I know that there are regular posters here who are ardent and articulate voices for either camp. I hope that all of you will indeed offer your voices on Facebook, Twitter, (I don't 'tweet') here and elsewhere on Friday. Whether you support a woman's right to choose or the right to life of the fetus, we all need to do are part to help engender some societal consideration of the life/choice issues.
I would rather lose a debate to a better argument than give free reign to facile solutions to these complicated questions. I hope, that irrespective of your convictions, you feel the same. Meet you here or out there on the 21st.
There is no pro abortion movement in North America. There are no pro abortion organizations. Abortion is legal and available to any woman that wants one. That's not gong to change any time soon.
ReplyDeleteWhat are you talking about, Tim? There's no debate. No more than when you locked the young girls up with nuns in homes for unwed mothers and kept them prisoner for months, until they had their babies and then drove them back out into the World stigmatized by society and alone or they took their chances in an illegal abortion procedure.
When you get the law changed and abortion isn't legal anymore and I have no doubt you eventually will, come back and force your Papist will on the people, see how long that will last. Not too long. I'll bet.
ANON: NARAL is a national pro-abortion organization. You are mistaken.
ReplyDeleteFr. Tim
"ANON: NARAL is a national pro-abortion organization. You are mistaken."
ReplyDelete- Oh?
"Our Solution
We will always have to fight to keep abortion safe and legal. This means defeating attacks in Congress and in the states.
We also believe in reducing the need for abortion. This means we support improving access to birth control and teaching young people comprehensive sex education.
Finally, we always are sure to separate anti-choice myths from facts."
-NARAL's page on Abortion, 1/20/11 (emphasis added.)
Looks like they have a ways to go with that last objective.
Arni
ReplyDeleteWe've had comprehensive sex education for decades now. How much more "comprehensive" does it have to get before it actually reduces abortion?
Cheers
Paul
Anri: Admit it. Abortion has simply become another form of contraception. It is the taking of one life for the convenience of another. Working to provide for abortion services (as NARAL and PP do) simply facilitates this process and makes it easy to wipe away any 'mistakes'.
ReplyDeleteSad.
Fr. Tim
The Catholic Church is against all forms of birth control except for national family planning, it says that all sexual acts that avoid the pregnancy risk are sins if the intent is to avoid pregnancy, and it has LIED to people in poor countries, telling them condoms don't work effectively.
ReplyDeleteThe Roman Catholic Church is directly responsible for numerous starving children in poverty-stricken countries where the Catholic Church dominates. You can deny it, it won't make any difference to me.
To reproduce or not reproduce is the WOMAN'S choice.
Not all Catholics believe the pope is God's mouthpiece. Some of them actually do a little thinking for themselves.
Tim, NARAL is NOT a pro-abortion organization. There IS no such thing as a pro-abortion organization.
ReplyDeleteAnd there IS no debate. And there never will be a debate until the anti-choicers actually listen and understand that CHOICE is PERSONAL and INDIVIDUAL and NOT something for which anyone needs to seek peer approval or permission! CHOICE is NOT group-think.
And abortion is NOT contraception. It is only an option after contraception has failed. You just tried to equate contraception with birth control, and they are not the same thing at all. As for a fetus' being " a life," well, that, too, is up to the individual. The law disagrees with you.
"We've had comprehensive sex education for decades now. How much more "comprehensive" does it have to get before it actually reduces abortion?"
ReplyDeletePfffft...just because the book is in the library does not mean anyone knows how to read it. Or even bothers to read it. So, then, folks like you come along and blame the library, instead of putting the blame where it belongs -- on the ignorance of those who do not (or cannot) read.
Get real.
Pffff.... Your obviously not up to speed on the issue if you think sex ed has been delegated to a few dusty books hidden in the library. I know thats the tired message the sex ed cheer leaders want parent to get so they can turn it up a few more notches with their children but its simply not true.
ReplyDeleteHeck my kids go to Catholic school and they were learning about sex at 7 years old. Quite graphically I might add. The only way to make it more "comprehensive" is to bring in a prostitute for a hands on workshop. No doubt a "progressive' somewhere is already planning for that.
Meanwhile children are sexually active younger and younger and business is good at the clinics$$.
Cheers
Paul
I read Prime Minister Harper is not interested in reopening the abortion debate.
ReplyDeleteFr. Tim what would you tell him if you had five minutes with Mr. Harper?
Paul:
ReplyDelete"We've had comprehensive sex education for decades now. How much more "comprehensive" does it have to get before it actually reduces abortion?"
Well, I don't know the situation in Canada (although I have to suspect it's better then mine...) but in the US, any sort of effective Sex Ed is fought tooth and nail and claw by conservatives - and so far with much success.
Comparing the rates of teen pregnancy, teen STDs, and - yes - abortion in places with effective Sex Ed vs. places that lack them might prove illuminating.
Also, I assume you read all of both sentences in that paragraph. Will you be commenting on the 'improving access to birth control' aspect of it as well?
Fr. Tim:
ReplyDelete"Anri: Admit it. Abortion has simply become another form of contraception. It is the taking of one life for the convenience of another. Working to provide for abortion services (as NARAL and PP do) simply facilitates this process and makes it easy to wipe away any 'mistakes'."
Hmm.
Here's another factoid for your 'why are atheists angry?' file. We don't like having our views told to us be people who don't even bother to ask. I've glanced back over my posts here and unless I am forgetting or missing something (both quite possible, of course), I don't believe I've expressed an opinion on abortion on this blog. You're free to ask my opinion on it, but please don't assume.
All I did was to show you a direct quote, easily found, that appeared to directly contradict something you were willing to say that someone else believed - I've done this a couple of times now... it's a worrisome trend.
This is a personal anecdote, and therefore in no way reliable data, but it's what I have at the moment, so I'll share it. I have never had a woman site 'convenience' as the reason for having an abortion. Health, poverty, fear, an understanding that she would be unlikely to love the child, and 'mind your own business - if you want one, give birth to it yourself' have all been said, but I don't think I've ever heard convenience. Perhaps your experience has been different.
There are few things more empowering to women than safe, accessible, effective control over having a child, either to do so, or not to do so. Be careful, Fr. Tim - take a long, hard look at who your allies are in this fight. Take a quick poll of which countries and cultures allow this sort of thing, and which ones don't, especially on the subject of religious reasons.
(Sorry to double-post... technical issues)
Word games. So if they're not pro-abortion but pro-choice, what exactly is the choice NARAL spends all that time and money supporting? Could it be abortion?
ReplyDeleteCheers
Paul
Anon: If I could have five minutes with the PM, I would ask him to consider that the right to life is rooted in the finest tradition of protecting and promoting the civil rights of the weakest and most vulnerable among us. That as MLK led marches, demonstrations and civil action to win equality under the law, so too is the pro-life movement prepared to mobilize and work to help frame the debate in these terms.
ReplyDeleteI would ask him to save life.
Fr. Tim
"...what exactly is the choice NARAL spends all that time and money supporting?"
ReplyDeleteThere IS NO "exactly!" Choice is always individual, and varies from individual to individual; it may even vary with one individual, depending on several circumstances. Choice is infinite.
WHEN are people going to understand that?
Paul:
ReplyDelete"Word games. So if they're not pro-abortion but pro-choice, what exactly is the choice NARAL spends all that time and money supporting? Could it be abortion?"
Not to be rude about this, but you might want to consider that someone can dislike, even loathe, something, and yet support the right to do it. Do you wish to be considered a supporter of all the things you might fight for the rights of others to do?
Join the KKK, for example? Engage in loudmouthed public bigotry? Wear mismatched socks?
I support plenty of rights I have no intention of availing myself of, and would find disgusting and abhorrent if I did. That's not a word game - it's actually quite important.
Today my prayer is that all humanity will know , without any doubt, that all life is sacred...from the moment of conception to it's natural end and we will treat each other accordingly.
ReplyDeleteJanus
ReplyDeleteI agree we can support the right of someone to do something, say something or wear mismatched socks and dislike it but we all have our limits. Regarding abortion, ending the life of another unborn human being is the limit for me and millions of other people. I know you believe a baby isn't a human until it makes it to the outside the womb but that is at the core of this whole debate. A debate that many on the choice side want silenced.
Regarding NARAL, abortion is their cause. I don't understand the shell game we need to play with terminology. If abortion isn't a morally reprehensible thing and actually a good thing, a basic human right as we're told, why then the repulsion at being called proabortion?
Would you protest to being called prohealthcare if you were in an organization supporting the right of people to have it? The only reason I can think of that someone supporting abortion insists on hiding behind the words ProChoice is that deep down in they know what they are supporting is a heinous act.
Cheers
Paul
It is indeed unfortunate that so many chose to ignore the contributions of science and technology which would go a long in establishing when life begins. The reality of the situation is that the smoke screen used so effectively in the70's seems to be the logical choice for the pro-abortion crowd.
ReplyDeleteCliff
"Regarding abortion, ending the life of another unborn human being is the limit for me and millions of other people."
ReplyDeleteWell, then, the answer for you is simple: don't do it! YOU believe that a fetus is a human being. You're allowed to believe whatever you want. I do not. I'm allowed not to believe whatever I want. And you are not allowed to force me to live by your beliefs! Nobody on the CHOICE "side" of this so-called "debate" wants to force you to have an abortion, fercrissake.
"Regarding NARAL, abortion is their cause."
So what? So long as no one is making you join them, why do you care? If you disagree with their cause, then don't join, and don't support what they do. That would be your CHOICE! But dammit, you may NOT stop me or anyone else from supporting whatever we want to support! You may NOT claim choice for yourself and at the same time remove it from anyone else.
"If abortion isn't a morally reprehensible thing and actually a good thing, a basic human right as we're told, why then the repulsion at being called proabortion?"
First, I don't get your propensity for trying to label every little thing either "good" or "bad" (and with the latter, somehow always managing to attach this thing of yours called "morality" to it in some fashion).
Second, get it straight what "right" is being discussed. Not abortion specifically, but access to ALL options concerning reproductive rights, including abortion, but also including giving birth. If you try to remove access to abortion, then don't be surprised when someone else comes along and says, "Okay, we got rid of abortion, so now we're going to get rid of Caesarian sections, and if a woman can't give birth naturally, she'll just have to die. After all, if God had wanted her to have options, she'd be equipped with a zipper."
And third, I am NOT "proabortion." I am pro CHOICE. I don't like being deliberately mislabeled and misrepresented by someone who knows it's a lie but insists on doing it anyway because it packs more negative emotional punch with those who are too lazy to think for themselves. In short, my friend, it's libel. So cut it out.
Pay very close attention to Anri's comments, especially this one: "I support plenty of rights I have no intention of availing myself of, and would find disgusting and abhorrent if I did. That's not a word game - it's actually quite important." BANG ON the money!
Ok, Paul, you noted that you were replying to Janus, but you seem to reference a bit of one of my posts, so I'll tackle just a little bit of what you said, if that's ok:
ReplyDelete"Regarding NARAL, abortion is their cause."
-One of their causes. Currently, the highest profile one, and the one we are discussing here, but not the only thing they are concerned about.
"I don't understand the shell game we need to play with terminology. If abortion isn't a morally reprehensible thing and actually a good thing, a basic human right as we're told, why then the repulsion at being called proabortion?"
As I've explained earlier, not all things that are rights are good things. Not all things that we would wish to protect would we wish to support.
I'll try again. I don't like (non-corrective) cosmetic surgery. Nose jobs strike me as ridiculous, and things such as breast enhancement doubly so (no pun intended...) I cannot imagine seeking out this procedure, I find it a moral shame that medical time, talent and money is being used in this manner when it is so desperately needed for more serious causes, and if the entire Beauty By The Knife industry dried up tomorrow and blew away in the wind, I would not mourn its passing.
I support the right of a consenting adult to have cosmetic surgery. I support the right of doctors to practice it, medical schools to teach it, and private insurance companies to cover it.
So, tell me, based on what you have read, am I for this practice, or merely against the banning of it?
Do you see the difference? Many people do.
If you do not, let me suggest in the most respectful terms that your failure to understand might - just possibly - not be a fault of the thing itself.
Fr. Tim Moyle said...
ReplyDelete"Anon: If I could have five minutes with the PM, I would ask him to consider that the right to life is rooted in the finest tradition of protecting and promoting the civil rights of the weakest and most vulnerable among us. That as MLK led marches, demonstrations and civil action to win equality under the law, so too is the pro-life movement prepared to mobilize and work to help frame the debate in these terms.
I would ask him to save life."
Fr. Tim:
Mr. Harper knows very well that it is the female's choice after all there is no way he would want to see his own wife in danger of losing her if she needed to live if a pregnancy went wrong.
On the other hand, you Fr. Tim see the unborn more important that the woman. That makes you dangerous because you want to force the female to died so the unborn can live.
When you want to pass laws to make abortion illegal you are sending many females to their death.
You also do not believe in artificial birth control. Many abortions wouldn't be needed if birth control was used.
So if you are anti-birth control then you are anti-life.
Just how "Pro Choice" are you?
ReplyDeleteWhat if someone's choice is to kill kittens by smashing them with a baseball bat? Should you remain silent since their choice to smash kittens doesn't mean you have to smash kittens as well? Should you support their choice to do it even though you find it revolting and inhumane for the sake of them "choosing" to do so?
The difference with the two camps in this issue is that one see kittens while the other willfully see's something else.
Comparing supporting choice for an abortion to a choice for a "nip and tuck" procedure with a cosmetic surgeon is laughable. The heart of another living human being isn't being stopped in a nose job or breast reduction. The slippery slop to Caesarian Section banning also gave me a chuckle
Cheers
Paul
Paul how old are you?
ReplyDeleteKittens?
Just admit it you are peeved because your in love with the idea to control the pregnant women.
To choose to have an abortion or use birth control...yes, it happens every day, and you are powerless to stop it. Even many Catholics do it. But you can whine and preach and threaten with hell if that makes you feel better...that's about all the power you have, Paul.
Kittens are small, totally helpless and beautiful creatures. Much like unborn children. Since many that would think nothing of killing an unborn child strangely seem to have a soft spot for cute fluffy animals like baby seals and kittens. I thought it would help bring home the point of how we prolife folk view your "Choice".
ReplyDeleteCheers
Paul
"Kittens are small, totally helpless and beautiful creatures. Much like unborn children."
ReplyDeleteYes to the first. No to the second.
I can pick up and cuddle a kitten. What can you do with a fetus?