Abortion As a Blessing, Grace, or Gift–A Renewed Conversation about Reproductive Rights?

bsmeter3

The “deep thinkers” at IEET (Institute for Emerging Ethics and Technologies) firmly believe they are the smartest kids in the room, so they spent a lot of time attempting to justify what is (humanly and ethically) totally unjustifiable – abortion. Here’s their latest attempt at taking themselves and their twisted logic way too seriously. – Ed.

Our inability to talk in morally resonant terms about abortion has clouded the broader conversation about mindful childbearing. (There are no “morally resonant” reasons to kill innocent babies in the womb. – Ed.) The cost in recent decades has been devastating. In developing countries millions of real women and children have died because abortion-obsessed American Christians banned family planning conversations as a part of HIV prevention efforts. (This is total “BS”. A flat-out lie! – Ed.) Those lost lives reveal the callous immorality of the anti-choice movement. (Now these guys have unilaterally redefined “callous immorality” as SAVING innocent lives. – Ed.)

Back home, here in the U.S., our inability to claim the moral high ground about abortion has brought us one of the most regressive culture shifts of a generation. (That’s because there is absolutely no moral high ground available when it comes to killing innocent babies. – Ed.) We are, incredibly, faced with “personhood rights” for fertilized eggs, pregnancies that begin legally before we even have sex, politicians with “Rape Tourette’s,” and a stunningly antagonistic debate about contraceptive technologies that could make as many as ninety percent of unintended pregnancies along with consequent suffering and abortions simply obsolete. (I think she is referring to various types of contraceptives that function by killing innocent life, after conception. But you never know! – Ed.)

The voices that are strongest on reproductive rights often falter when it comes to the cultural dialogue. At least part of this absence is because so many of the pro-choice movement’s leaders and funders are secular and civic in their orientation, awkwardly uncomfortable with the moral and spiritual dimension of the conversation, or, for that matter, even with words like moral and spiritual. From language that seems moderately wise–Who decides?–we fall back on “safe, legal and rare” (a questionable effort to please everyone) or even the legal jargon of the “right to privacy.”

abortionpile

A large pile of murdered teeny, weeny babies
numbering – so far – about 55 MILLION!

The other side talks about murdering teeny, weeny babies and then mind-melds images of ultrasounds and Gerber babies with faded photos of late term abortions. (As if none of these accurately reflect the sad reality of abortion, as well as the abortion mentality. – Ed.)  And we come back by talking about privacy?? Is that like the right to commit murder in the privacy of your own home or doctor’s office? (As a matter of fact, it is.  Now they’re catching on! – Ed.) Even apart from the dubious moral equivalence, let’s be real: In the age of Facebook and Twitter, is there a female under twenty-five in who gives a rat’s patooey about privacy, let alone thinks of it as a core value? (The right to privacy was merely the context and the false, fabricated  justification for the court’s ruling on the non-existent right to abortion. – Ed.) 

There’s more – but why bother? These guys are either deliberately, or by nature, almost totally ignorant about the truth of the issues they so poorly attempt to address. Probably because ignorance is their only hope! – Ed.

Ignorant CBS commentator accuses pro-lifers of opposing abortion in order to build up the white race.

“You know when you just showed that graph of the decline in the numbers,” she continued, “I thought, ‘Maybe that’s why they’re trying to eliminate all these abortions and stuff. They’re trying to build up the race. How creepy.”

Read more

Editor’s note: Ms. Giles needs to do a bit of serious research on Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger and eugenics.

Seen on the web: Vatican II

John Sobieski says:
If a tree is to be judged by its fruits, the Second Vatican Council has been an unmitigated disaster. Every area that was reformed was devastated. Reformed liturgy led to empty and closed churches. Reformed catechesis led to unprecedented ignorance. Reformed discipline led to widespread vice. Reformed religious life led to empty convents and monasteries. Reformed priesthood led to empty seminaries.When, oh when, will we admit we’ve gone down a dead end, so we can turn back and find the way again?

Link

Seen on the web: Denying Jesus’ existence.

Posted by Babs on Friday, Jan 13, 2012 10:12 AM (EST):

I dated an atheist in college. I remember him questioning the existence of Jesus. I was flabbergasted.

“Do you believe Julius Caesar existed?” He did. “Then how can you question the existence of Jesus? I mean, I get that you don’t think he is God, but he did live. He did die. There are extra-biblical references to him and his followers you know.”

That relationship didn’t last long, but I remember coming away with the shocking knowledge that there could be such ignorance on the part of people who pride themselves on their superior knowledge. Sadly, I’m not as surprised when I come across it today.

Link

Many CCD teachers resort to arts and crafts because of a genuine fear and ignorance in teaching the Catholic faith to students.

St. Augustine-the Father of Catechetics describes catechizing the ignorant in this way:

The best method for instructing ignorant men in Christian doctrine, one that will bear much fruit is to ask questions in a friendly fashion after the explanation; from this questioning one can learn whether each one understood what he heard or whether the explanation needs repeating.

In order that the learner grasp the matter, we must ascertain by questioning whether the one being catechized has understood, and in accordance with his response, we must either explain more clearly and fully or not dwell further on what is known to them etc.

But if a man is very slow, he must be mercifully helped and the most necessary doctrines especially should be briefly imparted to him.

Read more

Editor’s note: St. Augustine figured this out way back around the 4th century. What a shame the Catholic Church threw out all the old, thoroughly proven ways when, for reasons known only to God, it decided to liberalize the church.

Liberalism: the Substitute for Thought and Religion.

Ignorance of religion and the classics…constituting bad education from the multi-versities which were founded to set it right…has built up in this country a vapid liberalism of relativistic precepts…a liberalism that has polluted the wellsprings of much of contemporary journalism. It is not only that many of the liberal journalists of today have abandoned religious verities for the shifting sands of uncertainty that run through their commentaries.

It is that the teachings of the elders of philosophy are not known as well.  Aristotle’s Politics begins with a division of what the great sage saw as varied governments.  Reviewing them we find it very refreshing in view of what we have in this country…or what we have allowed to transgress this country.
He says: There is a six-fold collection of governments. Now hold on to your seats. If one person rules for the common good, it is called kingly rule.

If one person rules for his own self-aggrandizement and cares not what happens to the country, it is called tyranny.
If few rule for the true common good, it is called an aristocracy.
If few rule for their own advantage it is called an oligarchy.

Listen now:
If many rule for the sake of the true common good, it is called a polity.
And if a majority rules for the sake of their own selfish aggrandizement, it is called a democracy.
Aristotle takes the view that a majority can be as foolish, insensitive or tyrannical as any tyrant or oligarch.  I think that is what we have here today.

Therefore he concludes  that unalloyed democracy is a perversion.
Read more at Tom Roeser’s blog