your advice would be well placed, but that’s not the situation. The reverse is true, and I’ve written a fair amount on the pro-choice side of the issue at my blog. I wish I could do more.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Why would the Catholic church want the right to abortions overturned?

    Aren’t Catholics familiar with the Bible?

    Romans 13:1-4 & 1 Peter 2:13-14 Be subject to every human institution. All authorities (laws and governments) are from God.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Can someone point out a verse in the Bible that says abortion is wrong?

  • Digitali

    All this presumes the correctness of the belief that humans possess an immortal soul. That presumption, which I believe is rooted in our survival instinct, is one I do not ascribe to.
    Therefore I challenge anyone’s right to force me to subscribe to his religious beliefs. Personhood, for want of a better term, is conferred by society on an individual when said individual
    becomes an individual, i.e. when one can survive outside the womb, by a certificate of live birth. Until such time society should have no authority to intercede on its behalf. A claim of Divine right assumes a Divinity, which is an article of faith having nothing to do with science. A person of faith claiming to be a scientist is nothing more than, well, a person of faith.

    The only real sadness in my life, other that it will end at some point, is that I wasn’t born 200 years in the future, by which time I’m certain that superstition will have almost entirely evolved
    out of human life. That is unless religious strife has eliminated mankind from the finite existence of this planet.

  • Rose Magdalene

    Amen! All pro-life men need to immediately stop having sex with women.

  • Highly available birth control is a good method to avoid abortions, but…

    There are always going to be situations where a person will need to stop their pregnancy.
    I, for one, would rather not have them resort to coathangars for lack of safer options.

  • FreethinkingWorldGuy

    Agree with your sentiment, but just to further crystallize and merge your (slightly modified) stated proposal with Adrienne Reda Regnier ‘s points:

    “Amen! All anti-choice men need to immediately stop having vaginal intercourse with women.”

  • skenl

    Sure, but regarding what happens to a woman’s body, such opinions do not have much validity.

  • Raven Belote

    I’m always amazed at the people who want to control what others do with their own body, and also with the decisions only they can make for themselves, or with a doctor.

    If someone wants an abortion its their decision. They have to deal with all that decision entails… spiritually, psychologically, and health wise.
    I truly feel its no one else’s business.

  • Raven Belote

    Good luck with THAT!!!
    lol…. 😀

  • Chris Allen

    Funny how in the Bible there’s instructions on how to give an herbal recipe to a woman who’s pregnant with a child not her husband’s to CAUSE HER TO ABORT.

    Funny how in the Bible this is *not* considered “murder.”

    Funny how in the Bible a person is a person “from their first breath.” (Does not say “from conception”.)

    Funny how in his entire Catholic Church propaganda article, this guy never ONCE mentioned that the two PROVEN methods of reducing the number of abortions are “factual and comprehensive sex education,” and “free access to birth control”—both being policies, especially the latter, that the Catholic Church opposes vehemently.

    Funny how this man insists that we *must* wipe out all abortion… even though if we *could* wipe out all *other* reasons for abortion, including but not limited to, poverty, rape, incest, etc… that he IGNORES some abortions will ALWAYS be needed to save the life of the mother, when her life is threatened.

    But hey—it’s not about the women, right? Women are just “receptacles, hosts, incubators”—it’s not like we actually do anything to improve the world through our lives, or that there’s anyone who actually LOVES us and would have a hole in their lives if we were dead, right?

  • Pastor Disaster

    I want to preface my comments on this emotionally charged issue by saying that I’m not an atheist, Democrat, theist or a Republican.

    With that said… So, Kathy, to follow your logic… “It hasn’t happened since the 70’s… sooo, it’s not gonna happen!”

    Does that really do it for you? Do you think that’s sound reasoning?

  • Kathy

    It’s said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

  • But hey—it’s not about the women, right? Women are just “receptacles, hosts, incubators”—it’s not like we actually do anything to improve the world through our lives, or that there’s anyone who actually LOVES us and would have a hole in their lives if we were dead, right?

    I love the cavalier attitude men have toward pregnancy and childbirth, as if forcing women to bring every pregnancy to term has no downside and childbirth is some sort of walk in the park. Even in the USA, hundreds of women die giving birth every year.

    I think the reason the subject of abortion fires the imaginations of moralistic religious guys is that it gives them pleasure to demonize sexually-active women. The very idea that women should have the final say in the matter of procreation is abhorrent to them on such a fundamental biological level that the sort of dehumanization you describe here seems completely acceptable to them in comparison.

  • Adrienne Reda Regnier

    Yours is the most common reaction to my proposal, but really, ought not we hold men to their word?

  • Clay Cosmic

    No; indeed, on the contrary, the Bible (OT, anyway) actually condones & encourages abortion (the deliberate inducement of a miscarriage) in at least 5 separate passages: Amos 1:13, 2 Kings 15:16, Hosea 9:11-16 and 13:16, and Numbers 5:5-31. These are (purportedly) divine communications vetted & canonized by the early church. So while the Vatican might not be, apparently God is good-to-go on abortion.

  • Jack, I ask you to pay attention to what your critics are saying in this very combox and take them seriously instead of instantly blowing them off as demonic howls.

  • rtgmath

    I see that you have no trouble making women slaves to the fetuses men chain them with by rape. So much for civilized society. As long as you believe the rights of the woman to say no to bearing children are subordinate to the rights of a man to insist she bears the child, you have a caste system in which women are no more than slaves.

    And you don’t believe every life is sacred if you believe (as you do) in slavery.

    And you don’t treat women as innocent if you would force them to bear children when they don’t want them. Oh, but some innocent lives are worth more than other innocent lives, right?

    Your position has an inherent, inescapable contradiction. If you don’t like abortion, make sure birth control is readily available, taught, and teach men to keep it in their pants. The woman should have more of a right to say no than you have a right to say yes. Period.

  • Raven Belote

    Sure. It would be great.
    I agree. But its not going to happen in our times.
    Human consciousness hasn’t gotten to that point yet.
    There are still lots of humans that want to have power over others.
    Maybe in the future…. 🙂

  • swbarnes2

    The goal is to end abortion, not simply make it illegal.

    Savita Halappanaver didn’t get an abortion, a perfect example of your desired policy. Take a page from Paige Patterson, and stand proudly behind your values and their consequences.

  • William Casey

    All I got to say is Amen Sister

  • Paul Vinci

    Which countries , or example ….????

  • Otto

    Since you are advocating for gov’t involvement in women’s pregnancies I have a couple questions:

    1) How do you plan to let the gov’t know when a women is pregnant? Is she to self-report her pregnancy to a local or a fed branch of gov’t? This would be very important if you actually want to protect the ‘innocent’ through gov’t over site.
    2) How is it going to be determined when a woman is at a serious health risk by continuing a pregnancy? Obviously some pregnancies are so potentially harmful that a woman could die, is she expected to just gestate and damn the consequences, or are there going to be situations that do warrant abortions in your view? If there are situations that warrant abortions, who is going to make that determination? What group or agency gets to decide whether a woman is so at risk that abortion will be allowed? Who is best to make such decisions; doctors with their patients or gov’t and/or religious groups?

    The point is that the course you are advocating for has its own inherent problems and issues and I am not convinced the anti-abortion advocates have even had a thought about what would happen, and would need to happen, if your dream ever did come true and abortion was made illegal. Until some of these questions are reasonably answered I have no other conclusion to make than that your position is short sited and bereft of thought.

    OT: What does “Christian Democracy” mean?

  • fractal

    Two can play the “let’s legislate reproductive organs” game.

    Easier way to approach the problem.
    All men must get a reversible vasectomy—legislate that.
    If a man wants his vasectomy reversed, he must have a notarized note from a woman saying she wants to be impregnated by him—legislate that too!
    If a man impregnates a woman without her enthusiastic consent, he will be re-sterilized by law, for the next ten years.

    Are you laughing yet? Sound pretty silly?
    And yet, we as a culture have historically thought it was just FINE to intrude on a woman’s right to personal autonomy in the reproductive sphere.
    Why NOT legislate the penis?
    It is much more of a preventative measure than abortion, does no real harm to men, gets women off of those BC’s with wicked side effects, and will greatly lower the abortion rate.

    Sound better now, guys?
    What’s not to like?

    Or is this really more about people trying to control women’s bodies, because they think they can force the issue more easily than they can with men?

    Those days are over, guys.
    Women are not going back to coat hangers.
    So you best think twice about playing the “legislate the uterus” game, or we might just decide that turnabout is fair play.

  • Ezzy666

    Some people do not want to gestate a pregnancy. What incentive would you offer?

  • Pofarmer

    I hope you’re right, but I fear you’re wrong.

  • fractal

    Interesting that you forget to comment on the relative safety of male vs female contraception.
    All male contraception is safe.
    Most all female contraception is unsafe and can even cause death—notice THAT isn’t even worth mentioning most of the time…
    Why is that?
    Imagine asking a Man to take some BC that might give him a stroke, or possibly a pelvic infection that could render him infertile—or even give him sepsis.
    HAH.

  • Master Samwise

    You must not know that much about Catholicism. Sola Scriptura is damnable heresy.

  • Master Samwise

    1. Ideally there would be some form of universal healthcare with revenues coming from employees, employers, and the government much like the German, Austrian, and Polish sick funds.

    2. Umm, doctors? See 1.

    3. In the Catholic view, pregnancies where both lives cannot be saved are left up to the decision of the parents at the advice–not pressure–of their doctors. The method cannot be directly killing the child but a procedure intended to save the mother that has the double effect of killing the child is morally licit.

    4. Christian Democracy is a secular political ideology focused on balancing social hierarchy with social freedoms. This often takes the form of social market economies and assistance programs geared towards empowering individuals to regain self-sufficiency rather than paternialistic hand outs.

  • Master Samwise

    See Moloch.

    Also, Catholics are Biblical Literalists so your argument is laughably invalid.

  • Master Samwise

    Except not.

    Your quote from Amos is bizarre since God is actually judging the Edomites for killing children, not approving of it.

    Your quote from Kings is about Menahem of whom it is said later in the chapter: “He did evil in the eyes of the Lord.” This is not an endorsement either.

    Hosea is foretelling a time of extreme famine and turmoil, not that God is somehow endorsing abortion.

    The passage in Numbers is a sort of faith test common among tribes of the area but generally abandoned with the fulfillment of the law. In Numbers, the miscarry is not a result of the potion but the sin of the woman testifying falsely.

    You would seem smarter if you bothered reading the Bible sometime.

  • Clay Cosmic

    Thanks, Sam. I got those citations from a source I assumed had properly-vetted ’em before publishing them. I was obviously mistaken.

  • Clay Cosmic

    Just a follow-up, Sam, re the Numbers passage. It seems you’re incorrect here. The ‘bitter water’ was meant to be used as a test to see whether the woman is pregnant (and thus adulterous). The ‘bitter water’ (presumably some natural abortifaciant) would induce a miscarriage, not the sin _per se_ or another other supernatural woo _per se_. So this does indeed seem to be where the deliberate inducement of a miscarriage (i.e., an abortion of sorts) is condoned as standard procedure with no thought of the fetus as a sacred or rights-bearing entity. For a reasonably good discussion, in general, of this area, cf., e.g., Adam Lee’s Salon article, https://www.salon.com/2013/07/20/theres_nothing_about_abortion_in_the_bible_partner/

  • swbarnes2

    In the Catholic view, pregnancies where both lives cannot be saved are left up to the decision of the parents at the advice–not pressure–of their doctors.

    This doesn’t answer the question, and I think you know that.

    What if there is a 10% chance that if the pregnancy continues it will kill the mother? Who decides if that risk is high enough to justify an abortion? The pro-choice answer is “the mother”. The “pro-life” answer is “not the mother. Someone else; legislators, doctors, judges, priests…someone else who won’t be living or dying with the consequences”.

    The method cannot be directly killing the child but a procedure intended to save the mother that has the double effect of killing the child is morally licit.

    That’s horsesh*t, and I’m pretty sure you know that. Ireland might still have an abortion ban if Catholic doctors there were okay with giving a woman an abortion to save her life. But they didn’t, and she died. What actually happens in Catholic hospitals is just what the original poster wants…no abortions, period.

    More American examples (might be triggering)

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2636458/

    (emphasis mine)

    She was very early, 14 weeks. She came in … and there was a hand sticking out of the cervix. Clearly the membranes had ruptured and she was trying to deliver… . There was a heart rate, and [we called] the ethics committee, and they [said], “Nope, can’t do anything.” So we had to send her to [the university hospital]… . You know, these things don’t happen that often, but from what I understand it, it’s pretty clear. Even if mom is very sick, you know, potentially life threatening, can’t do anything.

    (emphasis mine)

    I’ll never forget this; it was awful—I had one of my partners accept this patient at 19 weeks. The pregnancy was in the vagina. It was over… . And so he takes this patient and transferred her to [our] tertiary medical center, which I was just livid about, and, you know, “we’re going to save the pregnancy.” So of course, I’m on call when she gets septic, and she’s septic to the point that I’m pushing pressors on labor and delivery trying to keep her blood pressure up, and I have her on a cooling blanket because she’s 106 degrees. And I needed to get everything out. And so I put the ultrasound machine on and there was still a heartbeat, and [the ethics committee] wouldn’t let me because there was still a heartbeat. This woman is dying before our eyes.… She was so sick she was in the [intensive care unit] for about 10 days and very nearly died… . She was in DIC [disseminated intravascular coagulopathy]… . Her bleeding was so bad that the sclera, the white of her eyes, were red, filled with blood… . And I said, “I just can’t do this. I can’t put myself behind this. This is not worth it to me.” That’s why I left.

    But sure, show us the courage of your convictions. If this is what you want health care to look like, strictly following Catholic teaching, so so strongly and proudly. Make clear to all women what you think of their welfare.

  • Lark62

    If Roe v. Wade is overturned, fundygelicals will be up a creek.

    They will instantly lose the “ooh think of the babies” lie that drove people to vote based on this one issue, ignoring all other traditional christian values.

  • Otto

    1) The current healthcare situation here is not your ‘ideal’ so this really doesn’t answer the question, additionally even if that ‘ideal’ was in place it would not address the issue of a woman taking some action to stop the pregnancy before healthcare was sought out.
    2) I am glad you feel doctors are best to figure out health care options, I agree, so why do you want gov’t involved?
    3) Umm, see #2. Also sometimes ending the pregnancy is what is needed to save the mother.
    4) I read up on it a bit, that is not really what I think of when someone uses the term ‘secular’.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    ” Catholics are Biblical Literalists so your argument is laughably invalid.”

    If that were the case, there would be no need to confess your sins to a Catholic priest & have the priest intercede for you with god. I don’t see the Catholic church abandoning the confessionals.

    I also can’t find anything in the Bible about Limbo or purgatory.

  • Paul Vinci

    Don’t have sex if you don’t want to be pregnant

    The incentive should be a clear conscience

  • Sherlock Holmes

    If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

  • Lark62

    You have a right to your warped religious beliefs about sex.

    But most people do not share your obsession. Lots of people have sex for reasons that do not include bringing more people into our overpopulated planet. Those people are not you and are not subject to your warped religious views.

  • Don’t have sex if you don’t want to be pregnant

    It’s funny that you just assume that women require abortions because they had sex with no intention of procreating. I can think of dozens of reasons why someone would change her mind about going through pregnancy and childbirth between when she has sex and when she learns she’s pregnant. People lose jobs, their responsibilities change, they’re left homeless by natural disasters, they get bad medical news, get divorced, have breakdowns, lose a spouse or part of their support system, and so on and so forth.

    Let’s not be so moralistic.

  • swbarnes2

    And if a woman’s pregnancy is killing her, she should just lie down and die?

    That’s what “end abortion” means.

    Please, explain to us what you would tell a 6 year old girl if her mother died a preventable death because her 17 week pregnancy killed her. Please explain how you would tell your own daughter that you were okay with sitting and letting her 20 week pregnancy kill her.

    If you have a shred of honesty, you will have no problem with this, but I’ve never met a “pro-life” person who was honest enough to respond.

  • Paul Vinci

    I would say with absolute certainty that the vast majority of abortions happen because of their permissive sexual behavior .. The scenario’s you have suggested would represent an extremely small number of situations

    But even so , none of them give a person license to kill an unborn . ..

  • Paul Vinci

    Woman don’t die from being pregnant … they sometime can die from complications from pregnancy , but those complications are by and large treatable with the marvels of modern medicine .. No woman would die in the way you suggest ## “LIE DOWN AND DIE ##

    Before you start preaching to me about honesty , then at least present a more accurate and honest depiction of a plausible scenario ……

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    Note that he is supporting pregnant peoples’ choices not discounting or choosing for them. Offering support to a group of people one cares about but is not part of is nothing new. The supported group is “in the driver’s seat”.

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    Of course the “wanting sex is sinful” thing is the entire base of the pro-forced birth people. You even went to the trouble of framing pregnancy as a punishment (“Stop your sex drive unless you want us to keep you pregnant against your will!”). “Tough justice” doesn’t keep people from wanting and benefiting from sex!

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    Your reasoning boils down to women are “sluts”, and only a “smal number” of them are human with common human problems.

    Could we get the “babies” out of the mothers’ bodies before they are aborted?

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    For the people who do die from pregnancy, death from pregnancy is not “rare” at all.

  • Oh, the baby-killer rhetoric that’s the first, middle, and last resort of the moralistic male. How predictable.

  • St JD George

    To be fair, I struggle with many of these issues too. However I will say that demonizing and inserting broad partisan smears into the discourse does you no service with Him. Ultimately our mission is to unite others to Him. Do not be ashamed, stand up and be counted as proud to be called Catholic living as best you can the FULLNESS of your faith, not selectively for only those things that appeal to your senses and ignoring the hard Truths. Having said that I acknowledge that there are many truths in what you speak, and His words in Luke 10:2 (harvest abundant, laborers few) speaks to me daily. It does chaff me that we increasingly put our faith in secular (euphemism for atheist) government and not God to solve our problems. It’s little wonder why faith in God is diminishing in society while our stress of partisan divide and disunity grows. There are no saints in heaven who were recognized for their efforts forming NGO’s though they may be in purgatory. Perhaps we all bear some responsibility for collectively having not lived to our full potential, including striving for unity in Him and not identifying ourselves in divisive partisan politics. Only our faith and trust in God will get us where we need to go, not our political party affiliation.

  • swbarnes2

    Why can’t you be honest?

    Sometimes the treatment to save a woman’s life is abortion

    If you are arguing that it’s okay for thousands of children to grow up without mothers, to give a fetus 12 more hours of unfeeling life say so plainly.

    If your answer to a woman saying “I think the odds of this pregnancy killing me” is “F*ck your feelings, you don’t get to decide that, priests will decide that for you” say so plainly

    What happened to Savita Halappanaver was not just a “scenario”, it actually happened, and she really died.

    I posted other examples of real life examples of women almost dying from their pregnancies, but the blog host is too cowardly to allow it to stand.

  • swbarnes2

    I’m posting this separate, in case the host again decides to be a coward and hide it.

    This isn’t a “scenario”. It actually happened. This woman almost died because doctors delayed giving her an abortion.

    (emphasis mine)

    I’ll never forget this; it was awful—I had one of my partners accept this patient at 19 weeks. The pregnancy was in the vagina. It was over… . And so he takes this patient and transferred her to [our] tertiary medical center, which I was just livid about, and, you know, “we’re going to save the pregnancy.” So of course, I’m on call when she gets septic, and she’s septic to the point that I’m pushing pressors on labor and delivery trying to keep her blood pressure up, and I have her on a cooling blanket because she’s 106 degrees. And I needed to get everything out. And so I put the ultrasound machine on and there was still a heartbeat, and [the ethics committee] wouldn’t let me because there was still a heartbeat. This woman is dying before our eyes. I went in to examine her, and I was able to find the umbilical cord through the membranes and just snapped the umbilical cord and so that I could put the ultrasound—“Oh look. No heartbeat. Let’s go.” She was so sick she was in the [intensive care unit] for about 10 days and very nearly died… . She was in DIC [disseminated intravascular coagulopathy]… . Her bleeding was so bad that the sclera, the white of her eyes, were red, filled with blood… . And I said, “I just can’t do this. I can’t put myself behind this. This is not worth it to me.” That’s why I left.

    If you think the doctor should have sat back and watched the sepsis make her sicker and sicker, deliberately holding off from the treatment which would saved her life, if you think it would have been okay for her to have ended up like Savita Halappanaver, say so plainly.

  • OrangeCommander

    “Robert, is that you are a man and as such will never become pregnant, so perhaps you would be wise not to comment on this issue.”

    I’m sorry, but when did we decide that people could only comment on the morality of issues of which they have first-hand experience? Should men, as potential fathers, have no say regarding the life of their unborn child? I may have not done the incredible back-breaking work of pregnancy and delivery, and I regularly praise and thank my wife for that, but my 10 month-old son is MY son, and you can better believe I have and will have a say about protecting him whether it’s in or out of the womb.

    Take your ill-conceived arguments elsewhere.

  • OrangeCommander

    How about the unborn child? Do they not get an opinion?

  • heidi jo bean
  • Paul Vinci

    ”’ Of course the “wanting sex is sinful” thing is the entire base of the pro-forced birth people “”

    What utter pile of nonsense that is …

    “” You even went to the trouble of framing pregnancy as a punishment “”

    Explain to me how I did that . I never used those words ./ I SAID , “” If you don’t want to be pregnant then don’t have sex “”. Its called self control;

  • fractal

    “CHRISTIAN DEMOCRACY IS A SECULAR POLITICAL IDEOLOGY”

    Bull.
    If that were true, why do they call it “Christian”?

    The worst thing that ever happened to American social services, was when they began to allow “faith based” non-profits to get govt. monies.
    Nasty church ladies with their “nose in the air” sense of judgment.
    And did ya notice that there is never a Buddhist or Muslim Social Service group that gets govt. monies?
    Not because they don’t apply….

  • Paul Vinci

    Why cant you be honest , and tell me why you neglected to tell me about the important details of this particular situation in the first place instead of presenting a scenario devoid of any real context . .

    And no , the direct killing of another human to save another is never just .

    In situations such as an ectopic pregnancy , where the developing fetus would not survive , then it would be justifiable to remove the fallopian tube where the fetus is devloping and remove it from its mothers body and allow it to pass away naturally . But it is not OK to directly destroy the fetus using the barbaric means that abortionists apply , such as ripping her limbs from her torso ,or smashing her skull in , or poisoning her

    Secondly , you falsely accuse me of being heartless towards this woman , but I never suggested that a doctor should just walk away or watch as she gets sicker . So your caricature of me is false .

    If the pregnancy is going to cause the mother to die as in this case , then to NOT INTERVENE would cause the death of both Mother and child , then the same thing could be done as in an ectopic pregnancy , where the child is removed ( NOT GRUESOMELY ABORTED ) from the dangerous situation , and allowed to pass away . …

    In Summary ….. it is never OK to deliberately kill another person , especially an innocent human who is exactly where she ought be ; nurtured and protected , and not seen as parasitic entity that must be destroyed in such disgusting and undignified means

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    Firstly, the “unborn” is no more a distinct organism than a parasitic twin with its own DNA is a distinct organism. Unless viable, there is no way to have an autonomous infant if in the hypothetical situation of the mother’s body being completely destroyed. The tissue (“unborn”) of the organism, who was operating independent of their own mother’s body (autonomously), is destroyed with the organism even if we try to save it (separate from the mother before bodily destruction) and treat it as an autonomous organism with adoptive parents and the best life-support technology in existence. There is no need to force, by penalty of law and unregulated abortion providers, people to go through any pregnancy just because they had sex that resulted in pregnancies.

    Secondly, we can’t choose our sexualities or when they draw us (it takes at least two to tango plus circumstances and opportunity) to have sex. That we are drawn to want to have sex is one of all lives’ greatest components. Even the most devout most in-control cause or have “virgin births” (referencing a Christian school joke when holier-than-thou girls would be discovered pregnant out of wedlock).

  • St JD George

    Not yet anyway.

  • heidi jo bean

    I will? Wow. You sure are presumptuous.

  • St JD George

    Not presumptuous, prayerful.

  • Marina

    I see you feel very free to talk about “broad partisan brushstrokes” when it suits you, but not when it’s you smearing honorable people whose own Christian conscience is guiding them to fight for the end of oppression and prejudice. Poverty is the leading cause of abortion. Abuse, rape, and incest are a very real and very common reality. I don’t see Catholics addressing any of that and I cannot live with myself if I just pretend it’s not a reality and I self-righteously condemn countless girls and women to a life which should be forced on no one. If men had to bear the unwanted children of their rapists, there would be no question about the right to a safe, legal abortion.

    I personally have searched the Bible for references to abortion, and I found only those recommending abortion under certain circumstances. So, I believe the anti-abortion stance is one concocted by the Catholic Church (old white men aka the patriarchy) to control women. They dare to dictate what every woman in the world can and cannot do, no matter her own religion, belief system, or lack thereof. Such arrogance! If she is a woman of faith, it is not up to her to make her peace with the Lord (and He with her), not for you or the Pope?

    There is indeed room for improvement for every human being on this earth, Catholic or otherwise. As such, I would agree when you say, “Perhaps we all bear some responsibility for collectively having not lived to our full potential, including striving for unity in Him…” I personally believe that religion has no place in politics, by which I mean Christians should not become politicians and they should not enforce their views on a nation of millions whose own belief system is very different. Our Lord tells us that although we are “in” the world, we should not be “of” the world… I believe this includes the involvement of individuals, churches, and religious organizations in the daily political running of a government. I have Christian friends who refuse to even discuss politics. Perhaps they are right. I find that hard personally, given the current deeply troubling times. So I continue to struggle with my conscience, my sense of justness, and indeed, given the unholy things I see Christians doing in the name of God, with my faith.

  • Paul Vinci

    No Adam , but nice try though . I don’t view women as sluts at all . I do happen to know one immutable fact . Pregnancy is the result of sexual intercourse and If many men and women are not willing to become parents then the obvious course of action would be to NOT have sex …

    And yes , the men are every bit as responsible as the women are , since they play equal part

    It is an unfortunate reality that we live in a highly sexually permissive culture .

    This needs to change , and a return to traditional values is the absolutely surest and best way to change this culture

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    It is an unfortunate reality that we live in a highly sexually permissive culture .

    Listen to yourself talk. Sex is for more than reproduction. Live your own values lest other people pressure you to no longer be able to, and hope that you don’t find love out of wedlock or that your community doesn’t find out. As we both know, life does not play by your religion’s rules or there would be no rules to enforce.

  • Paul Vinci

    YOU SAID : “””Firstly, the “unborn” is no more a distinct organism than a parasitic twin with its own DNA is a distinct organism”””

    MY RESPONSE :
    There we have it right there . You accuse me of calling women sluts whilst you view a growing human individual as a parasite .. This is exactly how
    Hitler viewed Jews……….. as parasitic non-persons .. Referring to a developing foetus as “TISSUE” is a false and dangerous construct of what should be rightfully
    viewed as a developing human person

    YOU SAID : “””””Secondly, we can’t choose our sexualities or when they draw us (it takes at least two to tango plus circumstances and opportunity) to have sex.””””””

    MY RESPONSE :
    But we can choose to have self control . You are confusing desire with necessity. No-one is denying a desire for sex as a legitimate part of human expression ,
    but that should translate into an overtly permissiveness sexual attitude . The desire to have sex should not impede our need to have self control .
    Consider a married a couple whereby one partner becomes sick and is unable to have sex .. The other partner as a duty of faithfulness , and in spite of the
    desire to have sex , would remain chaste during that period . That partners desire for sex should necessitate that person to commit adultery ” …
    And that my friend is largely the reason why we have so many abortions

  • Paul Vinci

    YOU SAID : “””Firstly, the “unborn” is no more a distinct organism than a parasitic twin with its own DNA is a distinct organism”””

    MY RESPONSE :
    There we have it right there . You accuse me of calling women sluts whilst you view a growing human individual as a parasite .. This is exactly how
    Hitler viewed Jews……….. as parasitic non-persons .. Referring to a developing foetus as “TISSUE” is a false and dangerous construct of what should be rightfully
    viewed as a developing human person

    YOU SAID : “””””Secondly, we can’t choose our sexualities or when they draw us (it takes at least two to tango plus circumstances and opportunity) to have sex.””””””

    MY RESPONSE :
    But we can choose to have self control . You are confusing desire with necessity. No-one is denying a desire for sex as a legitimate part of human expression ,
    but that should translate into an overtly permissiveness sexual attitude . The desire to have sex should not impede our need to have self control .
    Consider a married a couple whereby one partner becomes sick and is unable to have sex .. The other partner as a duty of faithfulness , and in spite of the
    desire to have sex , would remain chaste during that period . That partners desire for sex should necessitate that person to commit adultery ” …

    YOU SAID : “”””” Even the most devout most in-control cause or have “virgin births” (referencing a Christian school joke when holier-than-thou girls would be discovered pregnant out of wedlock). “”””””

    MY RESPONSE : You caricature of Christians and their beliefs is utterly irrelevant to this conversation and nothing more than red herring in a an effort to obfuscate the conversation

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    When you act in bad faith by citing a proper term, parasitic twin, the rest of your comment doesn’t get a read. Cancer and people with chimerism also are examples of one person with multiple DNAs not multiple autonomous people.

  • heidi jo bean
  • heidi jo bean

    Hey, listen… I appreciate the kind, positive thoughts, and I actually believe that positive thoughts are dynamic! But I don’t need a structured religion to accomplish sending out positive energy. To me, spiritualism is a very private matter, and I will not be compartmentalized.
    “It is possible that mankind is on the threshold of a golden age. But, if so, it will be necessary first to slay the dragon that guards the door, and that dragon is religion.”
    ~Bertrand Russell

  • Paul Vinci

    You are talking nonsense now . You are just gong down rabbit trails my friend . You are trying to tell me that cancer is analogous to a developing human person .

    Do cancers have brains , livers , feet , genitals , lungs , arms and legs like a person does

    You are fucking insane

  • St JD George

    I know, I was like you once, or I should say I once believed like that too. For quite a long time actually. It is as He says though, and you don’t realize how much you are missing until you have your full sight. Like St Paul in Damascus. It’s hard to explain to those who chose to remain partially blind out of fear and pride what it’s like to Truly be in love. He answers my prayers all the time, usually in unexpected ways. Having rejected Him I get your “bless your heart” sarcasm so I take no offense. Once you know what it is like to live a life of Joy the only thing you want to do is share it selflessly which requires a lot of patience reflecting on your own journey. And so it is I wish you all the peace in the world that only comes from being in love with He and His Mother.

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    Most aborted ZEFs don’t have any of those things, no. The comparison to cancer was in the unique DNA within a human with at least one set of their own DNA (again, see chimeras and parasitic twins). Also, the product of some pregnancies is cancer not a baby (see choriocarcinoma and gestational trophoblastic disease). Jesus is one sane creator, but sin is just so much more powerful!/sarcasm

  • St JD George

    I don’t condemn any women in trouble, I have served at project Rachel before and have seen their faces, offered what I could to help. We have a special ministry we support providing to a shelter which exclusively serves abandoned women with children who left abusive husbands. We also serve Saint Vincent DePaul whose primary clients are usually in similar circumstances. Honestly I don’t know anybody that doesn’t have compassion. We live in a pornographic culture of our making because we have rejected Christ and all that He taught us about His plans for our happiness. Satan is an equal opportunist and he steal’s the souls of those wearing both red and blue tunics. Our Lady at Fatima just over 100 years ago said the final battle would be over the family and so it is we see that there has never has there been an age in recent times where so much is being done to destroy it. We aren’t going to heal any wounds with divisive partisanship, which by the way is one of Satan’s favorite tactics, healing only comes from a loving heart. And guess who loves you more than any other.

  • St JD George

    You mean the ones that are spiritually dead and crumbling before your very eyes, having forsaken God for mammon? You can’t serve two masters, you of all people should know better. Shame on you.

  • Paul Vinci

    YOU SAID : Listen to yourself talk. Sex is for more than reproduction.

    MY RESPONSE : Sex is definitely more than reproduction , it also has a unitive aspect . Its unfortunate that far too many people adopt the unitive aspect to the exclusion of the procreative aspect which is why we have so many abortions . Its this attitude of “LET ME LIVE MY OWN VALUES” that has us in such a mess .

    YOU SAID : life does not play by your religion’s rules or there would be no rules to enforce.

    MY RESPONSE : Its people that play games with life , and not the other way around .. Its about time that our culture changes .. This over sexualised culture has been an absolute failure

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    If you stay out of other peoples’ sex lives, remind yourself that babies do not exist without OTHER PEOPLE going through ~9 months hard and risky labor, and you advocate for comprehensive healthcare, education, and social safetynet programs as exemplified in first-world nations (the USA is really more like a 2.75), most of your anxiety disappears. My anxiety increases when harm is being done to people.

  • Paul Vinci

    If you support abortion then you are support baby killing … simple

  • Paul Vinci

    Since we are talking about abortion , and with many abortions being the result of las sexual attitudes , then I can and will talk about peoples sex lives as often as necessary ……………….
    Just for the record ; My anxiety increases when people cause harm to small defenceless people who should be safely nurtured inside the sanctuary of their Mothers wombs

  • Paul Vinci

    YOU SAID : Most aborted ZEFs don’t have any of those things, no.

    MY RESPONSE : The majority of abortions ( 91.5% ) are performed at 13 weeks . There are arms , legs , lungs , heart , liver , brain all very much present in this little person . When we compare these facts against your reference to ZEF’s not possessing those physical attributes , it is apparent your comment carries very little force

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    I admit I could be wrong. I’m pretty sure most abortions are more like a heavy period.

    Now, do any of those things actually function? Are those things a viable baby, so we don’t need to use the pregnant person’s body against their will and then probably do the same to that baby in a few years?

  • Adam “Giauz” Birkholtz

    If there is no autonomously functioning body, the only person present is pregnant, and you are unsettling concerned with their sex lives and possible unwanted tissue. If they bud off a kid they don’t want, I’m sure they would think you were hiding something and would not call you.

  • Ezzy666

    There are plenty of people who have sex, an abortion and clear consciences.

  • Paul Vinci

    YOU SAID : Therefore I challenge anyone’s right to force me to subscribe to his religious beliefs..

    MY RESPONSE : And yet here you are forcing your opinion to such a degree as to warrant the execution of helpless unborn children

    :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    YOU SAID : Personhood, for want of a better term, is conferred by society on an individual when said individual becomes an individual , ie when one can survive outside the womb, by a certificate of live birth ..

    MY RESPONSE : Define society for me ??? ……………. It interesting that the majority of Americans do not support abort abortion after the the first trimester , so I guess the majority of society do in fact view unborn children as persons and worthy of protection .. And what about a time when abortion was illegal with the states view that person hood was inherent in an unborn child . How is it then that you can appeal to state as an authority such as the one that currently allows abortion on the one hand , and with previous illegalities that existed before our laws were enacted .

    A birth certificate is only a symbol of legal status and is hardly adequate in and of itself to determine what value a person truly has

    ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    YOU SAID : Until such time society should have no authority to intercede on its behalf

    MY RESPONSE : What nonsense is that . Every person who lives in society has an absolute right to lobby government or protest at what it sees as injustice . To asssert that people have no authority to intercede for the unborn is a ludicrous statement .

    :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    YOU SAID : A claim of Divine right assumes a Divinity, which is an article of faith having nothing to do with science

    MY RESPONSE : And your own claim of there being “NO DIVINE MANDATE” is equally lacking in scientific certitude , so please dispense from claiming the scientific high ground .

    :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    YOU SAID : The only real sadness in my life, other that it will end at some point, is that I wasn’t born 200 years in the future, by which time I’m certain that superstition will have almost entirely evolved out of human life

    MY RESPONSE : Really ..that’s your only sadness . But anyhow , what a sadness it is that people like you endorse the killing of small defenseless unborn children , and then have the audacity to talk about religious strife .. What utter hypocrisy that is .

    But I guess your ultimate sadness rest’s in the nihilism of your atheistic worldview

    Your hopes of a religion free world will never be realized in this or any other subsequent generation .. But keep on dreamin

  • Paul Vinci

    YOU SAID : Therefore I challenge anyone’s right to force me to subscribe to his religious beliefs..

    MY RESPONSE : And yet here you are forcing your opinion to such a degree as to warrant the execution of helpless unborn children

    :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    YOU SAID : Personhood, for want of a better term, is conferred by society on an individual when said individual becomes an individual , ie when one can survive outside the womb, by a certificate of live birth ..

    MY RESPONSE : Define society for me ??? ……………. It interesting that the majority of Americans do not support abort abortion after the the first trimester , so I guess the majority of society do in fact view unborn children as persons and worthy of protection .. And what about a time when abortion was illegal with the states view that person hood was inherent in an unborn child . How is it then that you can appeal to state as an authority such as the one that currently allows abortion on the one hand , and with previous illegalities that existed before our laws were enacted .

    A birth certificate is only a symbol of legal status and is hardly adequate in and of itself to determine what value a person truly has

    ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    YOU SAID : Until such time society should have no authority to intercede on its behalf

    MY RESPONSE : What nonsense is that . Every person who lives in society has an absolute right to lobby government or protest at what it sees as injustice . To asssert that people have no authority to intercede for the unborn is a ludicrous statement .

    :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    YOU SAID : A claim of Divine right assumes a Divinity, which is an article of faith having nothing to do with science

    MY RESPONSE : And your own claim of there being “NO DIVINE MANDATE” is equally lacking in scientific certitude , so please dispense from claiming the scientific high ground .

    :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    YOU SAID : The only real sadness in my life, other that it will end at some point, is that I wasn’t born 200 years in the future, by which time I’m certain that superstition will have almost entirely evolved out of human life

    MY RESPONSE : Really ..that’s your only sadness . But anyhow , what a sadness it is that people like you endorse the killing of small defenseless unborn children , and then have the audacity to talk about religious strife .. What utter hypocrisy that is .

    But I guess your ultimate sadness rest’s in the nihilism of your atheistic worldview

    Your hopes of a religion free world will never be realized in this or any other subsequent generation .. But keep on dreamin

  • Digitali

    I could go line for line to refute every point you attempt to make, but that would be well, pointless. Since your faith prevents rational thinking on your part, I have to give up on convincing you of anything, but I will leave you with this thought: I don’t have “hopes of a religion free world,” I am certain of it. I don’t dream about it because I know that long before evolution crushes organized superstition into a smattering of not very influential cults, I will have finished my existence here and most probably anywhere else.

    Like most religionistas, you conflate nihilism with atheism. The dictionary definition of nihilism is, “the rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless.”

    Atheists are, generally speaking, neither amoral nor unprincipled. I consider myself more agnostic than atheist and if you have a need to label me, you could call me a secular humanists. In that I don’t feel the need for a glowering father figure offering me eternal life in return for acting in a socially responsible fashion, am I less principled than you? Or maybe more?

    Keep on prayin’.

  • Kevin K

    The test in Numbers is kinda like the test to see if someone was a witch. Throw her in the lake — if she floats, she’s a witch, so should be burned … if not, she was innocent (but also still dead).

    Heads you win, tails she loses.

  • Kevin K

    Exactly. Some small part of me wants SCOTUS to up and just do it…maybe then people will stop electing frank morons to office.

  • Master Samwise

    Sorry, meant to say “aren’t.” Catholics are NOT Biblical Literalists. Google talk to text really is bad. My apologies.

  • Master Samwise

    1. The lack of the ideal does not diminish the need for it and other ideals. Ideally there would be no murder. As such, we ban it.

    2. Because some doctors are jerks and the government assures that everyone’s rights are respected. I mean, imagine saying that about literally anything else.

    3. Doctors do shady stuff…like sexually assault you and most of the female gymnasts in America.

    4. Then explain your term.

  • Master Samwise

    Because it has its roots in Christian social movements in the mid to late 19th century when political parties were not really a thing. Even when they began, they cut back the proselytizing in order to appeal to wider sections of the population. The CDU in German is a Christian Democratic party. They are secular.

    Are you alleging that the government is religiously biased in their disbursement of grants to nonprofits? If so, what do you base your contention on?

  • Otto

    1. Again banning does not answer the question. If your only response is to ban abortion and not try to setup a situation where embryos/fetuses are somehow protected I am not going to buy into the rhetoric that your concern, and the concern of other anti-abortion proponents, is to ‘protect the innocent’.
    2. Some doctors are jerks, that does not explain how the gov’t is going to be able to assess medical decisions properly. And again if your concern is to make sure ‘everyone’s rights are respected’…see #1
    3. That does not change the fact that sometimes killing the embryo/fetus is what is necessary to save the mother.
    4. “denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis.”

  • Master Samwise

    1. Again, i am not for straight up ban but ban in the context of wider, necessary social change. I would go on about how abortion is the result of the patriarchy using women as workhorses and sex slaves, but I am trying to be concise.

    2. Because the gov consults doctors on best practices and bans harmful things…like breast enhancement for two year olds.

    3. True, I accept that there will be some instances like that. It does not make abortion right. Again, double effect. Direct killing of another human being is to be avoided whenever possible. As you can probably guess, I am also against cap punishment and nukes. Most wars too.

    4. Does providing a universal healthcare system on the basis that you believe all life is inherently good count as religious? I mean, it is short of saying why you believe such a thing, but the support for a UHS is on the basis of inherent human dignity. Does it matter that I believe in inherent human dignity because I believe we have souls?

  • Otto

    >>>” Again, i am not for straight up ban but ban in the context of wider, necessary social change. I would go on about how abortion is the result of the patriarchy using women as workhorses and sex slaves, but I am trying to be concise.”

    Believe me, I am glad you didn’t…ugh.

    But if you are not for gov’t intervention and just want to change people’s minds through argument and debate, I am all for the exchange of ideas over legislation.

    >>>”Does it matter that I believe in inherent human dignity because I believe we have souls?”

    Not directly, but that is not what I consider a ‘secular’ position either. I happen to agree with your conclusion, just not that specific basis for it.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Not a problem. Besides, most Christians seem to tear the new testament like a menu where the customer picks and chooses what they want. And luckily for them the parts that are supposed to be taken as literal are the parts they agree with, and the parts that are not supposed to be taken literally are the parts they don’t agree with.

  • >’Constructing a society where every citizen has the assurance of a livable income, and access to medical care would doubtlessly go a long way toward de-incentivizing choices to have an abortion.’

    In this context, though, it appears that President Trump’s pick is inherently hostile to the notion of universal health care and expanded labor union rights as well as opposed to Roe v. Wade. So, the action of ending Roe has within itself the ironic (in a very sad way) sense of carrying within it the seeds of a reaction in which more abortions could likely occur. This is very possible.

  • Exactly. Even if one assumes for the sake of argument that independent human life begins at conception (a big assumption), that doesn’t change that people can and do have abortions anyways without feeling at all bad about themselves.

  • Not to be overly contrary, but the general concept of ‘Christian Democracy’ as a broad label goes back a while and has alternate meanings depending on the country: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Christian-democracy

  • Paul Vinci

    YOU SAID : my faith prevents rational thinking

    MY RESPONSE : That’s just another of the many fallacies people like try to label Theists with , but as I clearly pointed out in my previous reply it as you that wasn’t thinking straight .

    YOU SAID : I don’t have “hopes of a religion free world,” I am certain of it.

    MY RESPONSE : You and every other person of every age has believed the same thing .. And look still no end to religion .. I am absolutely certain that that your dreams will never be realized ,

    YOU SAID :
    Like most religionists, you conflate nihilism with atheism. The dictionary definition of nihilism is, “the rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless.”

    MY RESPONSE : Atheism is a form of nihilsm simply because there is no meaning in atheism since everything is ultimately pointless in the atheistic worldview because all will end for each person .. Your own hopes and dreams of a religion free world have absolutely no significance , because your hopes and dreams will die with you . That means that atheism is nihilistic

  • Mr. James Parson

    After it is over turned, a certain percentage of women won’t get abortions. Other will still get abortions. Sometimes it won’t work and they will end up in hospitals. They will be permanently injured. Some will die.

    Some women will go on Google and YouTube to look up to it yourself approaches.

    Many women are going to get thrown in jail because abortion will be considered murder. I suspect that 10,000s of women per year will end up in jail. The political fallout of that will be immense. Those that advocate treating abortion as murder will lose. It will take 10 – 15 years but they will lose.

    The 100,000s of women whose lives have been ruined, will not be forgiving. Nor will they have to be.

  • kyuss

    Keep dreaming.