The May 2010 Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Newsletter can now be found at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/Newsletters/Newsletter108(May2010)(RGB).pdf Bill C-384 was soundly defeated by a vote of 228 to 59. Check how the Members of Parliament voted at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/HowTheyVoted.pdf On June 5, 2010, we are co-hosting the US/Canda Push-Back Seminar at the Radisson Gateway Hotel at the Seattle/Tacoma Airport. The overwhelming defeat of Bill C-384 proved that we can Push-Back the euthanasia lobby in the US and Canada and convince people that euthanasia and assisted suicide are a dangerous public policy. Register for the Seminar at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/2010SeminarFlyer(RGB)(LetterFormat).pdf The Schindler family are being attacked by a Florida television station and Michael Schiavo. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is standing in solidarity with the Schindler family. My blog comments: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2010/05/att...
Reflections from the pastoral ministry of an Evangelical Catholic Priest.
I see a room full of people doing mental gymnastics trying to justify the horrific act they promote. You can tell they checked their critical thinking skills at the door.
ReplyDeleteCheers
Paul
We all knew this was coming down the pipe, as people get more educated and science is advancing, the truth was bound to come out.
ReplyDeleteThe smoke screen thrown up by the pro-abortion side will only work for so long, people can see through falsehood quickly. Their sixties tactics only work for so long.
We in the pro-life side will eventually win this battle, just as Wilberforce persevered, so will we fight on.
Cliff
So let's not listen to science, oh yeah let's repeat that statement when you go in for an operation or trust a doctor with any other health issue. Pick and choose what you want to believe, these folks showed incredible stupidity.
ReplyDeleteHow can I put this in a tactful way...I'm in the minority here at this site but I'll take the risk in enemy territory so to speak.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you let females decide for themselves if they want to proceed or not with their pregnancies.
You have this obsession about a female's vagina. Take care of your own body, watch out what your own penis does & where it goes. Let people make their own minds up. Let them live with the consequences of their own actions or inaction & decisions.
This abortion issue, especially from men. These people must think females are so stupid...
"Oh pregnant, I wonder how that happened? We won't pass judgment on them even if they had sex before marriage. Oh, they are married, etc..No matter, let us help them make the only right decision that is good for them!"
Females can think & make decisions for themselves. This is 2010 not the Middle Ages era.
You are in this arena called, "pro control narrow view mindset," just like the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church when it comes to reproduction rights & birth control.
It wouldn't surprise me, springing from your own bias reasons or even for spite, you would link yourself up & make a pack with Islam, Muslim, Taliban extremists to get your way in controlling all the females of the world.
After all, you keep hear voices that tell you it is God & Demons speaking to you.
Kudos go to you for being propaganda warriors, you do not even take in account it is your own inner ego thinking & speaking to you.
To agree or not to agree, is a matter of conscience.
The odds are on your side, you will do what you really believe you must do. As well as everybody else.
March on Christian soldiers!
I'll address your lone coherent thought.
ReplyDelete"Why don't you let females decide for themselves if they want to proceed or not with their pregnancies."
Simple. Because that decision to end a pregnancy results in the killing of another human being. We don't believe killing innocent people is right, in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 123rd trimester.
Cheers
Paul
Well good day folks. I have a question. Will folks who trust in the Roman church's system of salvation through the sacraments and good works, get into heaven because they oppose abortion?
ReplyDeleteIs God's grace received by sacraments or by faith?
Much is made out of the abortion issue and rightly so. But isn't the bigger question which is not often considered on these blogs, how does a person become right with God? How does a person get into heaven?
ReplyDeleteIf you have the answer, don't you think you have a responsibility to share it with the lost?
"Because that decision to end a pregnancy results in the killing of another human being."
ReplyDeleteWrong, Paul. An abortion will prevent the birth of a human being, but it will not kill one because a fetus is not a human being.
"We don't believe..."
Fine for you -- your call on what you believe. But NOT your call on what anyone else believes. And you don't get to run the world based on what you believe.
Lady Janus, was that you speaking in the video? Your anti-science, anti-intellectual side is showing. You can bad mouth religion all you want, but when you discredit science you just lost your case.
ReplyDeleteCliff
Cliff, (FYI, I was talking to Paul, not responding to any video) which religion(s) did I "badmouth?" And which science(s) did I "discredit?" And WHAT "case" are you being on about? Do you even understand what you just said?
ReplyDeleteGo have your little scornroast somewhere else, eh? When you can't connect the dots of a simple conversation, I'm not interested in playing with you.
Mr.Paul & Mr.Cliff (aka Mutt & Jeff), why don't you admit it, you just don't like the idea of letting females make their own decisions.
ReplyDeleteSTG: Suffice it to say that NOT opposing abortion is going it making getting into heaven a lot harder!
ReplyDeleteAs to your sacrament/faith question... without faith, the sacraments are not efficacious. Faith is the foundational requirement. It 'opens' us to receiving the graces offered by God through the sacraments. Without this openness... we are toast (excepting those miraculous cases where God breaks through the hardness of our lack of faith - He can do it!)
Fr. Tim
Anonymous, you are missing the whole point. I am opposed to the taking of innocent lives. I value human life, and am against killing helpless members of society. I am opposed to anyone who makes a wrong decision, male or female.
ReplyDeleteCliff
"Mr.Paul & Mr.Cliff (aka Mutt & Jeff), why don't you admit it, you just don't like the idea of letting females make their own decisions."
ReplyDeleteI can't speak for Cliff but thats an astute observation! And all this time I thought it was just some deep down compassion I felt for an innocent unborn baby getting murdered. That explains why I rejected my daughters idea to paint the house lime green too! Its not the fact the lime green would be hideous, its just because she's female and its like a gag reflex for me to oppose their decisions. Thanks for straightening me out.
Cheers
Paul (AKA Mutt)
Then do not do what you are opposed to doing, Cliff. It's that simple.
ReplyDeleteBut you don't get to define for anyone else that a fetus constitutes a life (and tossing the adjective, "innocent" around does not help your cause, either -- it just points out how far you are willing to twist and obscure the emotional buttons, if you think you can get away with it) or member of society, because it does not. And you don't get to define "wrong decision," either.
OH! Lady J you are on a roll! You fight a mean fight, but I still disagree with you on the "innocent human life" issue. It is societies duty and role to protect the most defenceless in our civilized society.
ReplyDeleteAnd my dear girl, it not twisting "emotional buttons", it is dealing with reality and science. Did you watch the video?
If you want human reason and choice to trump all other rationale, that is fine, but don't expect an educated, intelligent, humane society to stand idly by.
Cliff
Pardon me please for double posting.
ReplyDelete-----
Lady Janus: Yes, you are absolutely correct. I give you your point. But everyone is not entitled to live by whatever morality they so choose. There always exists a societal unconsciousness where certain principles and morality rule. Without such a template, we can not live in an essentially peaceful state with each other.
People don't have the right to choose to live by killing another. It is as universally held a tenet of civilization as exists among us. The taking of an innocent life is always wrong.
The issue at hand in the abortion debate is not a question of competing moralities. It's about whether or not this essential value of the sanctity of life is relevant to the issue.
Fr. Tim
Cliff, you can disagree with me all you like. You're allowed. You're also allowed to treat your own fetus in any manner you choose, as are we all. Be our guest. But do not make the mistake of assuming that you're allowed to tell me how I treat my own fetus. I'm the only one who gets to decide that.
ReplyDeleteI don't see the point or your calling a fetus "innocent." Doing so implies that it could be "guilty." How do you justify that? And then perhaps you could 'splain to us how emotion has anything to do with science. If you want to talk science, leave the emotion out of it. If you're gonna get all emotional, go appeal to someone who feels the same emotions you do as a response to the same stimuli. That's not me, in case you're wondering.
Tim, you're the owner of this blog -- you don't need to apologize for posting on your own blog! ;D
ReplyDelete"...everyone is not entitled to live by whatever morality they so choose."
Actually, to the extent that not everyone defines "morality" in the same way and to the same degree as everyone else, they do. There is no universal morality. There's not even a universal definition of it!
"It's about whether or not this essential value of the sanctity of life is relevant to the issue."
You cannot make it relevant to the issue if it is not relevant to all the individuals, themselves. And since the anti-choice position on morality, sanctity, and the value of life (never mind the definition of life) is not relevant to me, that makes the issue moot. There is no agreement. There will be no agreement. The best that can be accomplished is a stand-off.