- This topic has 1 reply, 9 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 9 months ago by Anonymous.
August 2, 2004 at 3:07 pm #3264AnonymousInactive
Jon-while not aways agreeing with you(it is a mother in laws job I think ” title=”Wink” /> ), I really appreciate your bringing forth the ‘flip side’ as it were.
If the only opinion I saw here echoed my own, how could I ever understand anybody who disagreed with me?
I wrote a personal message to invite jeratboy to stick around, in writing that it made me realize something.
Think of Mother Theresa—if she did not listen to all those non-Catholic people who espoused a religion and poitics entirely different from her own would she have been able to do all those ‘works of mercy’
I know its an emotional plea-the only kind I am good at these few days, but I feel everyone visiting this board does so to see what’s going on in faith, and faith in politics. I appreciate all the posts-even when some of them are difficult to think about.August 2, 2004 at 10:52 pm #3265AnonymousInactive
[quote:cxj4dduu]I’m assuming you got that from the article I linked to, but I take it to mean that John Kerry wanted the partial-birth abortion ban bill to have a clause that says those types of abortions are ok if the health of the mother is in danger.[/quote:cxj4dduu]
[i:cxj4dduu][b:cxj4dduu]health[/b:cxj4dduu][/i:cxj4dduu][b:cxj4dduu] can be defined any number of ways.
Plus, there can never be any justification for this infanticide[/b:cxj4dduu]August 3, 2004 at 2:26 am #3268
[quote:19bldxjx][i:19bldxjx][b:19bldxjx]health[/b:19bldxjx][/i:19bldxjx][b:19bldxjx] can be defined any number of ways.
Plus, there can never be any justification for this infanticide[/b:19bldxjx][/quote:19bldxjx]
Right, I wasn’t advocating it, just clarifying what I think was meant. ” title=”Smile” />August 3, 2004 at 6:59 am #3271AnonymousInactive
One of the current health reasons “justifying” abortion in some states is fatigue.
(“Well duh! you are going to experience fatigue while pregnant” remark has been excluded from this post. ” title=”Smile” /> )August 3, 2004 at 1:39 pm #3277
Wow, I thought the only health problem that justified an abortion in some states was the death of the mother, but [i:k4tdilmw]fatigue[/i:k4tdilmw]?August 16, 2004 at 10:54 pm #3307
How could having a partial birth abortion save the health of the mother? if she is that far into birth, couldn’t she just push a few more inches and give full birth? I just don’t understand how it would/could save a mother’s life to kill a baby right when it is almost born. :what:August 16, 2004 at 11:16 pm #3310
Some women run the risk of dying when they deliver a baby so that is the only thing I can think of. I am not sure of all the specifics or the causes. Also, I think that was more common (the mother dying from giving birth) a long time ago before modern medical/birthing procedures.August 16, 2004 at 11:19 pm #3312
but isn’t the baby half or one fourth out, doesn’t the head come out first? I have heard that the head is hardest part of giving birth. (since it is the biggest part of the baby)??August 17, 2004 at 4:40 am #3317AnonymousInactive
Partial birth abortion takes place through forced labor. If the mother gave birth, the child has a good chance of dying or otherwise being disabled (just like any premature child).August 19, 2004 at 12:43 am #3320
This link is a diagram of how a partial birth abortion takes place: http://www.priestsforlife.org/partialbirth.html#showit
[NOTE: this is [b:2hwmmtda]not[/b:2hwmmtda] actual footage, but a diagram]August 30, 2004 at 3:46 am #3332AnonymousInactive
I’m a little new here, but I have been reading what you guys write.
I think this sums it up — Republicans and Democrats support some Catholic issues, yet the Democrats and Republicans do have issues that seem to oppose Catholic dogma. Keep it simple!
Pick the lesser evil. Republicans dont eradicate social programs, and yes, you would have to put yourself in a god awful position to get the death penalty. Even Reagan,,,,,,himself didnt cut social programs significantly.
Wake up!! Abortion is the key issue. The Day of Judgement will make that clear. In addition, this third party bull**** wont help. Those babies need our help now. Pick the lesser evil.August 30, 2004 at 2:49 pm #3335
[quote:13kgxcpv]Pick the lesser evil.[/quote:13kgxcpv]
Assuming you mean Republicans, how will they get it done? How will they stop abortion?August 30, 2004 at 3:47 pm #3336AnonymousInactive
In the past 10 years the Republican controlled House and Senate has tried to push pro-life legislation through. Key “Catholic” Democrats have stood in the way. Even when Clinton vetoed three pro-life legislation bills in the 90’s, the House and Senate almost had the 2/3rds vote neccessary to override his veto. Those “Catholic” reps up there stood in the way as they always do.
Now we have another Dem. going for the White House who is pro-choice. Sure, he says he hates abortion but cannot enforce his will in legislation. He’s trying to hide under the cover of the law, but we should get real. The only party whose going to stop those 44 milliion butcher jobs (and counting) are the Republicans. Why do you think those Pro Choice rallies outside the Supreme Court building, White House, and Capitol building are so hateful and practially foaming at the mouth? Oh yeah,, the appointed of pro-life federal judges has been a major victory in the past years under the Bush administration.August 30, 2004 at 11:34 pm #3337
I thought the issue was a little more complicated than that. If I recall there were some or many Republicans opposed to bills attempting to limit or eliminate abortion/types of abortions.
I’m sorry I don’t have exact figures or numbers or dates at the moment, but that is what I recall from news reports.August 31, 2004 at 3:11 am #3338AnonymousInactive
Sure,, you will have Republicans for abortion,,,nothing is %100.
In fact, I have a friend of mine,,he’s Catholic yet he consistently votes Democrat. I told him how Republicans, on balance, are the ones who are pro-life. He would come back at me at how when he was young he knew of all these rich Republican girls who got pregnant and that their Republican fathers had them take an abortion.
The point is that you cannot cast dispersions on an entire party because of the actions of a few. Not all Republicans are pro-life, and some may have had abortions. I’ll will grant anyone this point.
Like I said, pick the lesser evil. You have to play the probabilities. You have to get real; Marxism didn’t cut it. Play the odds; you must pick the lesser evil when all in doubt. Keep it simple!!
Take care.October 6, 2004 at 1:03 am #3433AnonymousInactive
The health of the Mother Clause Kerry refers to is much larger than the mother’s health is endangered. The health exception is wide enough to drive the SUV( that Kerry isn’t sure whether he owns) through. The health exception comes from a U.S. Supreme Court decision, Planned Parenthood V. Casey, I think( gotta double check). It calls for any health exception a doctor can come up with. For example, depression/ Post partum Depression can be used as a health exception under Casey. With a health exception in place any abortion restriction becomes a toothless tiger.October 6, 2004 at 2:23 am #3434
[quote:3r15t2jf]It calls for any health exception a doctor can come up with. For example, depression/ Post partum Depression can be used as a health exception under Casey. With a health exception in place any abortion restriction becomes a toothless tiger.[/quote:3r15t2jf]
That’s pretty sad if that’s the case. So basically anyone could have an abortion if they can think of anything half-way convincing. :rolleyes:October 6, 2004 at 10:01 pm #3439AnonymousInactive
Unfortunately that is the sad truth of the health exception.October 7, 2004 at 7:28 pm #3444AnonymousInactive
I reiterate what I pointed out above, “One of the current health reasons “justifying” abortion in some states is fatigue.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.