Abortion In The Usa

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='21 July 2010 - 04:55 PM' timestamp='1279745759' post='2146110']
Does this include all abortions, even early term abortions before viability? [/quote]

Yes. When sperm and egg "collide" we have a human person.

[quote] And why no penalty for the woman? After all it is the woman who seeks out the abortionist. [/quote]

It would depend on her mental state and on consent. Some women are threatened to be kicked out of the home by their parents or boyfriend; some are told, by the boyfriend, that he will not support the child at all and that she will be on her own. Obviously if a woman went out and got an abortion, despite the pleas of her parents and her boyfriend who wanted to save the child, and gave her full consent then she should be penalized like the doctor.

[quote] Lastly, do you think such a law would have a chance at making it through Congress? [/quote]

Absolutely, although a few things have to be settled first. One, as stated in my other post, it must be stressed that this is a human rights issue. I believe that many people confuse it with a theological issue, but this is not the case (while of course plenty of faiths [i]do[/i] treat it as both a human rights and theological issue). Two, "radical" or as I call them "fake" feminists need to realize that no one is trying to oppress them or tell them what to do with their bodies. Of course the woman's body nurtures the child's, but there are TWO bodies here, not just ONE which these women seem convinced of. They need some sense slapped into them.

I know you were posing these questions to Slappo but I could not resist throwing in my two cents. I am sure he does not mind.

[Nihil Obstat]

I see no evidence, by the way, that the excommunicated sister we mentioned above *did not* assist in the procuring of a direct abortion. Bishop Olmstead seems to agree, but of course you've never hesitated to criticize our bishops in the past.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Nihil Obstat

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='21 July 2010 - 05:09 PM' timestamp='1279746565' post='2146119']
Two, "radical" or as I call them "fake" feminists need to realize that no one is trying to oppress them or tell them what to do with their bodies. Of course the woman's body nurtures the child's, but there are TWO bodies here, not just ONE which these women seem convinced of. They need some sense slapped into them.
[/quote]

Sorry, I need to ask something. Does anyone else find it incredibly ironic that the women who are so shrill about "their bodies" could not care less about the bodies of the children being shred to pieces by the abortionist?

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='21 July 2010 - 05:15 PM' timestamp='1279746932' post='2146121']
Sorry, I need to ask something. Does anyone else find it incredibly ironic that the women who are so shrill about "their bodies" could not care less about the bodies of the children being shred to pieces by the abortionist?
[/quote]

It is ironic and deeply troubling.

[MissScripture]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='21 July 2010 - 05:15 PM' timestamp='1279746932' post='2146121']
Sorry, I need to ask something. Does anyone else find it incredibly ironic that the women who are so shrill about "their bodies" could not care less about the bodies of the children being shred to pieces by the abortionist?
[/quote]
But they refuse to consider it a body, so they're not doing anything but removing a "blob of tissue." *insert pukey smiley here*

I also find it ironic when they start using the early feminists to try to push their agendas, when what they now push is NOTHING like what those early feminists were fighting for...I wonder what would happen if you told some of those femenists that Susan B. Anthony and the like were actually PRO-LIFE!

[JimR-OCDS]

HisChildForever'


[i]Yes. When sperm and egg "collide" we have a human person.

[/i]Agreed, but many people do not believe its a person at this point in the stage of development. So convincing the majority
to accept this belief, is not likely.



[i]It would depend on her mental state and on consent. Some women are threatened to be kicked out of the home by their parents or boyfriend; some are told, by the boyfriend, that he will not support the child at all and that she will be on her own. Obviously if a woman went out and got an abortion, despite the pleas of her parents and her boyfriend who wanted to save the child, and gave her full consent then she should be penalized like the doctor.
[/i]
Here I disagree. If abortion were made illegal, abortion clinics would be shut down. A woman would therefore have to seek out a doctor to perform the abortion,
so she is violating the law as much as he is. Abortion is murder, so she murdered her child, right?

[i]Absolutely, although a few things have to be settled first. One, as stated in my other post, it must be stressed that this is a human rights issue. I believe that many people confuse it with a theological issue, but this is not the case (while of course plenty of faiths do treat it as both a human rights and theological issue). Two, "radical" or as I call them "fake" feminists need to realize that no one is trying to oppress them or tell them what to do with their bodies. Of course the woman's body nurtures the child's, but there are TWO bodies here, not just ONE which these women seem convinced of. They need some sense slapped into them.

[/i]And I agree, except for slapping sense into them.

However, I think this is where the pro-life movement has failed. Rather than educating, they've been focused more on political alliance's and engaged in the nasty rhetoric of political campaigns. So, the education aspect stalled.

What you have said here is very true, and to have any hope of ever having a majority in congress to embrace this knowledge, we have to educate. Unfortunately, this isn't happening.


[i]I know you were posing these questions to Slappo but I could not resist throwing in my two cents. I am sure he does not mind.


[/i]Thanks for your civil and well thought out response


God Bless
Jim

[JimR-OCDS]

Nihil Obstat

[i]I see no evidence, by the way, that the excommunicated sister we mentioned above *did not* assist in the procuring of a direct abortion.

[/i]I didn't try to say she didn't assist in procuring a direct abortion.
I believe I said she was in error believing it was an indirect abortion.

She realized her error, and took appropriate action to have the excommunication removed which I assume was done in the confessional.


[i]Bishop Olmstead seems to agree, but of course you've never hesitated to criticize our bishops in the past.

[/i]
I didn't criticise Bishop Olmstead, how'd you come up with that?

Once again you show animosity towards me and provide nothing of value in the conversation.


Jim

Edited July 22, 2010 by JimR-OCDS

[JimR-OCDS]

MissScripture



[i]But they refuse to consider it a body, so they're not doing anything but removing a "blob of tissue." *insert pukey smiley here*[/i]


And its why I was a little upset just recently, that a law mandating that a woman who shows up for an abortion, must
be given an ultra-sound of her fetus for her to view, before she can proceed with the abortion, was rejected.


I don't remember if it was a vote in congress or a federal judge who rejected the law.

It seems ironic that the pro-abortionist have usually argued on the side of providing "information," but
when its provided, its rejected.

Jim

Edited July 22, 2010 by JimR-OCDS

[KnightofChrist]

Jim there are four posts on the previous page that require your reply. Posts 177-180.
Thanks

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='22 July 2010 - 09:13 AM' timestamp='1279807988' post='2146287']
I didn't try to say she didn't assist in procuring a direct abortion.
I believe I said she was in error believing it was an indirect abortion.
She realized her error, and took appropriate action to have the excommunication removed which I assume was done in the confessional.
I didn't criticise Bishop Olmstead, how'd you come up with that?
Once again you show animosity towards me and provide nothing of value in the conversation.
[/quote]
So you posting that whole article was a waste of my time, in other words?
(I didn't say you criticized Bishop Olmstead, you'll notice. I said you've had no problems in the past criticizing other bishops, namely His Grace Bishop Tobin.)

Edited July 22, 2010 by Nihil Obstat

[JimR-OCDS]

Nihil Obstat


[i]So you posting that whole article was a waste of my time, in other words?[/i]

You stated that you didn't think that the term "indirect abortion," was used in the Catholic Church. I used the article
to show you that it is, but you flat out rejected to read the article.


I then posted an articles from EWTN and CNS.


[i]I didn't say you criticized Bishop Olmstead, you'll notice.[/i]

So why did you bring his name up in your reply to my post?

[i]I said you've had no problems in the past criticizing other bishops, namely His Grace Bishop Tobin.

[/i]When the Bishop went on public TV and got his butt kicked on the issue of writing a law that
he says he would write if he were a member of congress, i.e. making abortion illegal, I criticised him.

So what?

I don't halt my ability to think just because he's a Bishop.



Jim

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='22 July 2010 - 11:47 AM' timestamp='1279810027' post='2146295']
Jim there are four posts on the previous page that require your reply. Posts 177-180.
Thanks
[/quote]


I don't have the time or desire. Its been like 6 against one and I've run out of time and interest.


Jim

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='22 July 2010 - 01:08 PM' timestamp='1279818486' post='2146336']
I don't have the time or desire. Its been like 6 against one and I've run out of time and interest.


Jim
[/quote]

In other words you have no answer and thus your logic is defeated. Being its just Slappo and I two more isnt going make that much of a difference to the three you alreadly replied to, one which did not even actually reply to you. You have the time you simply cannot defend your illogical stance.

Edited July 22, 2010 by KnightofChrist

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='22 July 2010 - 10:05 AM' timestamp='1279807519' post='2146284']
Agreed, but many people do not believe its a person at this point in the stage of development. So convincing the majority to accept this belief, is not likely.[/quote]

We need doctors and scientists to step forward and provide the facts. The laws protecting the human person [u]must[/u] extend to the unborn.

[quote] Here I disagree. If abortion were made illegal, abortion clinics would be shut down. A woman would therefore have to seek out a doctor to perform the abortion,
so she is violating the law as much as he is. Abortion is murder, so she murdered her child, right? [/quote]

The woman could still be dragged by her boyfriend to the abortion clinic, whether that clinic be in plain view or hidden at the back of an alley.

[quote] And I agree, except for slapping sense into them. [/quote]

Why?

[quote] However, I think this is where the pro-life movement has failed. Rather than educating, they've been focused more on political alliance's and engaged in the nasty rhetoric of political campaigns. So, the education aspect stalled.

What you have said here is very true, and to have any hope of ever having a majority in congress to embrace this knowledge, we have to educate. Unfortunately, this isn't happening. [/quote]

Which is why things need to get more scientific, i.e. educational.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='22 July 2010 - 12:05 PM' timestamp='1279818346' post='2146334']
You stated that you didn't think that the term "indirect abortion," was used in the Catholic Church. I used the article
to show you that it is, but you flat out rejected to read the article.
I then posted an articles from EWTN and CNS.
So why did you bring his name up in your reply to my post?
When the Bishop went on public TV and got his butt kicked on the issue of writing a law that
he says he would write if he were a member of congress, i.e. making abortion illegal, I criticised him.
So what?
I don't halt my ability to think just because he's a Bishop.
[/quote]
I've still yet to see a document with any sort of doctrinal authority that uses the term indirect abortion. So far all your references use the term as a sloppy and poorly constructed term that means something rather different.
RE: Bishop Olmstead:
He obviously did not use the term indirect abortion.
RE: Bishop Tobin:
His Grace is far more knowledgable and clearly far less confused on the issue than you are, so I'd respectfully suggest that you follow his lead more often.