tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post165332984940059112..comments2023-11-03T09:34:09.373-04:00Comments on Building Cathedrals:: What's at StakeJuris Materhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01717212659724234395noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-61631468397765872902008-10-25T12:20:00.000-04:002008-10-25T12:20:00.000-04:00Elsie,I think the discussion here has wound down a...Elsie,<BR/><BR/>I think the discussion here has wound down a bit, but thanks for sharing your thoughts and experience. I really appreciate your perspective and I agree with you that socialized health care has its own set of difficulties on which reasonable minds may differ. I'm still working out my thoughts on that one. For now, I'm glad I don't have to base my vote on health care reform as other more pressing life issues are at stake. Thanks again for your comment.Right Said Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03000769740954672341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-26093986526897624862008-10-25T11:41:00.000-04:002008-10-25T11:41:00.000-04:00I'm a bit confused by the assumption by "temporary...I'm a bit confused by the assumption by "temporary pro-choice" advocates that health care *must* be legislated in order to help people. We all seem to agree that it's important to work in your own community to help women with crisis pregnancies, but wouldn't it make sense to take this same approach to health care for those who can't afford it?<BR/><BR/>My husband recently had an organ transplant and cancer, during which time I was doing health insurance actuarial work (I've since changed fields, and he's been cancer-free for a year). We're thankful that his student benefits and Medicare covered the costs, but from my job we knew how high the bills can run. This experience led us to find a good grassroots organization that helps out with catastrophic illness expenses for under- and uninsured patients, and we now contribute regularly for the same reason that we give to local crisis pregnancy groups. Yes, there are some major problems with our health care system that need to be addressed. But saying that pro-life values should take a back seat because health care must be legislated seems to be a double standard to me, and avoids the opportunity to help sick and uninsured people now rather than waiting around for the government.<BR/><BR/>One last thing. In spite of our personal experiences, I still don't advocate socialized health care, for a purely selfish reason: I like a system where the option exists for prompt medical care-- my husband wouldn't be alive otherwise-- and this has been a problem with some government-administered programs in place in other countries. I've met Canadian medical tourists who had to come to the US in order to get treatment (paid for out-of-pocket) for an active cancer, due to wait-time problems with their system, not lack of Canadian medical expertise. Then there are under-insured US families we know who were able to pay off enormous medical bills with local fund raising. At least the option for quality care exists here, and communities can do much to immediately help people. Frontline did a great introductory piece ("Sick Around the World") on health care systems found in other democracies, and it's a good starting point for a broader look at the health care issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-78586587132948551942008-10-22T19:40:00.000-04:002008-10-22T19:40:00.000-04:00Elestethane - "But isn't that what many here have ...Elestethane - <BR/><BR/>"But isn't that what many here have done, in criticizing those who are working from the opposite end of the spectrum to create a better quality of life for both the ones already living and those children that the pro-life side will save."<BR/><BR/>We would definitely have to agree to disagree on a statement like this. People who are "working" on the opposite end of the spectrum (meaning pro abortion?) to create a better quality of life for people who are already living? And for people that the pro-life side will save? This makes no sense - aren't the people on the opposite end of the spectrum working for women's rights to choose to end pregnancies in abortion? HOW in the world is that aiding people who haven't been born yet? Helpless people who don't have anyone else speaking for them? <BR/><BR/>It is impossible to have 'common ground' between people who are pro life and anti abortion and people who are pro choice and pro abortion - IMPOSSIBLE. The only thing that I could, as a Pro Life, Anti Abortion person, agree with a Pro Choice, Pro Abortion person is that there are too many abortions performed. But for me, one is too many and I don't know how many is too many for them.Joannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00585179358306590340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-28649059812147567452008-10-22T17:39:00.000-04:002008-10-22T17:39:00.000-04:00Kelly, I guess will have to agree to disagree. I ...Kelly, <BR/>I guess will have to agree to disagree. I see many socialist countries as you call them, such as England, and most of Western Europe and they have much lower abortion rates than many other countries. Oddly enough, countries where abortion is heavily regulated such as Venezuela have extremely high abortion rates. The fact that many of the countries with both highly restrictive abortion laws and extremely high abortion rates are third world countries indicates that yes, child care, healthcare, the ability to provide for the child, do have an affect on whether a woman will choose to have an abortion.<BR/><BR/>Maria-<BR/><I>the movement focuses on 1)making abortion illegal and 2) lower abortion rates by giving mothers the immediate resources they need to give birth to their babies and make it through the difficult first few years.</I> Important as this job is, IMHO, a pro-life movement should indeed concentrate on the totality of life from conception to natural death. So when you say...<I>If you have an issue with the goals of the pro-life movement, working towards making abortion illegal and working to lower abortion rates, then take issue with those ends.</I> My concern becomes is pro-life or pro-existence. And they are two different things. <BR/><BR/>My point being with my previous posts, is that if these two previous groups of people that I have written about, could come together they could work on not a complete political platform but a truly pro-life political platform which is what is needed. <BR/><BR/>As you said <I>Don't take them to task for not addressing issues outside of their chosen cause.</I> But isn't that what many here have done, in criticizing those who are working from the opposite end of the spectrum to create a better quality of life for both the ones already living and those children that the pro-life side will save.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-66806979165902659122008-10-22T17:07:00.000-04:002008-10-22T17:07:00.000-04:00Molly, thanks so much for posting the WSJ link, I ...Molly, thanks so much for posting the WSJ link, I appreciate it. My goodness, the healthcare issue is such a big one in our country, one that will require lots of great minds coming together to figure out a solution. Of course we must always have a "preferential option for the poor," and figuring out how best to tweak and improve the system is a large task indeed! One of the main challenges is that the system has to keep running while at the same time being reformed...I can't think of any country that has "gotten it right," but we have a lot of smart people in this country and I believe that with some coordination and compromise, it can happen. <BR/><BR/>I've been thinking a lot about the torture issue, and I do hope that if McCain becomes president, he will be very clear about what is appropriate for the CIA and what is not. He may have already outlined what his plan would be - if anyone has more information on this, please let us know. I do remember Senator Obama commending Senator McCain on his position on torture in the last debate, however, so maybe he has done something recently to warrant this compliment??Kathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16361232588380298159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-52804387928758792632008-10-22T16:31:00.000-04:002008-10-22T16:31:00.000-04:00Hey Florentius,Thanks for your response.First, I w...Hey Florentius,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your response.<BR/><BR/>First, I want to say--I was definitely not calling into question Senator McCain's fine and heroic service to this country. <BR/><BR/>And, as you say, he has condemned torture publicly, which was why I was disappointed when he voted not to impose on the CIA restrictions that are imposed on the military. For details on this, and Kat's take on it, which argues on McCain's behalf, see her post above. <BR/><BR/>As for the cuts--this WSJ article says McCain will cut, not just freeze: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122315505846605217.htmlMollyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12785767112652015807noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-28010959704555533262008-10-22T16:22:00.000-04:002008-10-22T16:22:00.000-04:00Elestethane,It seems to me you expecting the pro-l...Elestethane,<BR/><BR/>It seems to me you expecting the pro-life movement to provide complete political platform. This is simply not the purpose of the pro-life movement. The movement began in reaction to the legalization of abortion and the accompanying rapid rise in abortion rates in our country. Therefore, the movement focuses on 1)making abortion illegal and 2) lower abortion rates by giving mothers the immediate resources they need to give birth to their babies and make it through the difficult first few years. It is a movement with a particular focus on a particular evil. Just because the pro-life movement focuses primarily on one issue, doesn't mean its members don't "care" about other issues. There are lots of organizations for particular causes - i.e., capital punishment, enviromental concerns, drunk driving, you name it. I don't expect these organizations to provide an answer for every ill in our country. They are devoted to a single cause and that it perfectly legitimate. If you have an issue with the goals of the pro-life movement, working towards making abortion illegal and working to lower abortion rates, then take issue with those ends. Don't take them to task for not addressing issues outside of their chosen cause.Mariahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13260855517451217601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-78969012041892357782008-10-22T16:02:00.000-04:002008-10-22T16:02:00.000-04:00elestethane,I have to disagree with you. Women don...elestethane,<BR/><BR/>I have to disagree with you. Women don't have abortions because of a lack of daycare/heathcare/ maternity options. If that were true, then socialist countries like England would have virtually no abortions, and their birth rates would be climbing. Of course, the opposite is true. The governments of many European countries literally pay their women to have children--and they still refuse to. So to suggest that the real way to reduce abortions is to increase food stamp payments, for example, is silly.<BR/><BR/>And think about this, if Obama really is so pro-life, then why would the strongest of abortion defenders support him? Why would abortion agencies give him 100% ratings if he didn't agree 100%with their philosophies?<BR/><BR/>I'm sorry, but if you vote for Obama then you aren't pro-life.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-23896884861043717452008-10-22T15:11:00.000-04:002008-10-22T15:11:00.000-04:00But once again, it's not just about convincing the...But once again, it's not just about convincing them not to have an abortion and providing them with the prenatal care needed to carry a child to term. All of the examples you sited are wonderful ways that people help women make the decision to have have the child rather than abort it. <BR/><BR/>But the question then becomes "Now what?" How do we provide them with the health care/insurance needed to take care of themselves and a child during pregnancy and after that child is born. How do we provide jobs (not rewarding companies for outsourcing jobs out of the country) for the single women who do end up in those situations and/or the men/husbands/fathers to be able to take care of their children and families. How do we provide a decent, high quality education, for these women AND their children (let's face it most of these women are not going to be able to stay home and homeschool, noble of a profession as it is, they just can't afford to not be working). Incidentally these are all questions that pop into any woman's head who is pregnant, the one's who feel backed into the abortion corner are the ones who can't find the answers. I admit the Catholic Adoption Agencies are a great way to help, but there are too few of them, and not enough information about them getting out there as well as the expense. (keep up the good work if you help to market these services) Not to mention the emotional baggage created with adopting. <I>Yes I know it's not nearly as much as having an abortion,</I> that's not my point. <BR/><BR/>It often seems to me that many pro-life groups are so dedicated to the idea of preventing abortions (a very noble cause, to be sure), by working to over turn Roe, providing young women with alternate means to continue to carry a child, and providing support to these women that they forget that there is a life after the child is born, that needs to be taken care of too. I'm sure they really do not feel this way. But again, I say pro-life groups tend to focus on preventing an abortion from happening, which includes overturning Roe. The "temporary pro-choice Catholics" are focusing on the child and family after it's born. <BR/><BR/>My point still remains, if there could be common ground between the two groups and they start working together for the greater good, rather than play the guilt card, we'd be a lot closer to reducing the number of abortions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-50944084983421060442008-10-22T14:48:00.000-04:002008-10-22T14:48:00.000-04:00Dear Susan,I read your link and thank you for post...Dear Susan,<BR/><BR/>I read your link and thank you for posting it. I was very sad to read that story. It is obvious from that woman's post that she is suffering greatly from the death of her children. I lost a baby at full-term, so I understand, to some extent, the heartache and grief she must be feeling. <BR/><BR/>While I never support the direct killing of anyone, I don't think legislation in this area would prohibit offering the mother life-saving medical treatment. Life and health issues are distinguishable and legislated in other areas (such as Euthanasia or family law). I think it is important that we don't take one or two "hard" cases like the one you posted about and then make rules that leave millions upon millions of healthy women and babies at risk. There will always be hard cases in any area of the law (just look at family law!), but would anyone honestly suggest that no regulation or legislation is a good solution?Right Said Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03000769740954672341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-11907377599775420252008-10-22T14:34:00.000-04:002008-10-22T14:34:00.000-04:00Dear Elestethane,You said, "And here is the differ...Dear Elestethane,<BR/><BR/>You said, "And here is the difference, pro-lifers want to do this after Roe has been over-turned, Catholic's who intend to vote for Obama (let's call them temporary pro-choice Catholics) want to do this before Roe is over-turned. There has GOT to be a middle ground."<BR/><BR/>I don't see it quite this way. Most pro-lifers I know are trying to do this while simultaneously working to overturn Roe. Pro-life activists are praying outside of abortion clinics (the 40-days for life is going on as we speak), manning the desk at pregnancy counseling centers, offering their homes to pregnant women in need, etc. They are literally working so hard to help these women. I have yet to see someone who will vote for Obama praying outside an abortion clinic, OR helping at a pregnancy counseling center. It seems that the "Catholics" planning to vote for Obama are not really active in the pro-life movement. Sure they want more government social services...but they are not really working in the private grassroots sphere (which most would argue is very effective at reducing the number of abortions), to help women in need. The only 'work' they do is to vote for and support expanded government run social programs.<BR/><BR/>To me, the middle ground seems to be the pregnancy counseling centers, prayer outside of abortion clinics, housing pregnant women, raising money to offer free ultrasounds to pregnant women, etc, but, in my experience, these sorts of activities are not usually attended/performed by "pro-Obama" Catholics. As a result, I come to the conclusion that most Catholics voting for Obama just don't think abortion is really that big of an issue. Maybe they just don't realize the scope of the problem, which is part of the reason behind Kat's original post.Right Said Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03000769740954672341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-39229651711255808552008-10-22T14:31:00.000-04:002008-10-22T14:31:00.000-04:00Elestethane, respectfully, I disagree with your co...Elestethane, respectfully, I disagree with your comment that pro-lifers would wait until after Roe is overturned to help change society to help women...We're trying to do that right now, as we have been for years and years with pregnancy help centers, Project Gabriel, homes for pregnant women and new moms to stay, adoption, etc. There is always more to be done, I will be the first to say that...But there are so many people who are working very hard right now!Kathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16361232588380298159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-28536957944800597872008-10-22T14:28:00.000-04:002008-10-22T14:28:00.000-04:00I respect your faith ladies. I really do. You li...I respect your faith ladies. I really do. You live honorable lives and are all clearly intelligent. But I disagree.<BR/><BR/>Please read what I've pasted below. This woman was pregnant with twins and lost one at 22 weeks. She ended up delivering the other twin at 25 weeks mere hours before developing a life threatening infection from the first twin. If the infection had come sooner and abortion was illegal you would have sentenced her to death. <BR/><BR/>Just an bit of an alternate view point is all I'm offering here. That there are smart, loving, compassionate women who sometimes need to make painful choices. It is easy to sit surrounded by beautiful bubbly children and lose site that not everyone is so healthy.<BR/><BR/>http://flotsamblog.com/2008/10/16/more-wounded-that-eloquent-im-afraid/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-89663728011789003792008-10-22T13:52:00.000-04:002008-10-22T13:52:00.000-04:00Molly writes: "Based on McCain votes on torture, c...Molly writes: "Based on McCain votes on torture, cuts to children's Medicaid and other such social programs, the fact that he plans to cut Medicare and Medicaid, and his position on the war, I find him to be lacking in these areas."<BR/><BR/>Dear Molly, <BR/><BR/>With all due respect, you're actually wrong on a lot of these issues. I should remind you that Senator McCain was one of the foremost voices against torture--even the comparatively mild form known as "waterboarding". You may recall that Senator McCain was actually tortured himself in a Vietnamese prison camp. He speaks with the ultimate authority on this issue, in my opinion.<BR/><BR/>Also, the so-called cuts in Medicare and Medicaid are actually just cuts in the percentage of growth--in other words, they're not really cuts at all. I personally think that a government healthcare system in this country would be a disaster. Having known many folks who work in the Netherlands, UK, and Canada, I would NEVER in a million years want a system like those countries have here in the US. It only results in poorer quality of care for everyone, the flight of excellent professionals out of the medical field, and healthcare rationing.<BR/><BR/>As for the war, McCain has been through war and paid for it with his own body. I would trust his jugdment on this issue far beyond Obama. And if you listen to Obama's own running mate, America's enemies are much more likely to test an inexperenced president like Obama than a tough guy like McCain.<BR/><BR/>Just my $0.02. <BR/><BR/>I pray that you will reconsider your vote for Obama, a candidate who, in my opinion, may be the least experienced and most pro-abortion candidate ever to achieve a major party's nomination.Florentiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17620534177711410311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-45089142655088470492008-10-22T13:36:00.000-04:002008-10-22T13:36:00.000-04:00Red said- (ooh that rhymes)"Women don't choose an ...Red said- (ooh that rhymes)<BR/><BR/>"Women don't choose an abortion like they choose an ice cream cone. Women choose abortion because they feel like they don't have any other choices. Our laws need to send the message that abortion is never a good choice, and <B>we as a society will do everything in our power to help them give their baby life.</B> Adoption is a loving and necessary component of this discussion."(my emphasis)<BR/><BR/>This is the most important idea. Not that we just tell women that abortion is never a good choice, but we, as a society, need to come up with better choices for these young women, and make sure they know about them. <BR/><BR/>And here is the difference, pro-lifers want to do this after Roe has been over-turned, Catholic's who intend to vote for Obama (let's call them temporary pro-choice Catholics) want to do this before Roe is over-turned.<BR/><BR/>There has GOT to be a middle ground.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-35088318267483903162008-10-22T12:35:00.000-04:002008-10-22T12:35:00.000-04:00This is a very interesting post, thanks. I was co...This is a very interesting post, thanks. I was considering voting for Obama but changed my mind for two reasons. One was his comment about how he didn't want his daughters to be "punished" with a baby if they came up pregnant and didn't want to be. To speak of your own children having a "punishment" of children seems like a paradox to me. The second comment was after the ridiculous Nancy Pelosi discussion on when life begins. A reporter asked Obama when he thought life began, when a human being started to have rights and Obama said that it was "above his pay grade" to figure something like that out. <BR/><BR/>That is just not someone I can vote for. We have fundamental differences as human beings, and I just can't support someone who feels that other, helpless humans do not have the right to live.Joannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00585179358306590340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-66593462961601739942008-10-22T12:01:00.000-04:002008-10-22T12:01:00.000-04:00Anonymous was me, Jeanne inTampa. I was in a hurry...Anonymous was me, Jeanne inTampa. I was in a hurry when I wrote that last one. <BR/><BR/>But I wasn't all of the anonymous. I wrote the one about I have a right to vote and you do not have a right to know how I voted. <BR/><BR/>Don't come to Florida and coerce people in the voting line or near a voting booth: it is a crime in this state. <BR/><BR/>Gay Marriage? One man one woman is already in the state law. 712.212 in the Florida stats. <BR/><BR/>The Republicans started this abortion thing in the beginning when I was 10 in 1973. I was there. You all weren't even born yet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-46589107898815734252008-10-22T11:08:00.000-04:002008-10-22T11:08:00.000-04:00One has to question what could be MORE grave or se...One has to question what could be MORE grave or serious than the slaughtering of innocent babies in their mother's wombs? Does healthcare rise to the level of grave? Does defending our nation? Does economic issues? I think it's very difficult to get more grave than abortion and I think the USCCB is very clear about this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-29058844709419768152008-10-22T00:46:00.000-04:002008-10-22T00:46:00.000-04:00I commend you ladies for sponsoring such a lively ...I commend you ladies for sponsoring such a lively and respectful debate.<BR/><BR/>I was going to write a post responding issue-by-issue to each of the responses to my previous post, but then I realized that doing so would actually cloud what I'm really trying to say and what I unsuccessfully tried to express previously. <BR/><BR/>In its "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship," the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops writes the following:<BR/><BR/>"Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter's intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate's opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity. There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate's unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil."<BR/><BR/>I wanted to post this because I think the whole USCCB document (found at http://www.faithfulcitizenship.org) is very useful and thought-provoking when considering the candidates this election season. The document also goes into more detail about specific areas of Catholic social teaching, and I highly recommend it.<BR/><BR/>Red, I respect and understand why you are a one-issue voter. I also think the USCCB document explains that it is acceptable to consider other issues if undertaken with serious and conscientious weighing of the gravity of all of the issues.Mollyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12785767112652015807noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-12531815397999396142008-10-21T23:23:00.000-04:002008-10-21T23:23:00.000-04:00To anonymous (it would be nice if you picked a nam...To anonymous (it would be nice if you picked a name, even a made up one!),<BR/><BR/>The nitty gritty policy discussion you are after is a bit abstract. If Roe is overturned, it would be up to each state to legislate this issue. Some states would legalize abortion with restrictions, others would ban it entirely. People would feel like they had more "control" over the law on this issue, and I actually think things would be less divisive because different sorts of compromises would be reached in different states. <BR/><BR/>I have thought about this somewhat, and I'm supportive of criminal punishments for the doctors and others involved in performing the abortion. I don't think the women should be criminally punished as most women are following the advice of somebody, and feel tremendous pressure and emotional instability when faced with an unplanned pregnancy. Again, if there were criminal sanctions, it would be a state by state decision as to how these are carried out. <BR/><BR/>I also think we should have adoption systems in place, along with health care and other social services available to women in a difficult pregnancy. If these social services are present, AND abortion is illegal, it will make abortion VERY, VERY rare. <BR/><BR/>Women don't choose an abortion like they choose an ice cream cone. Women choose abortion because they feel like they don't have any other choices. Our laws need to send the message that abortion is never a good choice, and we as a society will do everything in our power to help them give their baby life. Adoption is a loving and necessary component of this discussion. <BR/><BR/>As for life/health of the mother exceptions to the abortion laws, I think a situation where the mothers life is in jeapordy AND an abortion is the only way to save the mother is VERY rare. The double effect morally justifies treating the mother for various health issues, even if such treatment results in the death of the baby. This could easily be written into the law. The point here is that we are not aborting a baby, but treating the mother for an illness that might result in the death of a baby (like giving a pregnant woman chemo). Likewise, in many cases where the mothers life is at risk, doctors may choose to deliver a baby early (too early to survive perhaps?). These sorts of situations could have some general legislative guidelines and then states could rely upon hospital boards to make decisions about borderline cases (again these are rare).<BR/><BR/>Each state would work out the specifics differently. People would feel very involved and able to control the political process in their respective state. It would really change the whole nature of the debate. Having the court decide very divisive political issues usually only make the situation more volatile. For those familiar with the history of jurisprudence in this country, just look at Dred Scott and Brown v. Board of Education....Right Said Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03000769740954672341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-38902829975463794442008-10-21T21:47:00.000-04:002008-10-21T21:47:00.000-04:00First, JM, there are plenty of examples of things ...First, JM, there are plenty of examples of things that may be considered "bad" for society, but the choice to do them is not - and I would argue, should not be - prescribed by law (e.g. the use of alcohol and tobacco, not immunizing children, etc).<BR/><BR/>Second, and more importantly, I often find that most discussions on this topic digress into colloquial, bumpersticker-slogan- type arguments (it's a child not a choice, abortion is murder, if you can't trust a woman with a choice how can you trust her with a child). It may feel good to espouse your position for choice or life and make moralistic judgments about other people's positions, but that is not really productive. Afterall, I don't know a single person who is "undecided" on this issue. It is not difficult to merely have an opinion on this topic. <BR/><BR/>What I do think is productive and requires more thought is a dialogue on what policies would incentivize the desired end of fewer or no abortions. I have heard some people here suggest that various social policies may incentivize people to choose life when they might otherwise resort to an abortion. I have not heard anyone on the other side of the debate discuss the practical consequences of outlawing abortion or "overturning Roe" (let's assume there aren't constitutional limitations on making that happen). For example, should punishment vary by gestational age of the fetus? If abortion is criminalized, should a woman who makes an appointment for an abortion be prosecuted for attempted abortion? How would you handle a situation where parents of a minor or the baby's father coerces or forces a woman to get an abortion? <BR/><BR/>These policy questions, and the more basic ones I posed yesterday, require a higher level of discourse. I am genuinely curious how outlawing abortions, which is what it seems many here are advocating, would function at a practical level and how that would achieve the desired end. <BR/><BR/>For a truly fruitful discussion, let's abandon the bumpersticker rhetoric and talk policy nuts and bolts. I wish the candidates would do the same so the electorate can be clear what is really at stake on this issue. So if you are serious about your desire to reduce or eliminate abortions, let's hear how you suggest it would work.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-89960010669822571132008-10-21T21:29:00.000-04:002008-10-21T21:29:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-47524000355119483652008-10-21T21:28:00.000-04:002008-10-21T21:28:00.000-04:00And another thing- just a thought. Health care is...And another thing- just a thought. Health care is huge concern- but do you really want someone who is ok with killing innocent children to be calling the shots on who gets medical care and how much? Yikes. If I were a baby boomer I would be very afraid as I approach my twilight years- the elderly "consume" much more health care than younger people and any government program is going to have to do some sort of rationing. Look at Europe- Great Britain etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-34073237648712955942008-10-21T21:25:00.000-04:002008-10-21T21:25:00.000-04:00Any health exception, like the one in FOCA, essent...Any health exception, like the one in FOCA, essentially allows abortion for any reason thanks to Roe's companion case Doe vs. Bolton. In that case, the court defined health as encompassing any number of things- including a woman's emotional health. Thus, when the pro-abortion side advocates a health exception- it essentially gives a woman the ability to choose abortion for any reason she and her doctor decide is ok. So, the assertion that Obama supports abortion for any reason for all nine months of pregnancy is totally true. Look it up!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4839413630623850301.post-44753026100520098952008-10-21T20:13:00.000-04:002008-10-21T20:13:00.000-04:00Excellent article. Also, don't forget that Obama r...Excellent article. Also, don't forget that Obama received a 100% rating from the National Abortion Rights Action League.<BR/><BR/>It's mind boggling that anyone even reasonably pro-life could vote for this guy. That supposedly pro-life Catholics are aggressively promoting his candidacy says more about them than about him, frankly.<BR/><BR/>"Obama is pro-life" is one of the biggest of the big lies currently out there.Florentiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17620534177711410311noreply@blogger.com