The Silent Issue

President Obama said he would be everyone's president and listen to those he has yet to earn his trust. Please listen to my argument that in this time when all are asked to be responsible for their votes and their choices that effect the lives of others, wouldn't it follow that we should also expect more accountability of men and women who through carelessness or disregard, choose to end a perfectly good life to satisfy their own convenience? Drivers are held to account for their choice of drinking that kills or maims innocent life, ending or marring a would-be lineage! History shows many who were born into difficult circumstances rose above them and accomplished notable works of achievement. There are so many couples desiring to raise a family who cannot. They are also being denied a right to pursue their happiness. In case of rape, the woman did not have a choice so she should not have to bear the seed of a beast. In the case of risk to her own life, it would also not make any sense to bear an orphan, especially if she already has children still depending on her (however, I have personally witnessed miracles of survival and surrogate nurturing--a widowed mother who cherished life brought a new soul into the world to carry on in spite of her terminal cancer). If you believe God has a plan and that President Obama is an answer to prayer, then how do you think God would feel if our society didn't even try to reconsider the most vulnerable and innocent life in existence? How can anyone continue to deny our greatest national resource-- children and their natural right to life? Just because we arrived before they did does not give us moral license to deny them their turn on this planet. For all we know they may be coming with the answers and we are shooting ourselves in the foot by aborting their grand entrance! How would it feel if we were denied the natural right to pass away into the next life and had to live forever in a rotting corpse? It would still be better for us, for at least we had the opportunity to live and experience the sunshine and the rain, laughter and tears, love and the beauty of struggle all in the pursuit of happiness. No matter what changes are brought about in the new administration, the nation's continuing disregard for their own flesh and blood unborn will be to their own demise. Think about it, the reason why the minorities have become the majority is because their people continued to have children and raise families. Heritage is something you pass on! It ENDS when there is no one left in the family line to carry on. Did you not enjoy your vote? What if someone came and bumped you out of the line and denied you that right, that one moment to help make history. That is precisely just a tiny fragment of how you would feel if you were denied your chance to be born!

The 'right to choose' is simply the perceived right of women to have unlimited sex without consequences. We've made such great strides in this nation in forcing deadbeat fathers to support the children that they sired, primarily based on an argument of personal responsibility. You commit the act, you must bear the burden of the consequences. Is it so wrong to push that women have that very same responsibility? There are few who would deny the right of a woman to sleep with whomever she chooses, whenever she chooses. THAT is true 'freedom of choice.' People who are pro-life simply believe that by the time a child is conceived, the right to choose has already been exercised. The child (or fetus, or mass of cells, or whatever) should not be punished for the irresponsibility of the mother or for the inadequacy of her chosen method of birth control. Of course, this doesn't apply in cases of rape and incest, which only account for a small, single-digit percentage of abortions. We can abstract from rhetoric of 'life' vs. 'choice' (though I personally believe that it far more powerful, both in a semantic and a real sense, than 'personal responsibility'). I think it does nothing to advance the cause of women's rights to say that women should only be held to the same pathetically low sex standards as men. As a society, we're working at raising the bar for men regarding care for their children. We should ask the same for women.

Also, the argument that 'it wouldn't be loved properly' or 'it wouldn't be cared for' are ridiculous. Maybe YOU couldn't love it properly or care for it properly, but others could. The City of Chicago gives mothers who can't cope the ability to leave a child, without penalty, at a fire or police station, and from there, the children will be properly cared for. It is not the right of anyone to determine whether a child's life will be 'good enough' to spare it death. It's a slippery slope from there to eugenics and population control.

There are plenty of arguments against abortion that don't need a Judeo-Christian ethos behind them (unless a simple value for human life is monopolized by that ethos, which I don't believe is the case, since even the most secular and relativistic among us believe that there is an inherent 'badness' to murder, torture, enslavement, rape, impoverishment, disease, and anything else that degrades human life and dignity).

Do pro-lifers believe that a total ban on abortion will stop abortion...it would not...it would mean abortions would likely be done in a unsanitary basement by a untrained hand....and all the open talk of God is disturbing as well...is nothing private anymore.... If I dont know something I will say so..If a christian dosent know something they will lay it on God or envoke faith..whatever that is..Im pretty sure Jesus would laugh at you all and wonder what in the "hell" is going on...

Abortion is a moral issue. You may believe that life starts at conception, but it is not a Biblical principle - it is a modern stance by all-too-human church leaders. Because of this, and because of the complex nature of any medicle decision, abortion should be a church matter, not a legal matter. The question has been raised, is murder a "personal choice"? Well, when it is in self defense, it is a personal choice. A soldier enlisting to fight is making a moral, personal choice. A fireman who chooses to rescue one person, rather than another, is making a moral choice.
My point is that the question is too complex. Is abortion OK if the fetus in too horribly deformed to possibley live? If the mother's life is in danger? If, as in the case of rape or incest, if the mother's mental health is in danger? These are decisions which sould not be made by a govenment. They should be made by the woman, her care provider, and hopefully, her clergy. If she makes the wrond decision, she will face God, along with soldiers, firemen, and people who killed in self defense.
In the meantime, let those among you who are without sin cast the first stone.

Make no mistake - those of us who believe in a woman's right to make choices about her body don't feel any less strongly about it, either. For many of us, this is a black and white issue, and a complete deal-breaker.

I remember thinking in 2000 that John McCain was the only republican I could imagine tolerating as president, and even though John did and said some desperate things this cycle, still think so.

Palin, just like Bush before her, was totally unacceptable, for several reasons, but their militant anti-abortion stand tops the list.

Abortion hasn't been a central debate in the 2008 campaign, because the debate is over - people are either for it, or against it - there's nothing left to debate.

Come on....Let's hear all of the bleeding hearts try and convince the public that a woman has the right to kill her unborn baby!! Darn if they would have just kept that nickel between their knees they wouldn't have to commit murder.

I find it interesting that Newsweek put this article out today, just before the election. What a way to stir up a hornet's nest! I also find it interesting that the price of oil has dropped so dramatically in the past few weeks. No need to talk about drilling vs. alternative energy sources. And how about that economy? Could it be any worse? Can there be anyone to blame BUT Bush?
It's like a "perfect storm." Get ready for a change, people!! You want socialized health care? You got it. Abortion on demand? No problem. You don't? Well, too bad for you if your baby has some sort of genetic disease that will be too costly for the govt. to pay for. How about we legalize a person's right to die (euthinasia)? In fact, how about letting us help you along since your disease is too costly for the government to pay for?!
You probably think I'm fear-mongering. If Obama gets in and enough Senate races go to the Democrats, three or four Supreme Court Justices will announce their retirement. Obama will be able to choose whoever he wants. Roe v. Wade will be a minor concern compared to the decisions this court will make. The checks and balances established for our government by our Constitution will not matter. One of the things about having both Democrats and Republicans is at least it keeps the worst in each party from prevailing.

For those interested, I have 6 adopted children from various racial backgrounds and I know plenty of other good pro-life folks who support adoption and help poor women in crisis pregnancies with clothes, food...etc.

What's amazing is that obviously many of you can't stay focused on this issue (probably your conscience bothers you???) for more than a second and then you have to quick run to other distractions (the war, Pres Bush's approval rating....etc). Stay with the issue, please. 50 million dead babies since 1973. As for adoption, many are waiting to adopt and have to wait years to get a child. There's plenty of loving arms to receive these children. Again, if slavery was rightfully overturned by law, why shouldn't abortion be????

Ultimatly, there are more than two positions:
Anti-Choice, if a woman sleeps around, she should be punished, first with the baby, then with society's scorn (this happened to my wife btw).
Pro-life, abortions are a tragedy, and should be prevented in any way possible.
Pro-choice, A woman should have the right to choose what to do with her body.
Pro-life and pro-choice are actually a lot closer to eachother than either is to anti-choice btw. For instance, in Mexico if a woman goes to the hospital bleeding to death from a botched abortion, they won't treat her until she says who performed it, if she dies, oh well. This is horrific to a pro-life supporter, but not to an anti-choice supporter. Likewise, pro-life and pro-choice can support day care, adoptions, sex ed, and a host of other programs which help a woman so she doesn't need to have an abortion. Anti-choice folks don't want those items because they make life "too easy," on the "sinner," with "loose morals."
Of course the man who gets a woman pregnant is never a bad guy in the anti-choice movement...

I am always honestly confused that so many people who say that they are against abortion because they truly believe that life begins at conception, and are even in some cases against birth control, appear to lose little sleep over all of the fertilized eggs destroyed at fertility clinics. I do not recall ever seeing a demonstration by pro-lifers in front of a fertility treatment center, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of fertilized eggs, more than could ever possibly be adopted, are destroyed there each year. It seems like they are more concerned with controlling women than with the destruction of a life. If they ever do outlaw abortion, the smart thing for any lawyer to do on the behalf of women denied this procedure, is challenge the fact that fertility clinics are allowed to operate, when it is well-known that just about all unused fertilized eggs are incinerated. A fertilized egg is either a life or it isn't, right? I'm always surprised that more candidates don't bring this point up during debates. In the end, though, the only people who will have to follow this law are lower-income people. The wealthy will simply fly their daughters to other countries for safe abortions, just like they did before abortion was legal.

All this discussion about who's for what and who isn't when I just cannot seem to recall what any of the Republican Presidents have done to make the change for all of you Pro Life supporters, especially like they said they would, but yet they go into a country because the first reasons they gave were proved to be false and claim that the Iraqis are being led by a bad, bad man and need to be saved. Explain that to me. Explain why if they know how all of you feel about Pro Life, they haven't focused more on saving these lives and changed the laws as they are. Why, why, why? McCain also is not going to do anything about it but IS going to remain in Iraq to protect all of their children's lives. Makes no sense, but yet you all rush to vote for them.

Perhaps instead of wasting time fighting whether or not it's moral or acceptable or whatever, which could go on for quite a long time, we should look for actual solutions to the problem. Focusing on ways to eliminate unwanted pregnancies before they occur would be a good place to start.

The argument of "don't use religion to enforce your moral beliefs" is hypocritical and weak. I don't care if you're an atheist, an agnostic, or a believer in Christ, everyone has a certain moral belief by which they live and try to influence others. And the fact that some of you "pro-choice" folks have strong opinions on the war, the economy, or global warming shows you have certain beliefs that you are supporting and trying to influence with. Those of us who are pro-life simply believe strongly that no other issue is so critical, so black and white, and os such great moral implications as the murdering of innocent life through abortion. By the way, it's also interesting to note that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a racist who want to limit the population of the black community. Apparently those of you who support abortion have helped her racist goal succeed....today the black population is only 15% of the total population and yet black babies aborted represent 35% of all abortions. Or isn't racism a moral issue either that we should deal with???

I am a christian who voted for barack obama and have doen it proudly ..to see this nation move away from the racist biggoted past is wonderful to behold ..
I do not believe in abortion, but i also do not want war or neglect of the vulnerable or the homeless and naked not having the same food I am blessed to eat everyday ..In the parable of the goats and the sheep, Jesus talks to us about feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and imprisoned, and doing it for HIM ... he also tells us to follow the laws of our government, and render to caesar what is caesars and to GOD what is GOD ..
All life is sacred! BUT some in the church forget that Jesus watched multitudes killed in the name of a government and never stepped in. He came for the aborted baby and the mother too!!! He died for the world that is in SIN AND UNBELIEF OF HIM.

The discussion was were it belongs. Out of the limelight. It is a problem - but it is a moral - not a political dilemma. And the battle over it has not been faught over finding real solutions, but from ideological, unmovable positions. And I am afraid, that for as long as the facts of real life are not taken into consideration, as long as victims are victimized all over - a true solution will not be found.

I honestly do cherish life, but choice MUST remain.
There are so many extremely critical issues in this country right now, and this should not even be in the top 10 right now; and that is unfortunate but true. You had your pro-life president; but look at the mess he made of everything else. You won't even know about the worst of it until after he is out in January. Priorities, folks, plain and simple. Quote your dogma all you want, it won't heal the damage to this country your precious pro-life president has wreaked. Not by a long shot.

CatJax (response 4)

When Jesus said to "believe" on Him, He was saying we should have faith in Him, in the same way you would trust a parachute to save you when you jump from a plane. You don't merely believe in the parachute - you put it on. Please don't "jump" without Jesus. If you die in your sins there is no second chance. God will give you justice, and you will end up in Hell forever. Any troubles you have at present are dwarfed by the trouble you are in with your Creator. His wrath abides upon you (John 3:36). God doesn't want you to go to Hell. Neither do you want to go there, so confess your sins to God right now, put your trust in Jesus to save you, and you will pass from death to life. Then read the Bible daily and obey what you read. (See John 14:21). Your obedience to God is the proof of your love. Have faith in God, He will never fail you.
Pray something like this:
"Dear God, today I turn away from all of my sins (name them). This day I put my trust in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. He is the only way for me to be saved. He is 'The way, the truth, and the life.'" Please forgive me, change my heart, and grant me Your gift of everlasting life. In Jesus' name I pray. Amen."

The Bible tells us, "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death" (Proverbs 14:12), but Jesus said, "I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." (John 10:10)