Archive for Thursday, December 18, 2008

Right to life

December 18, 2008

Advertisement

To the editor:

Charlotte Ostermann’s letter (Public Forum, Dec. 10) pointed to the horrific reality of an abortion. One blog replied that, they did not believe in abortion but did not feel they had the right to tell someone else they could not have an abortion. The only way a person can come to this conclusion is to first refuse to believe that the child in the womb is a human and second that the abortion is a “procedure” similar to (insert favorite elective surgery).

The child is a human being; just ask a first-year medical student what their text says. If you think “waterboarding” is torture, how do you feel about saline scalding and poisoning or dismemberment one limb at a time?

Think about this, America. Approximately 50 million children have been murdered since Roe vs. Wade. Fifty million times, a human being in America was denied the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness as guaranteed by the Constitution.

What makes any of us think we have a right to life?

Scott Burkhart,
Lawrence

Comments

Bruce Bertsch 6 years, 4 months ago

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is NOT guaranteed in the Constitution of the US. There were legal abortions before Roe v Wade. Roe simply removed the option from the states and gave us the "viability" standard; at what point is the fetus viable outside the womb. Abortion is a horrific procedure. Not doing some research and simply requiting talking points is not the way to change opinion or law.

jaywalker 6 years, 4 months ago

Here we goooooooooo again.....................Not trying to stir the pot, but do pro-lifers consider or care that even if abortion were outlawed it would never stop the procedure and many women would die or suffer permanent injury?

AjiDeGallina 6 years, 4 months ago

The Bible instructs priests to perform abortions on adulterous women.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

oh gee...I hear the screaming from the pro-choice crowd now. Will we get to 500 posts on this one? AjiDeGallina (Anonymous) says…"The Bible instructs priests to perform abortions on adulterous women."Where does it say that? Please give us the context and source for this. Is it historical information? If you folks are going to be bold enough to quote holy scripture, please give us a complete statement.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

Jaywalker says:...do pro-lifers consider or care that even if abortion were outlawed it would never stop the procedure and many women would die or suffer permanent injury?Absolutely! That's why we would love to see Planned Parenthood become non-existent and support for unintended pregnancies ramped up. If any of you read the recommendations to the Obama Transition team on FOCA. You should be very scared. If this passes the way Planned Parenthood wants, states will loose rights. Tthe language suggests politicizing our Supreme Court—something you all abhor I gather from your reactions to these type of posts.

sk_in_ks 6 years, 4 months ago

By relatively recent counts (within the past four years or so), Brazil, which outlaws all abortions, actually has a higher abortion rate (four times as high) than some countries in which abortion is legal and less restricted than it is in the U.S.If the goal is to save the lives of the unborn, making abortion illegal may not be the best approach. Instead, we as a country might try a comprehensive approach, including sex education in schools, access to cheap or free birth control, universal health care, and better support for working parents (to help them meet the expenses of child care, for instance). These are hallmarks of several of those mostly European countries with more legal protections for abortion but lower abortion rates than Brazil's, or ours.Making something illegal isn't always the best way to end it; Prohibition provides ample proof of that.

grammaddy 6 years, 4 months ago

more fear mongering from the religious right.Roe v wade gave us nationally legalized abortion over 30 years ago. It's not going anywhere.As I've always said, if you think abortion is wrong, then for God's sake DON'T HAVE ONE!!! But don't push your religious crap on me. Planned Parenthood is not just about abortions, it's about a personal responsibility for your own sex life. I think if more people were responsible about sex, there would be a lot less demand for abortion.

llama726 6 years, 4 months ago

"If the goal is to save the lives of the unborn, making abortion illegal may not be the best approach. Instead, we as a country might try a comprehensive approach, including sex education in schools, access to cheap or free birth control, universal health care, and better support for working parents (to help them meet the expenses of child care, for instance). These are hallmarks of several of those mostly European countries with more legal protections for abortion but lower abortion rates than Brazil's, or ours."The problem there is:1) Parents get outraged when their kids learn about sex in school. They want abstinence only to be taught (that doesn't work - see Palin's kid :P) 2) No one agrees that access to B.C. is necessary (see above, abstinence only, etc)3) The conservatives in this country think universal health care is a waste of money (but bombing, invading, and occupying Iraq is a great use of resources)4) Better support for working parents? Not in our culture. Why is our culture not pro life? Because pro-life ends at birth, for most conservatives.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

So when churches recommend a conservative for say President who will choose the next Supreme Court Judges, that is NOT okay. But when a monster FOR PROFIT abortion mill (Planned Parenthood) openly recommends more liberal judges...it's okay now. And when Planned Parenthood funds Obama's campaign and now expects a payback...that's okay? And when those of us with formed consciousness BECAUSE of our religious beliefs speak up against abortion...that is wrong and we are forcing our beliefs on you. But when you throw your political agendas, tell us to shut up, misquote scripture, overlook the potential effects and disregard any other informed opinion other than your own... that is okay?The hypocracy of the pro-choice crowd just freaking infuriates me. Pro-life is from conception to natural death...which may come sooner for me if I keep reading this crap.

rachaelisacancer 6 years, 4 months ago

absolutelyridiculous says - "That's why we would love to see Planned Parenthood become non-existent"Spoken like a true idiot who's more concerned with telling people what to do with their lives rather than ensuring they live healthy and productive lives. Yeah, let's get rid of sex education and access to birth control. That'll definitely help lower the abortion rate. Pro-choicers - these anti-choicers have nothing new, nor valid, to offer to the debate. Let's not bother to listen to the b.s. they're chomping at the bit to spew. Let them pat themselves on the back in Sunday school and leave it at that.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@All the anti-religion zealots: This LTE mentioned nothing about religion and I believe Scott did a great job in illustrating extra-Biblical (that is, non-Biblical) points on why abortion is wrong. How you immediately jumped to a religious affiliation of the original letter is very telling. It's easy to say, "Stop shoving religion down my throat!" but that wasn't the point of the letter.What if you guys are wrong and the fetus can feel every tear of their flesh, every injection of saline? How do you know the procedure is not the epitome of torture, as Scott raises? The gas chambers in Germany were nothing in comparison to the holocaust of abortion in this country.Why is it that in many states, if a person kills a mother-to-be that person is charged with double-counts of murder or manslaughter? Why is it that if a child is born grossly premature in a hospital that every possible measure is taken to save that child yet if the mother wants to abort during the same stage in a pregancy, that's cool?I used to work in the NICU at KU Med. It amazed me to see the level of focus and attention that each premature child received and the hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical support that was provided to save that baby's life. Yet, down the hall on the 5th floor (at least in 1997), they were performing abortions on fetuses at the same stage of gestation.What makes the baby on the ventilator weighing 2 pounds different from the baby still in the womb? The fact that someone "wanted" the NICU baby? That's sick.And case in point, the premature baby definitely felt every pain we inflicted in trying to save its life. Each blood gas that I drew, each naso-gastric tube that we inserted spawned a natural pain response. The aborted fetus would certainly feel the same torture-level pain in the womb.The Iron Maiden and any other dark age torture device is humane in comparison to what we do daily to unborn children.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

grammaddy (Anonymous) says…"more fear mongering from the religious right."Fear mongering? Where did you read that? But don't push your religious crap on me. Planned Parenthood is not just about abortions, it's about a personal responsibility for your own sex life. I think if more people were responsible about sex, there would be a lot less demand for abortion.Read the 55 page memo to the Obama transition team on FOCA. Planned Parenthood is ALL about abortion. If, as you say, it's about personal responsibility, then we wouldn't be handing out condoms and birth control pills like candy. You're skin is thin and your arguments shallow.

Left_handed 6 years, 4 months ago

Roe versus Wade did not insert the viability standard. That decision allows for abortions at any time from conception to just prior to delivery.And pro-lifers are not "anti-choicers". I reject abortion but am pro choice. I believe that the choice occurs when two people choose to have sex. After that the inevitable outcome must be allowed to transpire.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

jason2007...THANK YOU for sharing that. Some sense from someone in the trenches.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

Left-handed says.."...the inevitable outcome must be allowed to transpire."Abortion is not inevitable. Birth should be if you choose to have sex and get pregnant.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

rachaelisacancer...thanks for backing up everything I've said this morning. You're a pal.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

Informed...in context of Left-handed's comment and pro-choice, I read that abortion was inevitable.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Absolutelyridiculous: Sure thing. Some additional background: I used to a Respiratory Therapist in a previous career. The toughest job I ever had was working in the NICU -- I hated it, here's why...Each of us, nurses, doctors, etc. grew very attached to these little premature babies. They exhibited "personalities" even as extreme premies and whey they died, which most extreme premies did, it was like losing a member of your family. Everyone mourned and even battle-hardened Neonatologists shed tears in many cases; yet a fetus at the same stage of development was torn in pieces from his mother's womb like some gross Nazi medical experiment in 1942. Dr. Josef Mengele would be proud.

sfjayhawk 6 years, 4 months ago

Funny how the pro-life people are only pro-life on this (abortion) issue. I would bet that most of the pro life crowd on this forum are also pro-capitol punishment, pro war on Iraq and pro-gun. I just dont see how someone can balance those viewpoints.

jaywalker 6 years, 4 months ago

Informed:Not 'kidding' myself, never thought there would be an 'epidemic' of deaths, just that there would be some. And cite whomever you desire, but a sanitary medical procedure is one thing. An unsafe, unsupervised, illegal, secret non-medically authorized abortion can't possibly be as safe and successful for the woman."Also, keep in mind that people do illegal things every day. That doesn't make it right"What? As far as the first sentence, let me just say there's no need to explain the incredibly obvious. But what's that 'sposed to mean? If referring to abortion, it's not illegal. If in reference to my point on the probability of illegal abortion procedures if the law were overturned...... who says it's gotta be right? It's gonna happen, that's what matters. Don't misunderstand me. I grasp the pro-life argument and have no qualms with it. I am not the poster that Mr. Burkhart refers to, but I did see that post and share that stance. I'm pro-choice because I'm not a woman and I don't believe in legislating what a woman can and can't do with her body or her life. Not for me or any man to say, as far as I'm concerned. I don't have to worry about becoming pregnant nor the repercussions that come with the condition.

lawrencian 6 years, 4 months ago

absolutelyridiculous -- if you are recommending that we read something, you should provide a link. Otherwise, you might as well be making it up.I agree that there is a lot of hypocrisy when it comes to a discussion about abortion, choice, etc. If it is going to be okay, then it should only be okay up to a certain point (say, 10 weeks max), and then no go. If a woman doesn't suspect that she's pregnant by that point, then that just means that she is totally oblivious. If it not going to be okay, then make it illegal. However, I think that the example of Brazil is not one to be taken lightly. Even if you don't personally agree with it, would you be willing to prosecute a woman for having an illegal abortion? Or take the chance that the person performing her procedure is not trained in the most efficient, humane ways to do so? If I had to make this choice, and ended up choosing an abortion, I sure as heck would want my doctor to know what they are doing!

rachaelisacancer 6 years, 4 months ago

Any time, absolutelyridiculous. You're always good for a laugh.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

again jason2007...spoken from someone who actually respects life because you've seen the pain and suffering. The problem with the pro-choice crowd here is that they keep aborting those kids so they deny themselves the opportunity to actually see life in progress. So, they have hard hearts and don't want to hear what religious folks have to say because deep down, it tugs at their conscious. And that is a typical defense mechanism. I live with someone who daily bears the weight of having an abortion...so I see it from this side, 20 years later. It's not much fun...so I pray a lot.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@sfjayhawk: Ah, the recourse of someone losing the debate: change the subject and dovetail an aspect that appears the make your opponent's original points contradictory. I was wondering how long it'd take...Pro-capital punishment: Absolutely am. The person made a conscious decision to commit a heinous act against his/her fellow man. Premeditated (i.e., well-thought out, demonstrative of a degenerate mind) murder and extreme assault on others are about the only examples I can think of where capital punishment is allowed. In those instances, the person's case is vetted over 20 years or so to ensure there is absolutely no doubt in hundreds of people's minds that the person is guilty. This is much different than abortion where the child did nothing to deserve death.Pro-war in Iraq: I am not pro-war, however I am pro-defending our nation's security. I believe that is about the only specific function of federal government that enumerated in the Constitution.Pro-gun: Absolutely am. Why is having the ability to defend myself and my family from harm wrong? All of these are red herrings and not congruent to the issue of abortion.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

sfjayhawk (Anonymous) says…"Funny how the pro-life people are only pro-life on this (abortion) issue. I would bet that most of the pro life crowd on this forum are also pro-capitol punishment, pro war on Iraq and pro-gun. I just dont see how someone can balance those viewpoints."For the record. I am not pro-capital punishmentI am not pro-war

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Duplenty: "The fact of the matter is this: slavery is legal. If you're against slavery, don't buy a slave. Outside of that, it's really none of your business" (Circa 1961).Interesting how activism can right wrongs in society, isn't it?

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

duplenty...before I sign off to get to workYou have some cognitive dissonance going on as well with your thinking that just because something is legal, it is right and should be a fundamental right. The baby has a right to live regardless of the messy life situation it finds itself in.

notsobright 6 years, 4 months ago

And add to that soiological studies that show 85% of women have abortions because the "man" in their life wants them to- NOT because they really want to. So once again, we have two victims- the death of a child and the oppression of women and life-long emotional turmoil/pain caused by this horrific practice. Welcome to Nazi Germany. . .Also do not forget the FACT that Margaret Sanger- early founder of PP- believed in Eugenics. . . the control and elimination of what the power brokers think are "unwanted" pregnancies- its called genocide. Why do you think there are so many PP clinics in the inner cities? Wake-up America. . .

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

Duplenty wrote:"And to submit that only the guilty face the death penalty is naive in the extreme."I missed that the first time around. Where did I say that? I said that a person on death row has his/her case vetted over 20 years where hundreds of people agree (their opinion based on an exhaustive review of the facts) that beyond the shadow of a doubt the person is guilty. I never said that only the guilty face the death penalty.I was talking process here, Duplenty...Please keep up.

mom_of_three 6 years, 4 months ago

I think several of us replied that we may not be able to have an abortion ourselves, but couldn't take someone else's right away. The LTE can make any assumptions he wants about those who think differently, but its my right to do so. There are probably a lot of things that he and others believe in that I do not agree with, but that's his right, too.

Trobs 6 years, 4 months ago

Nothing disgusts me more then abortions of convenience. You didn't expect a child so now it should suffer? It is disgusting.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Mom_of_three: You illustrate the problem perfectly. You believe it's a right and, therefore, should never be taken away. Throughout our nation's history there have been perceived "rights" which were absolutely abhorrent. I've referenced slavery a few times which I understand is a completely different subject; however, it illustrates the point that at one time people in the South believed it was a "right" to own human beings. In retrospect, I doubt any of us would disagree with the abolition of slavery but in 1861, many believed as you do about that which is wrong.Stop thinking selfishly about yourself or the woman (I don't mean that to sound inflammatory) and start thinking about the issue in a broader sense.No one is responding to my points about what I actually witnessed at KU Med in grossly premature children. Let me reiterate: They felt pain. Very clearly, very appropriately. How is it that anyone can disregard this scientific proof and still justify it in their minds that "our rights" trump the painful killing of a child in the uterus?The pro-abortion crowd is doing exactly what you claim religious folks do: stick your head in the sand, cover your ears and say, "la, la, la, la" when facts about the brutality of abortion are presented.

CNA_Resident 6 years, 4 months ago

First of all, Scott -There is a societal/legal/moral difference between existing contributing members of a society (women) and the developing fetus carried in only one gender (despite a recent story of some guy having a baby).Women, Scott, have a greater, higher, established right, both inherent and expressed (voters), in defined societal rights than a fetus - which is parasitic, and non-contributing to said society. So while you rant about how many fetuses have been killed by those women who exercised their rights, please compare that to, say - how many members of society are killed ~across the board~ each day/week/month and year in this society (let's just stick to North America, since abortion is also legal in Canada and Mexico), okay?Oh, and where's your rant on this society's recognition and treatment of existing, independently functioning children (non-voting members of society)?And here's another idea - for every woman who becomes pregnant, the man who ~got her that way~ needs to be held financially and lawfully responsible ... a simple DNA test should suffice to determine who that man is ... and must be able to provide for the offspring he sired until their majority as a contributing (voting) member of society.And if the woman chooses to have an abortion, not only she, but the impregnator must be sterilized (neutered or spayed) so that ~everyone~ (not just the woman) thinks twice before having unprotected sex.And for those legal types, if - despite whatever preventatives were used during sex to avoid pregnancy were used - the woman becomes pregnant, the manufacturer, and the retailer, distributor and the state (for charging taxes) must be held legally and financially responsible for all costs associated with either an abortion, or the pregnancy, birth and child-raising costs until said child reaches her/his majority.Okay? Are you happy now?? Or is this about something other than your outrage about abortions?

Leslie Swearingen 6 years, 4 months ago

My child was a baby from the moment of conception. I did not have a monster growing in my womb who transformed into a human upon birth. There are always going to be those who are incontinent sexually and there is not a thing that can be done about it. What if Christians stood up for their beliefs the way that Muslims do? This is a terrible world for the young. Meerkats take better care of their young than humans do. This is just my opinion, the way I live. We are all free people under the constitution so you can think and live anyway you want to, chief. As can I.

geniusmannumber1 6 years, 4 months ago

I find this letter to be repugnant. Learn what a blog is, or don't use the word. People like this should be rounded up.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

Duplenty wrote:"And comparing slavery to abortion is, again, a cognitive dissonance. Control of your own body ≠ owning a human being."You're absolutely right. That was not my point -- again, you're not keeping up. My point was that there once was a huge number of Americans who believed something that was dastardly was their right. They were wrong. Just because abortion is currently a right does not make it right.Duplenty wrote:"As for “keeping up”, you have never once addressed half of the equation - the mother - and her inalienable right to self-determination and control of her body. That's really the issue here, and no one - no one - can make those choices for anyone else."The baby is in her body but not of her body. You have a false understanding of the delineation of personhood. Just because the baby is inside does not make it the property of the mother. She is simply the custodian of the child, not a cancerous tumor.

jaywalker 6 years, 4 months ago

"And add to that soiological studies that show 85% of women have abortions because the “man” in their life wants them to- NOT because they really want to"That's utter BS. Talk about statistics being formed to fit any argument. That's garbage, with a faux french pronunciation. And therefore spare me with the 'two victims' diatribe, that too is toro droppings. There are exceptions, but there's no way that's the 'rule'. I've known a handful of women that have had abortions and not one of them was 'forced' by a man. Societal pressures, religious issues, stigma association - but not 'cuz a man coerced them.

meggers 6 years, 4 months ago

Jason2007,There is no pro-abortion crowd. Many of us have given the matter considerable thought and believe firmly that by not allowing women the right to make decisions pertaining to their own bodies, those that seek to impose their will only serve to subjugate women and treat us as little more than baby-making vessels. The case that sickened me the most was in Florida. A woman with severe mental retardation was raped at a care facility. A legal guardian was requested for her, as the nature of her physical disabilities (cerebral palsy and seizure disorder, I believe) made it questionable whether or not she would survive childbirth. Not to mention, she had the cognitive abilities of a toddler. Anyway, the governor (Jeb) intervened and contested the guardianship until a guardian could be named for the fetus, thereby delaying termination of the pregnancy. The courts eventually rejected his request and finally a guardian was appointed. At that point, it was late in the pregnancy and termination would have been as dangerous as childbirth. So... long story short, a woman with the IQ of a two year-old was raped, and then forced to bear the child, at great risk to her health, because the product of the rape was somehow deemed more important than the victim's health or emotional state. THAT is despicable and inhumane.If the ban abortion crowd truly wants to reduce abortions, perhaps they might consider pushing to mandate that insurance companies cover birth control, work to make Plan B available, and encouraging comprehensive (not abstinence-only) sex education to be taught to adolescents. It has always amazed me that so many anti-abortion folks also seem to have a problem with the very thing that has been proven effective in preventing pregnancy- birth control.

jaywalker 6 years, 4 months ago

"The baby is in her body but not of her body. You have a false understanding of the delineation of personhood"You have to be kidding?!! Not of her body? Re-he-he-eally?! I imagine the 'delineation of personhood' might not be defined by an unborn, gestating infant wholly dependent on the woman to eat and drink, sharing bodily fluids and functions, attached through tissues and unable to breath.

AjiDeGallina 6 years, 4 months ago

In Numbers 5, Priests are instructed to perform abortions on adulterous women.Abortion is mentioned 10 times in the Bible, but never listed as a sin.God said a body has a soul when he breathes life into his nostrils, a fetus does not breath through its nostrils until it is born.The Laws of the US are not Biblican anyway.Keep abortion safe and legal, do not FORCE woment to breed against their will.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

Jaywalker wrote:"You have to be kidding?!! Not of her body? Re-he-he-eally?! I imagine the 'delineation of personhood' might not be defined by an unborn, gestating infant wholly dependent on the woman to eat and drink, sharing bodily fluids and functions, attached through tissues and unable to breath."Actually, yes, Re-he-he-eally! A person wholly dependent on a machine to provide breath (ventilator) or to eat/drink (IVs and NG pumps) are not called a part of the machines. That person is "on" the machines not "of" the machines. That's my point with the baby. It's "in" the mother but not "of" the mother. It's called ontology. Read up on it. An understanding of that branch of metaphysics will get you caught up.Once again, you guys are really letting me down today. I'm having to slow down in my sprint to let you catch up. Where's LogicSound04 when I need him?

MyName 6 years, 4 months ago

The problem with criminalizing abortion is pretty simple. Millions of American women choose to have this procedure. The people who want to criminalize it try to equate it with "murder", but they have no explanation for how we've suddenly become a nation with a large percentage of "murderers". If abortion is 100% immoral, then why did all of these "terrible people" suddenly just pop out of the woodwork. I mean, unless you're the unibomber or something, you've probably met at least one of these women. Is there something that I'm missing where they take off their rubber mask and they become supernazis or something when they go home?You can't separate the supposed crime from the alleged criminal. Either these are ordinary women making a tough decision, or they're all monsters in disguise. And I've not heard a single argument from the right about where all these "monsters" came from or how making something illegal is going to "cure" them.

1029 6 years, 4 months ago

Every rational, intelligent individual needs to do all he/she can to reduce Christianity's influence in our society. That is why there could never be enough brilliant letters like this one. Keep writing letters, simpletons. You definitely aren't furthering your primary goal of imposing your religion on others. Rational individuals read worthless drivel like this letter and it only solidifies the realization that Christianity is a primitive concept that helped keep simple, confused people docile and obedient during the critical development of society.It's 2008. Christianity should be something for only the elderly and the weakest, most feeble individuals. I used to say to each their own--believing that people weren't gathering every Sunday so much to worship their god, but that they gathered more to celebrate community. I tried to respect individuals, knowing that belief in god was essentially for them to avoid confusion and depression. In recent years, I have come to be more critical of christianity because of letters like this. Intelligent christians--though they are outnumbered by their rural, ignorant, undereducated brothers and sisters--need to take a step back and recognize that the teachings of their religion are producing viewpoints such as Scott's. Think about it--why was this letter written? No intelligent human being is going to be swayed by the overly simplistic "abortion is murder" rational and they aren't going to fall for the tired attempts to make abortions sound so gross that they must be outlawed. Those are overly simple arguments, but the simple people who make them are by nature incapable of recognizing them as such. Pro-choicers recognize that the abortion "debate" is more complex than the average "pro-life" religious simpleton could ever understand. It has far-reaching consequences across society and is more than "protecting poor, innocent, magical gifts from god". Pro-choicers aren't going to all of a sudden say, "wait a minute, maybe women shouldn't be allowed to have a say on what happens to their bodies and to their lives". People like Scott write letters like this because it is a game to them--pro-life versus pro-choice. Writing the letter gives his life more meaning, makes him feel like he made a contribution to his team. Pro-lifers don't care about society, they don't care about people within it. They just crave the comfort of thinking they are right. They want to impose their views on "others". Get rid of christianity and you significantly undermine the "one versus 'the other'" mentality, hopefully subsequently reducing the sexism, racism, and other bigotry that is a product of christianity-related thought processes. Amen.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Duplenty: Ok, I'm done playing the shell game with you. First you raised the "legality" and that it was none of my business; I parried and you wish to obfuscate now.Next I raised an ontological point about a separate living organism within the body and the distinction in essence of being between the two; you wish to obfuscate by comparing a distinct genetic being to tissue/organs that are genetically identical to the host.Your point about me not having jurisdiction to tell a woman she must have a baby is irrelevant. I'm interested in the child. To me there is a lesser of two "evils" here: 1) infringe on a woman's "right" or, 2) allow a baby to live. It's not a hard decision.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Logicsound04: That's too bad. I've been looking forward to it -- you're one of the few who challenge me in the debates.C'mon, it's Christmas time...

jaywalker 6 years, 4 months ago

"That person is “on” the machines not “of” the machines"Sorry, jason. Not the same thing. A mother is not a machine, it's called common sense. Read up on it. An understanding of the difference between a human attached biologically to their host and a human attached to a machine will get you caught up.

gr 6 years, 4 months ago

"Scott, a fetus is not a human being."And, what do you suppose it is?

supertrampofkansas 6 years, 4 months ago

Hmmm.If I understand Jason correctly he is saying that the mother is a machine?That is what your analogy says.Fetus = to the person attached to the machinesMother = machine.Nice Jason.

Logan5 6 years, 4 months ago

The world population is now 6.7 Billion. Everyone over age 30 should Renew on Carousel.

WhiteDog 6 years, 4 months ago

Once again, can someone please tell me how we as a society are supposed to be able to provide for 1.3 million unwanted children per year? No one cares what happens to the mother and child after the baby is born. Just so long as it's born, right?Imagine the load on our public assistance programs for all of those children whose parents need help with the basic costs of food, clothing, shelter and medical assistance. How are WE going to fund food-stamp programs so that the children don't go hungry?How much are WE going to pay when those children get their only medical treatment by going to the emergency room?How are WE going to find foster care or adoptive families for the abandoned children?How are WE going to fund daycare for those mothers since low-wage jobs don't pay enough to cover the cost of full-time infant care?When those who claim to oppose women having the choice to abort unwanted pregnancies can solve those kinds of issues, then they can truly say they're against abortion. Until then, they're only against women.Solve the social issues, and the abortion rate goes down on its own.So, all you anti-choicers... can you answer "yes" to any of these questions?Are you wiling to pay exponentially higher taxes to fund the social programs to aid the unwanted 1.3 milion children per year?Are you wiling to pay double for your medical care in order to make sure those 1.3 million children per year have proper pre- and post-natal medical care?Are you wiling to open your home to foster or adopt one of the 1.3 million unwanted children per year? And could you talk 1,299,999 other anti-choice families into doing so?

verity 6 years, 4 months ago

Letters like this just make me more convinced to fight for the right to chose.

AjiDeGallina 6 years, 4 months ago

If the Right Wing Extremist really cared, they would demand child-care, health care, pre-natal care, domestic violence funding, education and support programs for abandoned mothers, and a host of other programs that actually lower the number of abortions that are performed.It, however, is not a love of a baby, it is not the love of a fetus, it is the love of control.There is no Biblical argument against Abortion, it is mentioned 10 times in the Bible and NEVER presented as a sin. In Numbers, preists are instructed to perform abortions on cheating women.It is about control of Women and come rapture, the fake Christians will suffer the slings and arrows of hell for all eternity for bearing false witness in his loving name.They are not Christians.Further, this is not a Christian country, it is a secular country and our laws are based as such.Anything else is treasonous to the Constiuttion.Hence, the Christian Supremecists (not be confused with real Christians) are triators to God and to America, they are the Taliban, pure and simple.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

Logicsound04 wrote:"That won't sway a warring-on-christmas secular progressive like myself…;-)"Great idea. How about if we hijack the thread and start a discussion on "The War on Christmas"? Would that get you plugged in?

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

Supertrampofkansas wrote:"If I understand Jason correctly he is saying that the mother is a machine?That is what your analogy says.Fetus = to the person attached to the machinesMother = machine.Nice Jason."Actually, you don't understand my analogy. Please read an entire thread before commenting on one post. I am sensitive that it is difficult for Oprah-ized touchy feely types to think deeply, so I'm trying my best to bring you all along to a deeper level of understanding.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@duplenty: I brought ontology in because people were saying the fetus was a part of the woman's body. That begs an ontological discussion of whether or not that is true.I'm still waiting for anyone, absolutely anyone, to refute my point on what I witnessed during my time at KU Med and how they can defend abortion in light of the facts that I raised.That's the crux of the issue not some nebulous distinction of rights which are decided by a single governing body (the Supreme Court) comprised of 9 people. I'm talking about realities and everyone else wants to talk about opinions.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Logicsound04: I thought you weren't biting? :)

WhiteDog 6 years, 4 months ago

75x55 (Anonymous) says…“Once again, can someone please tell me how we as a society are supposed to be able to provide for 1.3 million unwanted children per year?”That question only begs another.*******No, it begs an answer. One which you conveniently did not provide.

supertrampofkansas 6 years, 4 months ago

Sorry Jason,When you use a poor analogy, I'm going to tell you, you are using a poor analogy. Human beings are not machines. Your fanatic focus on the fetus being a human being is blinding you to the fact that there is an actual human being here and it isn't the fetus. Others such as Duplenty have already pointed out to you that you have no regards for the rights of the mother. Your poor analogy actually demonstrates this point very well. You are trying to create a black and white world out of a very gray area especially dealing with the rights of women. Sorry I must go but will return later.

rachaelisacancer 6 years, 4 months ago

Jason - You want pro-choice people to consider your accounts of pain that these fetuses endure, right?Try having your entire body swell for 9 months and then have an 8lb human rip and tear through your vag. Life is painful. Everyone's got to deal with it some time. In the United States, nearly nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy and 56% occur in the first eight weeks.You propose fetuses "feel" the pain of ripping flesh and injected saline. Most abortions, as noted above, occur before a heartbeat even occurs. Women who have abortions aren't cutting the throats of innocent children - they're cutting the crap spewed by people like you and living their lives well as they should. You enjoy wasting your breath on the matter of choice - a matter which you conveniently will never have to face firsthand. And for the rest of us, life (real, tangible, here and now LIFE) goes on.

tvc 6 years, 4 months ago

Jason, I will defend it. I used to say I am pro-choice, but I would never have an abortion. After having miscarried a blob of tissue that I really wanted to be a baby, I would have an abortion within the first few weeks of pregnancy if that was what I decided. You have held a premature baby. Well, I have held an embryo, and it did not cry probably because it did not have a head, body, legs or anything that resembled a human being. A pumpkin seed is not a pumpkin. It might become one, but it is not…no matter how much you wish it to be one.

Cait McKnelly 6 years, 4 months ago

"Why is our culture not pro life? Because pro-life ends at birth, for most conservatives."This is one of the wisest statements I have read today."I've known a handful of women that have had abortions and not one of them was 'forced' by a man. Societal pressures, religious issues, stigma association - but not 'cuz a man coerced them."Well, unless that man was hanging on a cross.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

Duplenty wrote:"I don't believe that your experience at KU Med (work for which I applaud you) can be refuted. “Experience” never can be refuted. Similarly, you'll never be able to “refute” the experience of a woman who felt she needed an abortion."We've arrived at an en passe. I'm talking about my observations (not experience which is an impression of reality) of babies experiencing pain in the 2nd trimester of development. You're talking about a woman's feelings driven by emotions. I am sympathetic to a woman who feels that her world is crumbling as a result of an unplanned pregnancy but killing the fetus is as barbaric of a solution as you can get to any problem.I'm not proposing to make the decision to have/not have an abortion for anyone else but the current legislative climate in regards to abortion essentially turns on the runway lights and makes it way too easy for abortion to be the "preferred" solution to this problem. My passion is to see suffering on all levels in society decrease (and if you read my comment history, I've presented ways I've put my money where my mouth is).

WhiteDog 6 years, 4 months ago

jason2007 (Anonymous) says…I'm still waiting for anyone, absolutely anyone, to refute my point on what I witnessed during my time at KU Med and how they can defend abortion in light of the facts that I raised.******I believe the stats say that fewer than 10% of all abortions occur in the second trimester of pregnancy, i.e. weeks 13-27. And that number includes those pregnancies that are aborted for serious genetic abnormalities. So the number of women choosing to abort even remotely viable pregnancies without a really damn good reason is extremely small. And I can guarantee you that no one was heroically trying to save the life of a miscarried 13-week-old fetus in your NICU.

rachaelisacancer 6 years, 4 months ago

Jason2007 says:"woman's feelings driven by emotions"Well, everyone, there's your big, fat, red flag. Seems Jason has a problem with women all together now, doesn't it? Good thing we all recognize that Jason's comments are in no way, shape or form reflective of himself being "driven by emotions." Just like absolutelyridiculous, Jason, you're always good for a laugh.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

rachelisacancer wrote:"And for the rest of us, life (real, tangible, here and now LIFE) goes on."Well, I hope you enjoy life. Good thing your mom didn't decide to abort you. The millions of others never had a chance at that luxury.Rachel also wrote:"Women who have abortions aren't cutting the throats of innocent children - they're cutting the crap spewed by people like you and living their lives well as they should."Maybe not cutting the throats of a bubbly five-year old with ribbons in her hair but they are cutting the life of what would become a bubbly five-year old with ribbons in her hair.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

Rachelisacancer wrote:"Well, everyone, there's your big, fat, red flag. Seems Jason has a problem with women all together now, doesn't it?"Give me a break, Rachel. A woman who is facing a crisis pregnancy has a welling of emotion that clouds the decision-making process. Any healthcare professional who deals with these situations will tell you that. A man who is in a crisis situation has emotion clouding his decision-making process as well -- it's human. Does that mean I hate the entire human race?Actually, your jumping to conclusions that fit your worldview of anyone who doesn't agree with you is always worth the laugh.

WhiteDog 6 years, 4 months ago

No 75x55, I know exactly what your point it. You see, I know the definition of the term "strawman argument". You may want to google it.

rachaelisacancer 6 years, 4 months ago

I guess if mother had chosen an abortion, I could be in heaven right now having the angels braid my hair, enjoying eternal sunshine and exquisite eternal happiness instead of reading through your nonsense. Or I guess if your mother had an abortion we could all be free of your nonsense. Ah, choices. And still, as so many have pointed out before - you care more about "what would become a bubbly five-year old with ribbons in her hair" than the bubbly adult women with ribbons in their hair who are here, now, real, living, human beings. Fancy that. Pardon me, but your misogyny is showing.

tvc 6 years, 4 months ago

Really? Well, I didn’t have an abortion, so where is my "bubbly five-year old with ribbons in her hair"?

rachaelisacancer 6 years, 4 months ago

Jason2007 says:"A woman who is facing a crisis pregnancy has a welling of emotion that clouds the decision-making process."So by all means, let's make the decisions for her. You've been here all day trying to use emotion to further your anti-woman agenda, thinking to yourself, "maybe if I tell everyone how horrible and painful abortion is for the fetus I can convince the world to think like me." I'm not calling you laughable because we have different worldviews. I'm calling you laughable because your arguments (which you base your opinions on) are irrelevant.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Duplenty: I have no idea what you're asking in your pertinent questions list. They're not questions they're fragment sentences followed by a question mark -- expect for the few which are ludicrous.I only engage questions where the commenter is posing serious points.@Rachel: In heaven? Seriously? I know you don't believe that. There's nothing but the black cold, right?Sorry Rachel but your points are being clouded by your emotion. Any men want to engage me in discussion?

OhHai 6 years, 4 months ago

Wow. Another inflammatory “letter” on the LJW site. Aren’t you guys tired of being baited by the staff with this subject? It’s always the most discussed and it ensures that everyone will hang out and come back to type furiously at one another. Pro Choice! Anti-Choice! We hate each other! You don’t understand my views! You are a Godless person! You’re an ignorant nincompoop! Arrrggggggghhhhh! There, that about sums up 99 posts thus far. How about this: I can’t change your mind. You can’t change mine. Hang out with only those people that you agree with so you don’t have a conniption fit when you hear an opposing view.

rachaelisacancer 6 years, 4 months ago

Jason2007 says (while repeatedly misspelling the name printed right in front of him):"Sorry Rachel but your points are being clouded by your emotion. Any men want to engage me in discussion?"Good. I'm glad we've cleared that up. No one needs to pay attention to any of the crap you've bothered to spew today, as your final and standing sentiment (the one not-so-cleverly hidden in your irrelevant arguments) is that you hate women and therefore their opinions, not to mention their lives, are irrelevant to you unless you can dictate what's to happen to both. By all means, let's get the men in here to talk about what women should do with their lives. Pathetic. Truly and utterly pathetic.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

Duplenty wrote:"Um, you're not too bright, are you Jason?"That's LogicSound's line. I believe he has it copyrighted. :)Answers to your finely written questions:"Given that, what do you propose a woman should do in the case of an ectopic pregnancies, which are never viable?"Ectopic pregnancies are completely different. Never viable, not way it will ever work -- D&C.-------------------------"What about frozen embryos? Do they deserve “personhood” status?"This is a whole other aspect of the "baby trade" that I abhor. They're not commodities, they're a human being -- so there's your answer.--------------------------"If abortion is outlawed, who should be charged (the woman, the doctor, or both) and with what?"Same type of approach to enforcing legislation as with any other. A good example is illegal drugs. The buyer is culpable for the provider is more culpable. The woman seeking the abortion should be charged but the doctor willfully violating his Hippocratic oath and the law should be held to a higher standard.---------------------------"What should the penalty for abortion be?"No idea. I'm not a Congressman. Last time I checked the Constitution, they wrote law, not the citizens.---------------------------"What should happen to a woman who smokes, drinks coffee or goes skiing while pregnant?"Has nothing to do with the issue we're discussing.---------------------------"And finally - let's say you're on a sinking ship, and on this ship is a three year old and a freezer full of frozen embryos. You can only save one. Who's it going to be?"And I'm being called the one who operates in black and white?! I'd grab the closest man (because woman would be emotionally unstable due to the sinking ship) and ask them to help me.Seriously, I'm just trying to add some humor to the discussion with the whole man/woman thing since Rachel is convinced I'm a chauvinist -- and the question really is ridiculous.The root of this discussion, however, is of the up most seriousness to me personally.

Gabe Hoffman 6 years, 4 months ago

Hey, let's argue about it on a forum that has no substantial meaning. You don't sway people. People do what they will. And it is someone's right to do as they please. Call it murder, but so is everytime you waste a egg through natural means, or otherwise. Same with men who...eh hem...take matters into thir own hands.So, good luck swaying Anonymous internet user!

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@00jester: Um, do you understand that the logic of your point ("you're never going to sway anyone's opinion so stop trying!") is contradictory to the fact that you posted to sway our opinion?

bondmen 6 years, 4 months ago

The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Successhttp://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.870/article_detail.aspWhy Genuine Christianity Improves The Worldhttp://www.thebible1.net/biblicaltheism/0402christianityimproves.htmWould China Benefit from Christianity?http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=377How Christianity Changed the World by Dr. Alvin J. Schmidt:"In this well-documented volume of over 400 pages, Schmidt marshals the evidence for the transforming power of the Christian faith. He shows how Jesus has the power to transform men, who in turn are able to transform society. And on every level, that is exactly what has happened. Several specific examples can be mentioned.In spite the claims of some today that Christianity oppresses women, the historical record shows just the opposite. Women were oppressed in almost every culture prior to the coming of Christianity. By elevating sexual morality, and by conferring upon women a much higher status, the Christian religion revolutionised the place and prestige of women.The way Jesus treated women was in stark contrast to the surrounding culture. In Roman law a man's wife and children were little more than slaves, often treated like animals. Women had no property rights and faced severe social restrictions. Jesus of course changed all that. The way he treated the Samaritan woman was one remarkable example. And this was not lost on the early disciples. We know from the New Testament documents that many women exercised various leadership roles in the early church. Indeed, during this period Christian women actually outnumbered Christian men.Admittedly there were some anomalies later in the church's history, when chauvinistic and anti-feminine views were allowed to re-enter parts of the church. But such aberrations must not detract from the truly revolutionary elevation of the status of women achieved by Christianity.Consider also the issue of health care. Prior to Christianity, the Greeks and Romans had little or no interest in the poor, the sick and the dying. But the early Christians, following the example of their master, ministered to the needs of the whole person. During the first three centuries of the church they could only care for the sick where they found them, as believers were then a persecuted people. Once the persecutions subsided, however, the institutonalisation of health care began in earnest.For example, the first ecumenical council at Nicea in 325 directed bishops to establish hospices in every city that had a cathedral. The first hospital was built by St Basil in Caesarea in 369. By the Middle Ages hospitals covered all of Europe and even beyond. In fact, "Christian hospitals were the world's first voluntary charitable institutions"."continued...

bondmen 6 years, 4 months ago

"Care for the mentally ill was also a Christian initiative. Nursing also sprang from Christian concerns for the sick, and many Christians have given their lives to such tasks. One thinks of Florence Nightingale, for example, and the formation of the Red Cross.Education, while important in Greek and Roman culture, really took off institutionally under the influence of Christianity. The early Greeks and Romans had no public libraries or educational institutions - it was Christianity that established these. As discipleship was important for the first believers (and those to follow), early formal education arose from Christian catechetical schools. Unique to Christian education was the teaching of both sexes.Also a Christian distinctive, individuals from all social and ethnic groups were included. There was no bias based on ethnicity or class. And the concept of public education first came from the Protestant Reformers. Moreover, the rise of the modern university is largely the result of Christian educational endeavours.As another example of the Christian influence, consider the issue of work and economic life. The Greeks and Romans had a very low view of manual labour, and so it was mainly the slaves and lower classes that were forced to toil with their hands. The non-slave population lived chiefly for personal pleasure. In these early cultures slaves usually greatly outnumbered freemen.Thus there was no such thing as the dignity of labour in these cultures, and economic freedom was only for a select few. The early church changed all this. Jesus of course was a carpenter's son. Paul was a tentmaker. And the early admonition, "If a man will not work, he shall not eat" was taken seriously by the early believers. Thus work was seen as an honorable and God-given calling. Laziness and idleness were seen as sinful.The idea of labor as a calling, and the idea spoken by Jesus that the laborer is worthy of his wages, revolutionised the workplace. The dignity of labor, the value of hard work, and the sense of vocation, soon changed the surrounding society; the development of a middle class being one of the outcomes. The development of unions is another result. Indeed, the works of Weber and Tawney, among others, records the profound effect the Protestant Reformation has had on work and modern capitalism.Other impacts can be noted. The commandment against stealing of course redefined the concept of private property and property rights. And the protection of workers and workers' rights also flows directly from the biblical worldview. The early unionists were Christians, and concerns for social justice in the workplace and beyond derive from the Judeo-Christian tradition."continued...

bondmen 6 years, 4 months ago

"Other great achievements might be mentioned. The Western political experience, including genuine democracy at all levels of society, equality, human rights and various freedoms, all stem from the Christian religion, along with its Hebrew forebear. The rise of modern science has been directly linked with the biblical understanding of the world. The many great achievements in art, literature and music also deserve mention. For example, how much poorer would the world be without the Christian artistry of da Vinci, Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Bach, Handel, Brahms, Dante, Milton, Bunyan, and countless others?The bottom line, as Schmidt notes, is that if Jesus Christ had never been born, to speak of Western civilisation would be incomprehensible. Indeed, there may never have been such a civilisation. The freedoms and benefits we enjoy in many modern cultures are directly due to the influence of this one man. Schmidt deserves an enormous amount of gratitude for this sterling collection of information and inspiration. Christians have made many mistakes. But they have also achieved many great things, all because of the one whom they follow."

Roadkill_Rob 6 years, 4 months ago

Oh man, I was pro-choice until I read this LTE and the comments from all the self-righteous nut-jobs. Thanks guys for changing the world via message boards. I'm really envious that you know what it's like to walk in other people's shoes. It must be nice to know what's best for everyone.So now what do I do? Should I go and adopt some unwanted children like all the pro-lifers do? Oh wait, you guys don't actually do anything other than preach on message boards? Nevermind, then.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Roadkill_Rob: Ah, Rob you stepped in it this time. My wife and I are in the process of adopting a child. Care to wipe the muck off your face?

WhiteDog 6 years, 4 months ago

Jason, I very earnestly responded to your question over an hour ago. Are you going to reply, or should I just log off and finish my Christmas cards? My kids at school wouldn't want their murderer... er....I mean.... mom to be late to pick them up, you know.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@WhiteDog: You didn't ask a question and statistics are like water...they're everywhere. Didn't know you were waiting for me...I don't take "90% of monkeys prefer Dole bananas while 40% of gorillas prefer Chiquita" kind of statistics serious unless they're sourced.Since you did respond earnestly, I'll reply in kind:The fact is that abortions do happen in the 2nd trimester when a fetus is viable (the survival rates are low, but it does happen). That was my original point with the NICU example.There are studies which show that a fetus does appropriately respond to external stimuli and pain even in the 1st trimester. The results are inconclusive but the neural and muscular responses do suggest that the fetus would feel the pain of abortion. Since we do not have conclusive evidence whether or not this is true, wouldn't logic indicate we would want to error on the side of life vs. repeatedly telling ourselves that the baby doesn't feel anything and that all is well with moving forward in our selfishness?

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

75x55 wrote:"Looking forward to going home and hugging my kids and asking how their day went."You said it. Thank God my three children weren't given to Rachel who may have had dismembered them in the mad dash to fulfill her feminist ambition of complete freedom of choice!

Polly_Gomer 6 years, 4 months ago

jason2007 (Anonymous) says…"@Roadkill_Rob: Ah, Rob you stepped in it this time. My wife and I are in the process of adopting a child. Care to wipe the muck off your face?"You are the exception, Rob is mostly correct, therefore has no "muck" do deal with. Besides it's not all about you, Jason. Was Rob talking to you specifically, Jason? Do you think the TV talks directly to you?Do you think the sun rises and sets on you?

rachaelisacancer 6 years, 4 months ago

Yep, thank gawd, Jason. I'm a one-woman baby-killing machine... watch out! Polly - Jason is the sun. It's his universe and we're just living in it. We should get out and make more room for all those babies he's collecting.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Polly: Yes, yes, and yes.Seriously, though...you know as well as I do that Rob was throwing dirt at all of us who were defending the pro-life position. I can only speak for myself, Polly, so it probably does come across as "it's all about me". Rob was talking to the "right wing nutjobs", which I count myself in, so I responded as a member of said right wing nutjob coalition.Actually, he does have muck to wipe off.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

Rachel wrote:"Yep, thank gawd, Jason. I'm a one-woman baby-killing machine… watch out!Polly - Jason is the sun. It's his universe and we're just living in it. We should get out and make more room for all those babies he's collecting."I actually laughed out loud at that one...At least you're finally playing along.

CNA_Resident 6 years, 4 months ago

Wow, Bondmen ... now that you've exhausted your christianity-is-great rote-rant, I thought I would point out the historical fact that Christianity has done far more damage to civilization (the Webster's New Age spelling, ya Brit) than it has ever done to benefit it.And, hate to break the news to ya, but eastern, middle-eastern, African and those so-called European pagans had the principles, philosophy and practice you ascribe to christianity centuries before that particular religious interpretation even existed.Try opening up something other than what you're copying from, like anything from Joseph Campbell, for instance; or a timeline of history, or A world history of religions before you open up another christianity-is-great rote-rant on us all.

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

124. Blah. Blah, blah. Blah, blah, blah, blah. Nothing new being said here. Pro-choice verbally attaching the Pro-life crowd. Typical.

rachaelisacancer 6 years, 4 months ago

Yeah seriously, people. Quit attaching the pro-life crowd, verbally, in print, no less. It's soooo typical. All these evil pro-choice people trying to force everyone else to get abortions are so uncool.

notsobright 6 years, 4 months ago

Such a brilliant argument that one has to result in name calling. . . reminds me of the bully on the playground with a low IQ.Also interesting how people seek to impose their view on the rest of us that no one should be imposing their view on others. . . ???? Rational?This is so simple: A baby is a human being. It is wrong to kill an innocent human being. Three inches inside the womb or outside the womb- its still a child, its still murder.A law does not make something right and moral. Good laws should reflect morality.

Jason Bailey 6 years, 4 months ago

@Notsobright: I believe I understand now how a logical person would feel in a debate with Josef Mengele when discussing his experiments on Gypsies and other "worthless" lifeforms.

BrianR 6 years, 4 months ago

The laws resulting from Roe v. Wade did not nessarily mean that abortions could be performed, they’ve always been performed, dating from ancient Greece, probably well before. What Roe said was that ending a pregnancy could be carried out by medical personnel, in a medical setting.Then there is the part about it giving women the full rights of first-class citizens. Another plus.Outlawing abortion will create a criminal underground of providers. Other than that, overturning Roe will change nothing. Outlawing abortion won’t change the number of women seeking abortion so, for the most part, the number of abortions that occur won’t change significantly.And as always, people with money will be able to do as they please, when they please. More poor women will die, that is what the pro-life movement is offering.

Confrontation 6 years, 4 months ago

Scott just loves to control every woman and her uterus. Typical male attitude.

WhiteDog 6 years, 4 months ago

jason2007 (Anonymous) says…There are studies which show that a fetus does appropriately respond to external stimuli and pain even in the 1st trimester. The results are inconclusive but the neural and muscular responses do suggest that the fetus would feel the pain of abortion. Since we do not have conclusive evidence whether or not this is true, wouldn't logic indicate we would want to error on the side of life vs. repeatedly telling ourselves that the baby doesn't feel anything and that all is well with moving forward in our selfishness?*******I'm pretty sure there are studies which show that fairly conclusively that unwanted children raised in abject poverty are able to feel pain, too.Wouldn't logic indicate that we should err on the side of not causing years of potential suffering to a child who has a complete nervous system?

Roadkill_Rob 6 years, 4 months ago

Jason,The fact is that these kind of LTEs are pointless and lazy and very few pro-lifers adopt children. Most people like you sit around and judge other people and have no idea what it's like to be in their position. Do us a favor, Jason, and stop talking like you're an expert on the issue b/c you have never been in a tough situation like a lot of women have.

notsobright 6 years, 4 months ago

Most do not know the difficult position ANY of us have been in. . . Makes no difference. Of course these are difficult issues- but it does not make it better to kill one's own child.Particularly horrific is the child is the most innocent among us and the emotional/physical devestation to the mother years down the road are awful. Some of us DO know what we are talking about. And "Yes", I do hope we can impose this morality on the society, Just as others imposed immoraity on innocent children and their mothers. I am sure glad somone imposed their morality on slavery, Nazi Germany, and now an attempt for Darfur.

WhiteDog 6 years, 4 months ago

I'd still like for someone to tell me about the emotional devastation from which I'm supposed to be suffering.I had an abortion at 19 when I was in college. I was living in the dorm, had a 10-hour-per-week, minimum wage ($2.85 at the time) job, and had extremely conservative parents who would have disowned me -- if not because I was pregnant, but as soon as they saw the mixed race child who would have resulted.So, I would have been uneducated, unemployed, uninsured and homeless if I had continued the pregnancy.Instead, I chose to wait until I was financially and emotionally ready to have children before actually having them. On the other hand, I definitely would have suffered emotional devastation had I not had the choice to terminate an unwanted pregnancy at 19. Nor would I have had the wonderful children I have today. So, the way I look at it, my abortion then allowed my children now to have life.Funny, I don't feel like Josef Mengele.

AjiDeGallina 6 years, 4 months ago

There is no Biblical argument against Abortion, it is mentioned 10 times in the Bible and NEVER presented as a sin. In Numbers, priests are instructed to perform abortions on cheating women.

Doug Fisher 6 years, 4 months ago

I find it somewhat hypocritical that some of these same pro-lifers are the ones who bomb abortion clinics and kill people. And you talk about protecting human life? Give me a break!

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

142. Blah. Blah, blah. Blah, blah, blah, blah.

Richard Heckler 6 years, 4 months ago

There are plenty of ways to prevent abortion:Birth ControlBirth control is a way for people to prevent pregnancy and to plan the timing of pregnancy. Birth control is also commonly called contraception. People have used birth control methods for thousands of years. Today, we have many safe and effective birth control methods available to us. All of us who need birth control want to find the method that is best for us. And each of us has different needs when choosing a method. If you are trying to choose a method of contraception, learning about the methods may help you make your decision. Use the list of birth control methods below to read about each method. * Abstinence * Birth Control Implant (Implanon) * Birth Control Patch (Ortho Evra) * Birth Control Pill * Birth Control Vaginal Ring (NuvaRing) * Birth Control Shot (Depo-Provera) * Birth Control Sponge (Today Sponge) * Breastfeeding * Cervical Cap (FemCap) * Condom * Diaphragm * Emergency Contraception (Morning After Pill) * Female Condom * Fertility Awareness * IUD * Outercourse * Spermicide * Sterilization for Women * Vasectomy * Withdrawal (Pull Out Method) Birth Control MethodsOnly you can decide what is best for you. And we are here to help. A staff member at your local Planned Parenthood health center can discuss all of your birth control options with you and help you get the birth control you need.

AjiDeGallina 6 years, 4 months ago

75, you confuse your ignorance and denial as a truth.Your blindness is the perfect example of how you and your kind fail God, fail America and fail your families name.It is a fact, abortion is mentioned 10 times in the Bible, it is a fact that it is never listed as a sin, it is a fact that God said a life does not have a soul until he breaths into his nostril, it is a fact that Priests performed herbal induced miscarriages..ie abortions on adulterous women, it is a fact that a fetus was not counted as a person in any measure of the Bible. You can pretend those facts do not exist, but it just shows that you are a cheap dirty liar who would not know the truth if it slapped you in the face.

skinnee11 6 years, 4 months ago

Mr. Burkhart,What exactly gives you the right to tell anyone what they can and cannot do to their own body? Abortion is not a crime. In fact, abortion is a great thing. Those 50M "babies" you speak of, (by the way they are fetuses, NOT human) how were you planning on paying for those? The woman chose what was in her best interest which is her inalienable right. Whether it be for medical or even selfish reasons, I applaud anyone that can make such a bold decision especially faced with the prospect of hearing ridiculous, misogynistic comments such as yours. You should be ashamed of yourself for forcing your will upon women!

rtwngr 6 years, 4 months ago

skinnee11, Mr. Burkhart was not telling a woman what to do with her own body he was telling a woman what she shouldn't do with someone else's body. A fetus IS a human and the American Medical Association says so. Let's take an extreme example:Let's say a woman carries a child to within two weeks of term. Then decides that she is having a nervous breakdown and cannot mentally endure the rigors of childbirth. An abortionist, like George Tiller, steps in and says that he has medical grounds under the law to terminate this pregnancy. The child's life is terminated and all is well. This is not considered murder under the law. It is her "inalienable right" as you say.Mother number two decides two weeks after birthing her child that she is having a nervous breakdown and cannot raise the child. She decides to throw it off of a bridge and end its life.What is the difference in the way the life ended for both of these babies with the exception of the time?Inalienable right indeed.

gr 6 years, 4 months ago

Aji, if abortion is mentioned so many times in the Bible, why have you only listed the confronted (and bogus?) one in Numbers?"it is a fact that God said a life does not have a soul until he breaths into his nostril,"That may or may not be true. But, you just said that it has a "life".From your view, it stands to reason that someone's kidneys did not breath and so can be "harvested" from bums on the street.Or how about the baby that was born and has yet to take a breath of life. Can the baby killer take it to the dumpster in the street and dunk it in a bucket of water? Not yet human, according to you.By the way, if a fetus is not a human being, what do you suppose it is?

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

148 Hey Merrill...you forgot to mention Natural Family Planning in your list.

AjiDeGallina 6 years, 4 months ago

It is a fact, abortion is mentioned 10 times in the Bible, it is a fact that it is never listed as a sin, it is a fact that God said a life does not have a soul until he breaths into his nostril, it is a fact that Priests performed herbal induced miscarriages..ie abortions on adulterous women, it is a fact that a fetus was not counted as a person in any measure of the Bible.Those facts have not changed 75, no matter how much you want to deny them. It just makes you a liar.

AjiDeGallina 6 years, 4 months ago

75, the only Bible you read is the bible of ignorance, you have nothing of value to offer anyone.

jonas_opines 6 years, 4 months ago

That response, to a request for information that you should have ready if you are willing to state it as a simple fact, will not help your credibility. At least throw us the book or the site you got the factoid from.

bondmen 6 years, 4 months ago

AjiDeGallina - the truth is not in you! You do the work of the one cast out of heaven because he is the father of lies. Try and supress him who is in you for a moment and open your mind to the meaning of Numbers 5:13-22 which you repeatedly misrepresent:Paul condemns "old wives' fables" (1 Tim. 4-7). But, Moses here commands the practice of a superstition that has no basis in science. The accused wife was found guilty after drinking bitter water only if her stomash swelled. But, both the innocent and guilty wives drank the same bitter water, thus showing that there was no chemical or biological basis for one swelling and the other not.The text does not say that the difference in the guilty woman's condition had a chemical or physical cause. In fact it indicates that the cause was spiritual and psychological. "Guilt" is not a physical cause. The reason the belly of a guilty woman might swell can be explained by what is known scientifically about psychosomatic (mind over matter) conditions. Many women have experienced "false pregnancies" where their stomachs and breasts enlarge without being pregnant. Some people have even experienced blindness from psychological causes. Experiments with placebo pills indicate that many people with terminal illnesses get the same relief from them as from morphine. So it is a scientific fact that the mind can have a great effect on bodily processes. Now given that the text says the woman was placed under an "oath" before God with the threat of a "curse" (v. 21) if she was actually "guilty," the bitter water would have worked like a psychosomatic lie detector. A woman who believed she would be cursed and knew she was guilty would be so affected. But those who knew they were innocent would not.Furthermore the text does not say anyone actually drank the water and experienced an enlarged stomach. It simply says "if" (cf. vv. 14, 28) she does, then this will reslut. No doubt just the belief that this would happen and that one would be found guilty would have convinced the woman who knew she was guilty not even to subject herself to the process. Also see: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/dec/10/abortion-truth/#c762013

terrapin2 6 years, 4 months ago

I haven't read the whole thread - no time, but I did want to point out that there is no one that is "pro-abortion". Because we believe that women should be able to choose what to do with THEIR lives and THEIR bodies does not mean we celebrate the decision to have an abortion. No "lefties" are trying to get pregnant just so they can have an abortion. I may not choose to have one but nothing gives me the right to tell anyone else what decision to make in the privacy of their doctor's office. One other issue is the fact that planned parenthood provides a lot of much needed education and services besides abortions. They would much rather see someone learn about their bodies and prevent an unwanted pregnancy/disease than perform an abortion. Take things like PP and sex education away and I guarantee you will see more abortions.

AjiDeGallina 6 years, 4 months ago

lol, bondman, you are a riot, and ignorant.I have read many interpretations of that part of the Bible and yours if far and away the biggest double speak ever...you said nothing...you are nothing.

gr 6 years, 4 months ago

"the bitter water would have worked like a psychosomatic lie detector."Maybe someone had better check Aji's belly.

supertrampofkansas 6 years, 4 months ago

"Slay both man and woman, infant and suckling." 1 Samuel 15:3"Dash their children, and rip up their women with child." 2 Kings 8:12"Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished." Isaiah 13:16"They shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children." Isaiah 13:18"Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children." Ezekiel 9:6"Their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up." Hosea 13:16"When men strive together and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according to as the woman's husband shall lay upon him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." Exodus 21: 22-25 After the priest has had the woman stand before the LORD, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, "If no other man has slept with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have defiled yourself by sleeping with a man other than your husband"- here the priest is to put the woman under this curse of the oath-"may the LORD cause your people to curse and denounce you when he causes your thigh to waste away and your abdomen to swell. May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells and your thigh wastes away." Then the woman is to say, "Amen. So be it." Numbers 5: 12 to 31Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you. Deuteromony 22: 21 "If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid." Deuteronomy 21:18-21

absolutelyridiculous 6 years, 4 months ago

Nice Old Testament scripture. Now, lets see your commentary on the context and meaning of it all. Just to quote scripture does NOT understanding nor rationale for murder make. Surely you must know the commandments as well...you shall not kill.Idiots. Try again.

supertrampofkansas 6 years, 4 months ago

"Surely you must know the commandments as well…you shall not kill." - absolutelyWell after reading this whole thread, I came to the conclusion that it makes no difference what I think or how I interpret these passages because everyone here seems to have their own ideas on this matter. I merely posted them because they seem to be the pertinent verses that noone wants to post. The commandment Thou shall not kill also seems to be subject to a matter of interpretation as well because of the word "kill". Some christians I know change that word to "murder" to distinguish between war-time situations or capital punishment or whatever situation that is deemed ok to kill another human being. Of course, this leads you right back to square one regarding abortions because again you have to define when life begins in order to define what it means to kill.

WHY 6 years, 4 months ago

Whats worse than 10 babies in a bucket. One baby in 10 buckets.

WHY 6 years, 4 months ago

I just think we need to conserve buckets.

WHY 6 years, 4 months ago

If Jesus doesn't like abortion, Jesus should do something about it.

Corey Williams 6 years, 4 months ago

WHY (Anonymous) says…"If Jesus doesn't like abortion, Jesus should do something about it."Exactly. God could clear up a lot of things if he would just get off his lazy butt and start working on an addition to the bible. Then there wouldn't be any problems with abortion, gay marriage, single mothers, or just about anything else that separates the American society.

supertrampofkansas 6 years, 4 months ago

75x55,So tell me how do you interpret "murder" or "homicide". Even if that is a literal translation, the interpretation of that term will vary from person to person depending on their perspective. I wonder how Iraqi citizens view US soldiers that have "killed" their children, spouses, and friends. Do you think they should be able to call the soldiers "murderers"? Do you really think it matters what the "proper translation" of a word is when the definition of that word "changes" depending on your point of view?

bondmen 6 years, 4 months ago

1 Samuel 15:2-3 - Why did God destroy the Amalekites?Problem: God is depicted in the Bible as a God of mercy and compassion, freely forgiving those who turn to Him (Ps. 94:18-19; Lam. 3:22; James 5:11; 2 Peter 3:9). By vivid contrast, this text informs us that God commanded the seemingly merciless slaughter of innoccent Amalekites - men, women and children. Why?Solution: The Amalekites were far from innocent. In fact, they were utterly depraved. What is more, they desired to destroy Israel (v. 2), God's chosen people, the channel of His redemptive plans for all humankind (Gen. 12: 1-3). The act of their total destruction was necessitated by the gravity of their sin. Otherwise, some hardcore remnant might rise to resume their hateful act toward God's people and plan.As to the question about the innocent children, several observations are relevant. First, we are all born in sin (Ps. 51:5) and deserve death (Rom, 5:12 ). Everyone will eventually be taken by God in death - it is only a matter of when (Heb. 9: 27). Second, God is sovereign over life and reserves the right to take it when He will (Deut. 32:39; Job 1:21). Third, all children who die before the age of accountability are saved. Hence, the act by which God took the children is far from merciless. There is much more but better to snack on small bites so one doesn't choke on the big ones.

supertrampofkansas 6 years, 4 months ago

I apologize for my last few posts. They aren't really the subject of this article so I will stop trying to hijack the thread. I am out of here. Have a good weekend all.The Tramp

livnlarry 6 years, 4 months ago

Mr. Burkhart grab a clue. I see your posts all the time in here with your pro-life style. I too am catholic and I am PRO CHOICE. I guess I wouldnt be catholic if his holiness knew that. (The pope is getting ready to wear his 5 million dollar gold hat at christmas eve services. He should donate all that money to funding education about safe sex and get into the current century.) Its not for anyone here on earth to decide what one decision someone makes. If there is a pearly gates where St.Peter is taking tickets at the gate then He can decide what to do with that woman who made that decision. Its not our decision here and its not your decision to tell someone what to do. If you want to do that then move to Communist China.

Corey Williams 6 years, 4 months ago

bondmen (Anonymous) says…"Third, all children who die before the age of accountability are saved. Hence, the act by which God took the children is far from merciless."And where is your scriptural proof of this?

Frederic Gutknecht IV 6 years, 4 months ago

lawrencian says..."If it is going to be okay, then it should only be okay up to a certain point (say, 10 weeks max), and then no go. If a woman doesn't suspect that she's pregnant by that point, then that just means that she is totally oblivious."...and so you want to encourage single, totally oblivious women to have children? Will that work for you? Note that my apparently callous attitude derives from not equating pain with horror and not believing that a fetus is a human being with rights. Most living things on the planet die a "painful" death, some lingering but most being (by intelligent design?~) crushed, torn and ripped apart in a few seconds or minutes. It's not such a bad deal... Enjoying several, or a multitude of, months of good life for a minute of "hell", barely grasped by "lambs", seems like the way of this world. Is this not true? Getting beyond the notion of hatred and some "apple of God's eye" perception seems more important than the dictation of what is "right and good" in this life. There will always be a war in the offing if we are fighting for what's "right" from our perspective of fear and loathing. Look around! We all become terrorists in that light. If we wish to seek a sustaining light in this world, then it will include a massive concession to living and dying and feelig pain. Placing humans, by default, into a higher class is dangerous. Love should PERHAPS not be driven by emotion, unexamined belief and/or religion. Are we without fault? Who has the right to throw stones?Does a vegan have more rights than a Christian, because they wish to cause less pain and suffering to the flesh than the corporatocray and its minions? Are humans the apple of God's eye? Which god? Should we hack off our hands and poke out our eyes to protect our right to a place at the right hand? Where would this lead? The world will always be full of left hands, detached and as vicious as snakes, attached and as vicious as snakes. Perhaps it's time to embrace the notion of living in peace, alone, without any who oppose our narrow views...behind a fence that tells all of our fellows that we have no respect for their views. I don't know! What do you think?It looks to me like humans take what they want by violence, very much like most lives on this planet...at least those with fluids coursing through their bodies. We fight for life. Is your fight greater? Are MORE human lives greater than FEWER? Is a more standardized human presence greater than a more diversified human presence? Granted...it is said that trilobites ruled the planet for 300 million years. Do you wish to be a trilobite?~) There is not one left. Perhaps it's time for us to embrace the intelligence of diversity and smite the selfish, dictating, terroristic geniuses of control and homogeneity.Just a thought...

bondmen 6 years, 4 months ago

2 Samuel 12:23 - Do those who die in infancy go to heaven?Problem - The Scriptures teach that we are born in sin (Psalm 51:5) because we "all sinned [in Adam]" (Rom 5:12). Yet David implies here that his baby, who died, will be in heaven, saying, "I shall go to him" (v. 23). Solution - There are three views regarding children who die before the age of accountability, that is, before they are old enough to be morally responsible for their own actions.1. Only elect infants go to heaven. Some strong Calvinists believe that only those babies that are predestined go to heaven (Eph. 1:4; Rom. 8:29). Those who are not elect go to hell. They see no greater problem with infant predestination than with adult predestination, insisting that everyone is deserving of hell and that it is only by God's mercy that any are saved (Titus 3:5-6).2. Only infants who would have believed go to heaven. Others claim that God knows the end from the beginning (Isa. 46:10) and the potential as well as the actual. Thus, God knows those infants and little children who would have believed in Christ had they lived long enough. Otherwise, they contend, there would be people in heaven who would not have believed in Christ, which is contrary to Scripture (John 3:36). All infants whom God knows would not have believed, had they lived long enough, will go to hell.3. All infants go to heaven. Still others believe that all who die before the age of accountability will go to heaven. They base this on the following scriptures. First, Isaiah 7:16 speaks of an age before a child is morally accountable, namely, "before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good." Second, David believed in life after death and the resurrection (Ps. 16:10-11), so when he spoke of going to be with his son who died after birth (2 Sam. 12:23), he implied that those who die in infancy go to heaven. Third, Psalm 139 speaks of an unborn baby as a creation of God whose name is written down in God's "book" in heaven (vv. 14-16). Fourth, Jesus said, "let the little children come to me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God" (Mark 10:14), thus indicating that even little children will be in heaven. Fifth, some see support in Jesus' affirmation that even "little ones" (i.e., children) have a guardian angel "in heaven" who watches over them (Matt. 18:10). Sixth, the fact that Christ's death for all made little children savable, even before they believed (Rom. 5:18-19). Finally, Jesus' indication that those who did not know were not morally responsible (John 9:41) is used to support the belief that there is heaven for those who cannot yet believe, even though there is no heaven for those who are old enough and refuse to believe (John 3:36).

jonas_opines 6 years, 4 months ago

"Problem - The Scriptures teach that we are born in sin (Psalm 51:5) because we “all sinned [in Adam]” (Rom 5:12). Yet David implies here that his baby, who died, will be in heaven, saying, “I shall go to him” (v. 23)."That's not a problem, that's just salesmanship. Convince people that they have an unfilled need, that can only be filled with the services that you're providing.

gr 6 years, 4 months ago

Aji saying babies aren't alive and deserve to die: “it is a fact that God said a life does not have a soul until he breaths into his nostril,”Are fish alive?

slang4d 6 years, 4 months ago

I love how this has turned into an argument about "scriptural proof." That's an oxymoron- there is no proof of anything in the bible and the whole thing is so absurd and inconsistent I marvel at the idiocy of the people who claim to live by it. Some facts here- because there was a time abortion was illegal so we have some actual evidence of what happened. -It is estimated that up to 15,000 women a year died because of illegal abortions. -Before 1970, when abortion was legalized in New York City, Black women accounted for 50 percent of deaths due to illegal abortions. Puerto Rican women accounted for 44 percent.Women will ALWAYS have abortions. Where there is poverty, where there is desperation- there will be abortions.

gr 6 years, 4 months ago

"I marvel at the idiocy of the people who claim to live by it."Darwin's book anyone?"It is estimated that up to 15,000 women a year died because of illegal abortions. "How many babies die from abortions?"Women will ALWAYS have abortions."Teens will ALWAYS drink. Make it legal.People will ALWAYS do drugs. Make them legal.Kind of silly, don't ya think?

bondmen 6 years, 4 months ago

"Over the centuries, Christian artists have probably more readily embraced the mystery of God becoming baby flesh than have many Christian theologians. The very paradox that puzzles or repels some pietistic Christian thinkers intrigues and attracts Christian artists. For example, John Donne is one of many Christian poets who embrace the mystery of God as infant, and never more powerfully than in the second poem of his seven-sonnet cycle entitled “Annunciation”: Salvation to all that will is nigh ; That All, which always is all everywhere, Which cannot sin, and yet all sins must bear, Which cannot die, yet cannot choose but die, Lo! faithful Virgin, yields Himself to lie In prison, in thy womb; and though He there Can take no sin, nor thou give, yet He'will wear, Taken from thence, flesh, which death's force may try. Ere by the spheres time was created thou Wast in His mind, who is thy Son, and Brother ; Whom thou conceives’t, conceiv’d; yea, thou art now Thy Maker's maker, and thy Father's mother, Thou hast light in dark, and shutt’st in little room Immensity, cloister'd in thy dear womb The poem captures the absurdity of the omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and holy God condescending into Mary’s womb, choosing her to become her “Maker’s maker” and her “Father’s mother.” Rather than moving beyond the literal facts of His incarnation, the poem contemplates the meaning of God as fetus, as flesh, as finite."http://www.ttf.org/index/journal/detail/manger-wetter/

Commenting has been disabled for this item.