I Attended Obamaroma

[kujo]

[quote name='zwergel88' post='1533173' date='May 19 2008, 12:18 AM']Also, looking at the current age and makeup of the Supreme court, it doesn't seem likely that there will be any vacancies in the next four years, so barring the opportunity for a supreme court nomination, what exactly is it that you expect McCain to do to stop abortion. He can't just snap his fingers and make it illegal.[/quote]

Justice Ruth Ginsburg wants to retire but will only do so if/when a Democrat is in the White House. And Justice Steven Breyers is [i]super old[/i] and would probably like to step down, too.

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='MissyP89' post='1533188' date='May 19 2008, 12:57 AM']I have heard this as well. To support, a quote from Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI), from [url="http://community.livejournal.com/catholicism/1977334.html#cutid1"]"Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion. General Principles"[/url]:
Forgive me if this quote is out of context. I'm not trying to support any particular view; this is just what I have read, and considering it comes from our current Holy Father, I figure it would be of use.

In Christ,
Melissa[/quote]


Excellent quotes. The key phrase to this is "which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons"---I have not seen ANY reasons which are serious enough to permit voting for a candidate like Obama or Hillary. Especially Obama who, as others have pointed out again and again, doesn't even tell us what he plans to DO. Anyone who think he has provided good enough reasons (despite his stance on the Catholic Non-Negotiables) is fooling themselves big time.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='mommas_boy' post='1532145' date='May 18 2008, 03:52 AM']This is technically incorrect. Many of the policies that Obama puts forth (here, I am speaking specifically about his anti-life policies and about nothing else) do perpetuate evil. However, Obama's immoral policies do not make him an "evil" man. To be sure, Obama actually intends for these policies to do good; but despite his best intentions, he is sorely misinformed. I could honestly say that Obama desires to change this country for the better, and I would say that that makes him a very good man. Again, however, he's just doing it all wrong out of a combination of stubbornness and blind ignorance of the rationale that we hold.

I admire Obama for his idealism; you have to admit that it's very refreshing. Now, if only we could get someone who had a similar level of passion, youthful vigor, and romantic idealism who didn't support policies contrary to the Catholic faith ...[/quote]

okay I retract that statement. Let me rephrase. His policies are evil, and I BELIEVE personally that he really is an evil man, through and through. Do I really have anything truly objective to base that on, maybe not. But I do believe that if someone truly believes in and tries to bring into existence, something that is truly evil, then by association, that man is evil. I am absolutely positive that Satan and his minions truly believe in their cause, are they not evil, because technically it is only their actions that are evil? Maybe Hitler wasn't evil, only his actions? I liken Obama at least as bad as Hitler. Maybe worse, you know "wolf in sheep's clothing" type of deal. I do believe a hidden enemy is worse than an admitted public enemy. Maybe Obama's not as bad as Satan, but he can't be far TOO behind. And no I don't equate him to the anti-Christ. As bad as I think he is, he'd only be a proto-type. The worst is yet to come, unfortunately.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='kujo' post='1532264' date='May 18 2008, 10:12 AM']I happen to agree with you. No matter how immoral his policies are, the man himself is not [u]evil[/u]. We certainly need to pray for the Holy Spirit to move in his heart and change his beliefs when it comes to abortion, he is still a good man who honestly believes his direction is the best way to take this country.[/quote]

Maybe. I think it depends on if one believes someone can actually 'be' evil. I tend to believe it so. If he's not evil, I can't imagine who would be. Just believing in something doesn't make one a good person. Satan believed what he did and does is okay, doesn't make him a good spirit, or does it?

[Alycin]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1533278' date='May 19 2008, 03:31 AM']Maybe. I think it depends on if one believes someone can actually 'be' evil. I tend to believe it so. If he's not evil, I can't imagine who would be. Just believing in something doesn't make one a good person. Satan believed what he did and does is okay, doesn't make him a good spirit, or does it?[/quote]

But are Satan's intentions for the betterment of ANYONE but himself?

[kujo]

I'm sorry...everytime I read someone casually throw out the comparison of a anyone who supports abortion to Hitler, I have to think we are being a bit overdramatic. I am not cheapening the depravity of abortion, just saying that men of good faith can disagree on something, even something as vile as this, without one side being painted as "evil." Perhaps you are all using Hitler as a symbol of "ultimate evil." Whatever the case may be, I think the comparison is a tad ridiculous and our points can be made without it.

[quote name='Alycin' post='1533280' date='May 19 2008, 04:40 AM']But are Satan's intentions for the betterment of ANYONE but himself?[/quote]

Good point....

[Thy Geekdom Come]

I want to add in response to zwergel that there is no proof that abortions declined under the Clinton Administration. Either abortions went down (which I find unlikely) or more abortions were done in the privacy of one's own home with abortifacient drugs (which I find far more likely).

[kujo]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1533315' date='May 19 2008, 09:44 AM']I want to add in response to zwergel that there is no proof that abortions declined under the Clinton Administration. Either abortions went down (which I find unlikely) or more abortions were done in the privacy of one's own home with abortifacient drugs (which I find far more likely).[/quote]

Actually, there has been a fairly-steady decline in abortion since 1990, Raph.

[quote][b]Results: A total of 839,226 legal induced abortions were reported to CDC for 2004 from 49 reporting areas, representing a 1.1% decline from the 848,163 legal induced abortions reported by 49 reporting areas for 2003. The abortion ratio, defined as the number of abortions per 1,000 live births, was 238 in 2004, a decrease from the 241 in 2003.[/b] The abortion rate was 16 per 1,000 women aged 15--44 years for 2004, the same since 2000. For the same 47 reporting areas, the abortion rate remained relatively constant during 1998--2004. In 2003 (the most recent years for which data are available), 10 women died as a result of complications from known legal induced abortion. No death was associated with known illegal abortion.

The highest percentages of reported abortions were for women who were known to be unmarried (80%), white (53%), and aged <25 years (50%). Of all abortions for which gestational age was reported, 61% were performed at <8 weeks' gestation and 88% at <13 weeks. From 1992 (when detailed data regarding early abortions were first collected) through 2004, steady increases have occurred in the percentage of abortions performed at <6 weeks' gestation, except for a slight decline in 2003. A limited number of abortions were obtained at >15 weeks' gestation, including 4.0% at 16--20 weeks and 1.4% at >21 weeks. A total of 35 reporting areas submitted data stating that they performed and enumerated medical (nonsurgical) procedures, making up 9.7% of all known reported procedures from the 45 areas with adequate reporting on type of procedure.

Interpretation:[b] During 1990--1997, the number of legal induced abortions gradually declined. When the same 47 reporting areas are compared, the number of abortions decreased during 1996--2001, then slightly increased in 2002 and again decreased in 2003 and 2004. In 2000 and 2001, even with one additional reporting state, the number of abortions declined slightly, with a minimal increase in 2002 and a further decrease in both 2003 and 2004. [/b][/quote]

Source: [url="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5609a1.htm"]CDC[/url]

See also: [url="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/03facts/pregbirths.htm"]CDC Factsheet[/url]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='kujo' post='1533320' date='May 19 2008, 08:55 AM']Actually, there has been a fairly-steady decline in abortion since 1990, Raph.
Source: [url="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5609a1.htm"]CDC[/url]

See also: [url="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/03facts/pregbirths.htm"]CDC Factsheet[/url][/quote]
My point is that the CDC can't possibly give us statistics on the at-home abortions now available to women with RU-486, the morning after pill. Since that's become legal, the actual number of abortions nationwide is no longer able to be tracked accurately.

[kujo]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1533329' date='May 19 2008, 10:17 AM']My point is that the CDC can't possibly give us statistics on the at-home abortions now available to women with RU-486, the morning after pill. Since that's become legal, the actual number of abortions nationwide is no longer able to be tracked accurately.[/quote]

That's probably true; however, the statistics I cited still are significant.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kujo' post='1533333' date='May 19 2008, 07:26 AM']That's probably true; however, the statistics I cited still are significant.[/quote]
The statistics only represent "reported" abortions.

[kujo]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1533339' date='May 19 2008, 10:38 AM']The statistics only represent "reported" abortions.[/quote]

Right. So, the number of reported abortions (that being the ones performed at a doctor's office or a clinic or whatever) are declining. Raph brought up a good point in that we can't know whether there's been a commensurate increase in the at-home ones using RU-486 and the like; however, the fact remains that the ones being performed by physicians are declining.

Why are we fighting these statistics? This is a good thing, regardless of who was in the White House/Congress when it came about.

[MissyP89]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' post='1533266' date='May 19 2008, 03:27 AM']Excellent quotes. The key phrase to this is "which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons"---I have not seen ANY reasons which are serious enough to permit voting for a candidate like Obama or Hillary. Especially Obama who, as others have pointed out again and again, doesn't even tell us what he plans to DO. Anyone who think he has provided good enough reasons (despite his stance on the Catholic Non-Negotiables) is fooling themselves big time.[/quote]

Thanks for explaining, Icy.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='kujo' post='1533313' date='May 19 2008, 07:42 AM']I'm sorry...everytime I read someone casually throw out the comparison of a anyone who supports abortion to Hitler, I have to think we are being a bit overdramatic. I am not cheapening the depravity of abortion, just saying that men of good faith can disagree on something, even something as vile as this, without one side being painted as "evil." Perhaps you are all using Hitler as a symbol of "ultimate evil." Whatever the case may be, I think the comparison is a tad ridiculous and our points can be made without it.[/quote]

Maybe, but for some it's an appropriate comparison. Perhaps he'd be better compared to one of Adolph's top officials who carried out his orders. Regardless, since I believe he truly stands behind his stance, I consider him to be an evil man.

[quote name='kujo' post='1533313' date='May 19 2008, 07:42 AM']Good point....[/quote]

I didn't forget about that post. I am writing up a short reply but want to make sure I get my points right first.

Edited May 19, 2008 by goldenchild17

[CatherineM]

They just started allowing stores to start selling the plan B birth control on the shelf, not even behind the pharm's desk. I wonder if the availability of this stuff has led in any way to the lower abortion rates.