Christian Democrats in the United States
Domestic Issues - Abortion Make abortion undesirable by providing healthcare, family planning services, well-managed adoption programs, education and child care, a living wage, and justice. Offer your hand, and people will choose life. As for moral edge-cases like the doctor saving the mother's life, we support the right of human beings to make difficult decisions in service of life to the best of their abilities when those decisions are presented by the face of death. Outside of these cases, regardless of our individual views on personal rights, we maintain that abortion is never a good choice in the wealthiest country in the world. We believe it is possible to construct a society in which abortion is not absolutely prohibited by law, but no one wants one. We seek to resolve real-world problems to decrease demand for abortion, and not to divide people with our religious views. Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
Thursday, August 27, 2009
8:30 PM
It's in Christ that we find all life to be valuable, even that of mothers who chose abortion, because "they know not what they do," life is complicated and painful. It's not a moral excuse, but most of them probably made the best choices they thought they could at the time, given what they knew from their experiences, because that is what people do.
It ought to be Christians who would lend a hand, not an accusing tongue, and then those accusers would have no reason to hate Christianity. In any case, if we live in a free country, then certainly any soul has the right to believe in God, and Jesus, as much as in the tooth fairy. We are free to believe in Jesus, and since Jesus is true, that belief overpowers negative beliefs in time. We are free to believe in falsehood, and limitation, but that turns out not to be true in the long run.
Negative, destructive beliefs are so unpleasant to the mind, that the mind cannot live with them forever, it will reflexively turn to the good. Focusing on the sense of good can always return you to a good state of mind.
Unfortunately, opponents of philosophy have made religion their scapegoat. Our public education systems are so embroiled in conflict over ridiculous creationist pseudo-science, that teachers feel it is too risky to teach the substance of the morals and ethics embodied in philosophical history, which includes religious and non-religious writers. Instead of leading students to approach that dialog with an open mind, they declare the entire question off limits, because of the annoying tendency of some teachers to use the podium as a bully pulpit. (...)
As a result, young people in America have no idea how to form self-identity, little ability to ask questions about their own minds or to challenge their own assumptions, and no clue how to think through their decisions to see how they will affect others and themselves. Systematic, balanced philosophy is reviled, replaced by feel-good, self-help pulp steeped in esoteric symbols, and paradoxically, logic is shunned as a tool of clownish alchemists, the brunt of jokes and burns. Any such culture is ripe for milking by "dark spirits," dark patterns of thought, which they allow to rule their minds. They may not be aware at all, or may believe the shallow explanatory theories that leave the impossibility of their mind untamed, trying to explain away the thing they fear in the corner of their mind. Then that fear grows, until it consumes them, like thorns may consume a seed sown to the side of the path.
Many opponents of abortion quickly resort to the answer "because it is," when asked "why." Well, "why" is in fact an extremely difficult question. Yelling at scared girls is not going to help anyone answer that. Patiently loving them, the way the Lord loves them, will probably help a lot.
god loves all souls
Those women who choose abortion can lose themselves in guilt during "moments of clarity" when their integrated mind fully feels the obvious truth that they terminated what would have become their child. These same women are taught by abortion promoters that Christians are the evil ones, who seek to restrict their "choice." Some might even be suicidal, or fractured.It's in Christ that we find all life to be valuable, even that of mothers who chose abortion, because "they know not what they do," life is complicated and painful. It's not a moral excuse, but most of them probably made the best choices they thought they could at the time, given what they knew from their experiences, because that is what people do.
It ought to be Christians who would lend a hand, not an accusing tongue, and then those accusers would have no reason to hate Christianity. In any case, if we live in a free country, then certainly any soul has the right to believe in God, and Jesus, as much as in the tooth fairy. We are free to believe in Jesus, and since Jesus is true, that belief overpowers negative beliefs in time. We are free to believe in falsehood, and limitation, but that turns out not to be true in the long run.
Negative, destructive beliefs are so unpleasant to the mind, that the mind cannot live with them forever, it will reflexively turn to the good. Focusing on the sense of good can always return you to a good state of mind.
Unfortunately, opponents of philosophy have made religion their scapegoat. Our public education systems are so embroiled in conflict over ridiculous creationist pseudo-science, that teachers feel it is too risky to teach the substance of the morals and ethics embodied in philosophical history, which includes religious and non-religious writers. Instead of leading students to approach that dialog with an open mind, they declare the entire question off limits, because of the annoying tendency of some teachers to use the podium as a bully pulpit. (...)
As a result, young people in America have no idea how to form self-identity, little ability to ask questions about their own minds or to challenge their own assumptions, and no clue how to think through their decisions to see how they will affect others and themselves. Systematic, balanced philosophy is reviled, replaced by feel-good, self-help pulp steeped in esoteric symbols, and paradoxically, logic is shunned as a tool of clownish alchemists, the brunt of jokes and burns. Any such culture is ripe for milking by "dark spirits," dark patterns of thought, which they allow to rule their minds. They may not be aware at all, or may believe the shallow explanatory theories that leave the impossibility of their mind untamed, trying to explain away the thing they fear in the corner of their mind. Then that fear grows, until it consumes them, like thorns may consume a seed sown to the side of the path.
Many opponents of abortion quickly resort to the answer "because it is," when asked "why." Well, "why" is in fact an extremely difficult question. Yelling at scared girls is not going to help anyone answer that. Patiently loving them, the way the Lord loves them, will probably help a lot.
> detail, links and comments >>
Monday, March 30, 2009
10:58 AM
- Every girl's visit to every doctor would have to be monitored.
- By equality of law, no protection of privacy with a doctor in any context for anyone.
- Government would require registration of pregnancy, perhaps even the attempt.
Without these measures, how would you expect any law against abortion to be effective?
Even with these measures, and probably because of the increase of government power over details of peoples' lives, people would have less faith and belief in government than they do today, which is to say, they would have none at all.
A government with these kinds of powers in this context would exercise it in others. It would further increase the resistance of everyday people to being governed at all.
Yes, it is a slippery slope, but it is one that history shows is true. The less the government respects its people, the less that government is constituted of the people and run by them and for them, the more the people resist, whether in outward ways or in covert spirit.
The government power needed to enforce a ban on all abortion would piss so many people off, that more people would end up believing in their hearts that abortion was okay, because of their natural resistance to being bossed around by others in every sphere of life.
Abortion will only stop when people believe it is wrong. Law, punishment and forced repetition of words will not make people believe that. That will only have the opposite effect from what is intended.
So how does the world change so that people believe life is sacred and abortion is wrong?
First, we must stop rape and the mentality among men that they have a right to procreate by force, whether that force is direct and brutal, economic or psychological. Women must be encouraged to assert their rights to control their reproductive cycle before conception.
Second, government would have to show that life is sacred and killing children in other contexts is wrong, like war. We would have to commit our wills to work for peace and make war an obsolete relic of earlier ages. If there were no battlefield for humanity, if we allow our love to be strong enough to heal the conflicts of the ages and promote all life and culture, people would naturally see life as valuable.
Third, we must work toward a global economy in which basic resources such as food, shelter and knowledge are essentially free, or at least, easy to obtain by anyone who tries. There is such an open field of new knowledge, tools and goods for free market competition that some margin of safety for basic necessities certainly does not qualify as a communist system. It's just what caring people would do for those in need.
If pregnant women feel they can raise a child in a healthy environment, they will. We have to work toward that world. It's the only way to stop abortion.
When Jesus said, "blessed are the peacemakers" and "the meek shall inherit the earth," he did not refer to the "peace between man and God" as some would divert us to believe. Jesus said that some wars would come to pass as humanity transformed into something new, but did not say that wars were necessary until the end of time.
Jesus wanted peace in his time and he gave people the opportunity, but they refused. Luckily we still have that opportunity, and we always will.
making illegal will not make people believe it is wrong
If we make abortion illegal, this will not cause everyone to believe that abortion is wrong. This is the central mistake of those who believe in the power of human law. You cannot legislate belief. The government power needed to stop people from getting and giving abortions would be overwhelming. Imagine what it would take:- Every girl's visit to every doctor would have to be monitored.
- By equality of law, no protection of privacy with a doctor in any context for anyone.
- Government would require registration of pregnancy, perhaps even the attempt.
Without these measures, how would you expect any law against abortion to be effective?
Even with these measures, and probably because of the increase of government power over details of peoples' lives, people would have less faith and belief in government than they do today, which is to say, they would have none at all.
A government with these kinds of powers in this context would exercise it in others. It would further increase the resistance of everyday people to being governed at all.
Yes, it is a slippery slope, but it is one that history shows is true. The less the government respects its people, the less that government is constituted of the people and run by them and for them, the more the people resist, whether in outward ways or in covert spirit.
The government power needed to enforce a ban on all abortion would piss so many people off, that more people would end up believing in their hearts that abortion was okay, because of their natural resistance to being bossed around by others in every sphere of life.
Abortion will only stop when people believe it is wrong. Law, punishment and forced repetition of words will not make people believe that. That will only have the opposite effect from what is intended.
So how does the world change so that people believe life is sacred and abortion is wrong?
First, we must stop rape and the mentality among men that they have a right to procreate by force, whether that force is direct and brutal, economic or psychological. Women must be encouraged to assert their rights to control their reproductive cycle before conception.
Second, government would have to show that life is sacred and killing children in other contexts is wrong, like war. We would have to commit our wills to work for peace and make war an obsolete relic of earlier ages. If there were no battlefield for humanity, if we allow our love to be strong enough to heal the conflicts of the ages and promote all life and culture, people would naturally see life as valuable.
Third, we must work toward a global economy in which basic resources such as food, shelter and knowledge are essentially free, or at least, easy to obtain by anyone who tries. There is such an open field of new knowledge, tools and goods for free market competition that some margin of safety for basic necessities certainly does not qualify as a communist system. It's just what caring people would do for those in need.
If pregnant women feel they can raise a child in a healthy environment, they will. We have to work toward that world. It's the only way to stop abortion.
When Jesus said, "blessed are the peacemakers" and "the meek shall inherit the earth," he did not refer to the "peace between man and God" as some would divert us to believe. Jesus said that some wars would come to pass as humanity transformed into something new, but did not say that wars were necessary until the end of time.
Jesus wanted peace in his time and he gave people the opportunity, but they refused. Luckily we still have that opportunity, and we always will.
> detail, links and comments >>
Saturday, April 26, 2008
11:45 AM
We must have faith in this regard that love and law will be written in the hearts and minds of the people, and when offered positive options, freedom for and from tradition and each other, and a deep reflective education, we will choose wisely.
jokers to the right
When people concede to government the power to regulate love and their decision to have a child, the principles of such a government no longer value sanctity of life, so in that direction, they are always out of line with the principles of the people. If the United States travels down that road and over an indeterminant threshold, the government would no longer need the pretense of abortion to exercise absolute power. Those who offer you the idea of power to regulate the beginning of life will not let you have any once you give it to them — they wish to regulate all life, and yours. It is a lie and a ruse; this power can never belong to any government in a way that does not cripple its own peoples' hearts and minds.We must have faith in this regard that love and law will be written in the hearts and minds of the people, and when offered positive options, freedom for and from tradition and each other, and a deep reflective education, we will choose wisely.
> detail, links and comments >>
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
5:04 AM
On the one hand, a large part of society has accepted the robotic track that abortion is equivalent to birth control and only a manifestation of a woman's right to control her reproduction and to not be raped. Another large part of society has accepted the robotic track that women who are raped or who consider abortions somehow deserve the worst that life has to offer, and that they have to go it alone.
Somehow through it all, the women themselves are forgotten (like "Citizen Ruth") as competing interests seek power over them through shame. Both sides of this supposed "moral" debate pile the shame onto women, pushing them from a position of desperation into total moral isolation, in which they feel they have no options, into a sort of murder/suicide mentality, a self-negating and life-negating mentality. One can only guess how many women commit suicide rather than get abortions, or who commit suicide because they got abortions.
I am certain it can appear to some women, as it has appeared to me at times, that no human being on earth has any sympathy for what they're going through, that humanity judges they are weak for not knowing what to do, for not knowing how to go it alone.
They are the biggest tragedy of our time, equivalent in scope to the abortions which are morally and economically unnecessary in our country. The women are forgotten, they are used by society not once but twice, first used and manipulated by men, then used and manipulated in an abstract way by media. Who will recognize them for the mortal, frail, imperfect human beings that they are? Who will have compassion for them, and mercy on their souls? Jesus would, but would you?
The hardest thing for any sinner to do is to ask to be forgiven. But we must remember, we cannot find moral absolution by asking forgiveness of other human beings. We have to ask God.
All the bible-pushing, gun-toting, moralistic, judgmental and accusatory people out there who call themselves Christians only pile more shame on women considering abortions and those who have had them, and the natural resistance of humans to human authority causes those women to draw into themselves and further away from God.
That kind of unforgiving, ruthless and selfish attitude does not serve the goals of love in the world. It makes women less likely to recognize their own mistakes and ask God for forgiveness of those mistakes.
Love, not guilt or force, is the only way that humanity will ever open itself to the coming of the Lord and the kingdom of ends, in which the law is written not in books, but in our hearts. Forgiveness is a way to let a little more love into the world. If you know someone considering an abortion, or who has had one, let them know that you do not lord it over them, that you do not want to make them feel ashamed for the unchangeable reality of their life. Let them know you are there for them, to support them, to love them. Love is the only way to live in full the lives that God intended for us.
forgiveness
The most difficult thing a person can do is to change the mind about something so intimately bound up in life and personality and death as the subject of abortion. Women who have had abortions may have the toughest time that any person can have on the earth wrestling with issues of conscience.On the one hand, a large part of society has accepted the robotic track that abortion is equivalent to birth control and only a manifestation of a woman's right to control her reproduction and to not be raped. Another large part of society has accepted the robotic track that women who are raped or who consider abortions somehow deserve the worst that life has to offer, and that they have to go it alone.
Somehow through it all, the women themselves are forgotten (like "Citizen Ruth") as competing interests seek power over them through shame. Both sides of this supposed "moral" debate pile the shame onto women, pushing them from a position of desperation into total moral isolation, in which they feel they have no options, into a sort of murder/suicide mentality, a self-negating and life-negating mentality. One can only guess how many women commit suicide rather than get abortions, or who commit suicide because they got abortions.
I am certain it can appear to some women, as it has appeared to me at times, that no human being on earth has any sympathy for what they're going through, that humanity judges they are weak for not knowing what to do, for not knowing how to go it alone.
They are the biggest tragedy of our time, equivalent in scope to the abortions which are morally and economically unnecessary in our country. The women are forgotten, they are used by society not once but twice, first used and manipulated by men, then used and manipulated in an abstract way by media. Who will recognize them for the mortal, frail, imperfect human beings that they are? Who will have compassion for them, and mercy on their souls? Jesus would, but would you?
The hardest thing for any sinner to do is to ask to be forgiven. But we must remember, we cannot find moral absolution by asking forgiveness of other human beings. We have to ask God.
All the bible-pushing, gun-toting, moralistic, judgmental and accusatory people out there who call themselves Christians only pile more shame on women considering abortions and those who have had them, and the natural resistance of humans to human authority causes those women to draw into themselves and further away from God.
That kind of unforgiving, ruthless and selfish attitude does not serve the goals of love in the world. It makes women less likely to recognize their own mistakes and ask God for forgiveness of those mistakes.
Love, not guilt or force, is the only way that humanity will ever open itself to the coming of the Lord and the kingdom of ends, in which the law is written not in books, but in our hearts. Forgiveness is a way to let a little more love into the world. If you know someone considering an abortion, or who has had one, let them know that you do not lord it over them, that you do not want to make them feel ashamed for the unchangeable reality of their life. Let them know you are there for them, to support them, to love them. Love is the only way to live in full the lives that God intended for us.
Labels: abortion, forgiveness, shame
> detail, links and comments >>
Saturday, October 6, 2007
1:36 PM
rape and abortion
It would seem the unequal subject of rape appears frequently in discussions of abortion. Beyond the hypothetical cases, the two seem to pertain to the same base issue, manifest in one individual's attempt to control another, an other, the conscious negation of the presence of another consciousness, whether formed or only formative. Those against rape and those against abortion often "seem" to be on opposite "sides" of society. Men teach their boys they are entitled to sex, even if they have to take it by force, and women teach their daughters that any children sired by such brigands wouldn't matter, so subtly saying to the daughters and sons that their own lives are not worth living — that the children living now would have been better off not being born. And in so doing, do not both of these positions, when considered opposites, give tacit approval to rape through hopelessness, and tacit approval to abortion through hypocrisy? As such they both become subtle positions for rape and for abortion in the eyes of children, and people are drawn apart. How are such children to learn how to step up to the plate and carry on society when all the old people are gone? For it is to protect and direct one's own conscious person, not another's, that we are each given our will. Violence is in any way a violation, against any of these "sides" of conflict into which we throw ourselves. Do not exchange one for another — there are other ways out.> detail, links and comments >>
Saturday, June 2, 2007
4:41 PM
The principles that guarantee a woman's right to conduct her affairs and direct her own life in the way she chooses are the same principles that promote safety of full-term babies still in their mother's womb, even from mothers. Abortion of a full-term baby is every bit infanticide under the law, and nothing else. (A life lost in a medical emergency while trying to save both people is another matter.)
To argue against those principles promotes the idea that women, as individuals, have no independent rights either, and is ultimately self-defeating.
Nothing in the principles of a right to be free from authoritarian government defines where to draw a line cutting off babies, so no case is protected in spirit from applying these principles of individual rights to make human judgments of morality and character. But in these cases, the mechanics of law would become pernicious to society.
This is why every woman's liberty ought to be protected — because if empowered to control their lives, they will choose not to become pregnant until they want to bring a baby to term. That liberty applies to everyone equally — we have to figure out how to balance that by empowering women against male aggression, and by enabling enough individuals to offer positive choices when accidents and crimes happen.
support every woman's right to plan pregnancy
Women have every right to choose to plan their reproduction.The principles that guarantee a woman's right to conduct her affairs and direct her own life in the way she chooses are the same principles that promote safety of full-term babies still in their mother's womb, even from mothers. Abortion of a full-term baby is every bit infanticide under the law, and nothing else. (A life lost in a medical emergency while trying to save both people is another matter.)
To argue against those principles promotes the idea that women, as individuals, have no independent rights either, and is ultimately self-defeating.
Nothing in the principles of a right to be free from authoritarian government defines where to draw a line cutting off babies, so no case is protected in spirit from applying these principles of individual rights to make human judgments of morality and character. But in these cases, the mechanics of law would become pernicious to society.
This is why every woman's liberty ought to be protected — because if empowered to control their lives, they will choose not to become pregnant until they want to bring a baby to term. That liberty applies to everyone equally — we have to figure out how to balance that by empowering women against male aggression, and by enabling enough individuals to offer positive choices when accidents and crimes happen.
> detail, links and comments >>
Monday, May 28, 2007
8:29 PM
However, since those principles are about different aspects of our lives, Roe v. Wade does not say that abortion is good. It only says that building the kind of government necessary to prevent abortion would be a horrible, awful place to live, which is absolutely true. It would be a fascist, invasive, ruthless government. In the end, more people would die unjustly by constructing such a state with absolute power over rights that can be so easily abused.
So, even under the principles of Roe v. Wade, it is possible to deduce and express the opinion that every abortion is an evil sin, and that abortion is a moral ill of our society, and a termination of distinct individual life in every case.
It just means that we have to take a course other than investigation and punishment to stop abortion. Punitive law never really stops any immorality, it just puts a band-aid on it, mitigating the effects.
Using law as a vehicle to enable individuals to offer alternatives to abortion, however, is another matter entirely, and is one that every American ought to consider. Education, family planning, contraceptives, adoption reform, child care, a living wage, social justice, alimony enforcement and assistance for single mothers are all positive solutions to abortion that every American ought to support.
Do not be tricked into instating a fascist government that can invade the privacy of every home and hospital in America. The people who want that are manipulating our religions and our sympathies to achieve their ends without regard to what we really care about.
logical conclusions from Roe v. Wade
Roe v. Wade sets up principles that must be balanced: privacy vs. infanticide. Then it draws a six-month line.However, since those principles are about different aspects of our lives, Roe v. Wade does not say that abortion is good. It only says that building the kind of government necessary to prevent abortion would be a horrible, awful place to live, which is absolutely true. It would be a fascist, invasive, ruthless government. In the end, more people would die unjustly by constructing such a state with absolute power over rights that can be so easily abused.
So, even under the principles of Roe v. Wade, it is possible to deduce and express the opinion that every abortion is an evil sin, and that abortion is a moral ill of our society, and a termination of distinct individual life in every case.
It just means that we have to take a course other than investigation and punishment to stop abortion. Punitive law never really stops any immorality, it just puts a band-aid on it, mitigating the effects.
Using law as a vehicle to enable individuals to offer alternatives to abortion, however, is another matter entirely, and is one that every American ought to consider. Education, family planning, contraceptives, adoption reform, child care, a living wage, social justice, alimony enforcement and assistance for single mothers are all positive solutions to abortion that every American ought to support.
Do not be tricked into instating a fascist government that can invade the privacy of every home and hospital in America. The people who want that are manipulating our religions and our sympathies to achieve their ends without regard to what we really care about.
> detail, links and comments >>
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
11:21 AM
rape/incest
As sad and difficult as such cases are, I personally think that women should hold their anger at bay in decisions about abortion after rape or incest, because if the baby were born, it would not be the baby's fault. As a society, what we need to do is work toward openness, equal rights and justice so that rape and incest don't happen.> detail, links and comments >>
Monday, May 7, 2007
6:38 PM
Abortion rights activists sometimes use the slogan "keep your laws off my body." The question is, whose body is it?
We don't allow infanticide. Roe v. Wade itself establishes that the right of privacy must be balanced against the rights of the individual such that it concludes full-term mothers are not solely their own bodies -- they have the body of a distinct individual inside them who deserves equal protection under law.
Whose body is it? Where do you draw the line? The decision in Roe v. Wade establishes principles that have to be balanced — then it throws those principles out the window and draws an arbitrary six-month line across all cases simply because it becomes difficult to figure out.
As a society of laws based on reason, American courts are obligated to answer those questions with the best reasoning available. Roe v. Wade is not reason, it's politics, and those politics do not belong in the court.
"keep your laws off my body"
Here's another point where "right" and "left" are divided from one another and refuse to consider each others' points of view.Abortion rights activists sometimes use the slogan "keep your laws off my body." The question is, whose body is it?
We don't allow infanticide. Roe v. Wade itself establishes that the right of privacy must be balanced against the rights of the individual such that it concludes full-term mothers are not solely their own bodies -- they have the body of a distinct individual inside them who deserves equal protection under law.
Whose body is it? Where do you draw the line? The decision in Roe v. Wade establishes principles that have to be balanced — then it throws those principles out the window and draws an arbitrary six-month line across all cases simply because it becomes difficult to figure out.
As a society of laws based on reason, American courts are obligated to answer those questions with the best reasoning available. Roe v. Wade is not reason, it's politics, and those politics do not belong in the court.
> detail, links and comments >>
Sunday, May 6, 2007
4:39 PM
CNN article link
Link: CNN: "GOP is pro-life in the womb, not necessarily after" - Roland S. Martin> detail, links and comments >>
Saturday, May 5, 2007
12:07 PM
This division is similar to the way colonial Belgians divided the Hutu and Tutsi by setting an arbitrary measurement against a wide diversity of African physical features, dividing one people artificially into two, who could then be played against each other and controlled. (Hotel Rwanda) These artificially divided people later fell into a psychotic civil war when the colonial apparatus fell apart.
Regardless of your position on rights, the only way to do something constructive to stop abortion is to change the terms of the debate on another level so we are not divided. Don't make it a fight between people for rights. Make it a fight between people who offer to support and raise the kids that the woman feels she does not want, no matter who she is, and the people who would encourage her to get an abortion just to maintain her rights.
divide and conquer
The "right" and "left" parties are polarized because each one tries to set the terms of public debate with its own argument that "feels" right, but those are two different sets of terms, so they can never reach a solution. To the engineers of these political discussions, it isn't as important what they mean as how they say it.This division is similar to the way colonial Belgians divided the Hutu and Tutsi by setting an arbitrary measurement against a wide diversity of African physical features, dividing one people artificially into two, who could then be played against each other and controlled. (Hotel Rwanda) These artificially divided people later fell into a psychotic civil war when the colonial apparatus fell apart.
Regardless of your position on rights, the only way to do something constructive to stop abortion is to change the terms of the debate on another level so we are not divided. Don't make it a fight between people for rights. Make it a fight between people who offer to support and raise the kids that the woman feels she does not want, no matter who she is, and the people who would encourage her to get an abortion just to maintain her rights.
> detail, links and comments >>
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
1:14 PM
We tend to favor community judgment over judgment by an individual, like our requirement that all suspects be tried in public court by a jury of their peers. We favor this because we believe in ourselves and our society's values. Perhaps a solution under current legal principles could require the consensus of three or more M.D.-holding doctors to agree, based on medical evidence of the specific case, that the fetus could not take ever take a breath on its own or become a conscious person after receiving quality neo-natal care. If they do not agree, then the potential capacity for choice belongs to the unborn child, and no one has a right to take its life.
alternatives under the current "penumbra"
Some who join this party may decide they are against abortion in any circumstance, and some may not see it that way. We think it's worth it to consider alternative solutions conforming to the privacy interpretation under the current "penumbra" of the rights enumerated by constitution and public law. Even if you can get past that, the logical problem in Roe v. Wade's arbitrary 6-month rule is seen by many as a great risk to the integrity of law itself.We tend to favor community judgment over judgment by an individual, like our requirement that all suspects be tried in public court by a jury of their peers. We favor this because we believe in ourselves and our society's values. Perhaps a solution under current legal principles could require the consensus of three or more M.D.-holding doctors to agree, based on medical evidence of the specific case, that the fetus could not take ever take a breath on its own or become a conscious person after receiving quality neo-natal care. If they do not agree, then the potential capacity for choice belongs to the unborn child, and no one has a right to take its life.
> detail, links and comments >>
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
3:40 PM
Abortion
Make abortion undesirable by providing healthcare, family planning services, well-managed adoption programs, education and child care, a living wage, and justice. Offer your hand, and people will choose life. As for moral edge-cases like the doctor saving the mother's life, we support the right of human beings to make difficult decisions in service of life to the best of their abilities when those decisions are presented by the face of death. Outside of these cases, regardless of our individual views on personal rights, we maintain that abortion is never a good choice in the wealthiest country in the world. We believe it is possible to construct a society in which abortion is not absolutely prohibited by law, but no one wants one. We seek to resolve real-world problems to decrease demand for abortion, and not to divide people with our religious views.> detail, links and comments >>
Archives May 2007 / June 2007 / October 2007 / February 2008 / April 2008 / March 2009 / August 2009 /