Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Kathleen Parker :: Townhall.com Columnist
Pope Pelosi At the Gate
by Kathleen Parker
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


WASHINGTON -- When Democrats decided they wouldn't let the GOP be "God's Only Party," they weren't kidding. Thanks to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, none other than St. Augustine has been summoned to Denver.

He was resurrected as Pelosi was trying to respond to the question that refuses to die: When does human life begin? This time, it was Tom Brokaw asking on Sunday's "Meet the Press." Citing Barack Obama's recent pass on a similar question -- "At what point does a baby get human rights?" -- Brokaw asked Pelosi what she would say to Obama were he to ask her advice.

Pelosi didn't finesse her answer, as Obama did when he said the question was above his pay grade, but she may wish she had.

"I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time," Pelosi began. "And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctrines of the church have not been able to make that definition. ... St. Augustine said at three months. We don't know. The point is, is that it shouldn't have an impact on a woman's right to choose. ... I don't think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins."

Few paragraphs have contained more falsehoods. The reaction was swift from Denver's archbishop, the Rev. Charles J. Chaput, among others, who condemned Pelosi's comments during Mass that same evening. Blogging on Monday, Chaput quoted Jesuit John Connery, author of "Abortion: The Development of the Roman Catholic Perspective," who concluded that "The Christian tradition from the earliest days reveals a firm anti-abortion attitude."

It is true that laws and penalties concerning abortion have evolved through the ages. "Right to life" is a relatively new concept. It is also true that Augustine -- and St. Thomas Aquinas eight centuries later -- subscribed to a "delayed hominization" theory, meaning that abortion couldn't be homicide because the fetus doesn't receive a soul until a certain point in its development.

Augustine even thought that "hominization" occurred earlier for males than for females. Is it possible that the same authority whom Pelosi invokes to justify her belief in choice also ranked the female fetus below the male on God's "Ensoulments To Do" list?

We may forgive Augustine, of course, because people didn't know much about nascent life in the early 400s. The ovum wasn't discovered until 1827. Fetal imaging, now routine for expectant parents, was unimaginable.

If Augustine had known then what we know now, would he stand by Pelosi as she asserts that when life begins should have no bearing on a woman's right to choose?

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled as much in Roe v. Wade, obviously, but Justice Harry A. Blackmun dodged the question of when life begins using the same rationale as Pelosi -- that because scientists, theologians and others couldn't agree on when life begins, then a woman's privacy trumped the unborn's right to due process.

One may choose to believe that out of convenience or conscience, but the logic of the court was both self-contradictory and incorrect, according to Robert P. George, a professor of jurisprudence at Princeton and a member of the President's Council on Bioethics. By its ruling, says George, the court implicitly determined when life begins (against the fetus), while ignoring science that long before had determined the facts of human embryogenesis.

In his new book, "Embryo," George and co-author Christopher Tollefsen, associate professor of philosophy at the University of South Carolina, left religion behind and set out to establish the embryo's personhood by reviewing all the major scientific works on human embryogenesis and early intrauterine development.

Included was American medicine's most prominent human embryology text, "The Developing Human," whose authors are not imprecise on the matter of life: "Human development begins at fertilization when a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to produce a single cell -- a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual."

In other words, human life begins at conception. That is not a religious posture, but a scientific fact that the lowest paid laborer on the planet can assert without qualm. What we do with that understanding is another matter, but no one in the 21st century should pretend not to know when human life begins.

On this matter at least, the church and science are in agreement.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kathleen Parker is a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Kathleen Parker's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
pelosi makes up her own religion!
this is how they feel about the unborn.this is why i dont vote the dems. mike from texas

Truly ignorant
I find it very disturbing that highest leader of the Congress of the United States, the most powerful nation on earth, has such a shallow intellect and such a deceptive tongue. Likewise, Obama, with his "above my pay grade" response, is equally ignorant, or deceptive, or both.

Poor RED Nannie
She just cain't hep it, she's got Botox on the brain..every shot goes right from her face to her brain.

Any one that's read the Bible knows what God
thinks of abortion even if it's not specifically laid out. Even Obama agreed
when he quoted Matthew; citing Jesus's words
regarding the "least of these," he just couldn't let on he agreed otherwise his 100%
approval rating from Planned Barrenhood and NARAL would have gone POOF just like the lives
of 50 million plus AMERICAN babies, many of them black babies. And he'd lose allll that money!!!!

Popelosi
Sounds like a pope. Self-appointed holder of
nothing good that all the world should listen to.

Dummy
Abortion is not the only thing she is ignorant about, when talking about alternative fuels, she didn't even know that natural gas was a fossil fuel, something that any grade schooler would know. I don't know how these ignorant know-it-all's get into office.

Pelosi?
She is the elected representative of a very small district in San Francisco, California. She DOES NOT represent me or the rest of America. She needs to shut up for the rest of her very limited time she has left in her position. Her peers (she calls them sibjects) will appoint a new speaker as soon as they can.

Nacy needs to learn about the Birds and
Too elementary I suppose, but if a baby is born dead, then it must have been alive at some point. When does the soul join the body? Various religions have their own ideas about that. One more thing, Science has long shown pictures of those wiggly things in sperm. Women have things called eggs, so the wiggly things and the eggs are alive right, for if they weren't how could they produce a living thing? Nope, Nancy Pelosi needs to be bounced on her Daddy's knee again and be told about the Birds and the Bees

It isn't a question about when
"life begins". Life, in this sense, is perpetual. The sperm and egg are always alive. The question is properly, when does separate life begin? Am I pro-choice? Nope. Am I anti-abortion? Nope. I'm a MYOB person. I cannot imagine forcing my will upon a woman to either have a child or abort one. This is sheer madness. Where does it end? Where can it end? This is a highly emotional subject that is either one way or the other; there is no middle. Therefore I see no end to the fighting. The only reasonable solution is to teach and preach to your children, et al to sway their opinions in the same way society has succeeded in keeping from people from smoking. Yes, I am aware it isn't the same thing but the answer will come from society as a whole, and not by law. Abortion will always be available as it was pre Rowe v Wade.

Pelosi on Church Teaching
Madame speaker is well titled. She just talks and talks and talks and acts as if her every word is holy writ! Well, I say pelosi is the most ignorant office holder in the land. Or at least of those most visible and audible in the political arena. She is ignorant of Church dogma, or at the very least she is a pick and choose (cafeteria style) Catholic. Can't be Ms Nancy - Denver's archbishop was swift with his condemnation of her comments. Pelosi is cunning - I'll be watching to see how she spins herself out of this one!
Her recent “Most Catholics don’t accept all the Church teachings” won’t fly with true Catholics.

ON PRO LIFE, ABORTION, EUTHANASIA...
ON PRO LIFE, ABORTION, EUTHANASIA, CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND OTHER MORAL AND ETHICAL CHOICES, by Ivan Erickson, author of “Song of the Storm Winds”. Please visit http://www.ivan-erickson.com to read and comment on my religious discourses, and to order my novel via direct links to amazon.com
Man’s Free Will: From The Book of Sirach, 15:11 – 20:
“Say not: ‘It was God’s doing that I fell
away’;
for what he hates he does not do.
Say not: ‘It was he who set me astray’;
for he has no need of wicked man.
Abominable wickedness the LORD
hates,
he does not let it befall those who fear
him.
When God, in the beginning, created
man,
he made him subject to his own free
choice.
If you choose, you can keep the com-
mandments;
it is loyalty to do his will.
There are set before you fire and water;
to whichever you choose, stretch
forth your hand.
Before man are life and death,
whichever he chooses shall be given
him.
Immense is the wisdom of the LORD;
he is mighty in power, and all-seeing.
The eyes of God see all he has made;
he understands man’s every deed.
No man does he command to sin,
to none does he give strength for lies”.
Also, God gave us the commandment, “Thou Shalt Not Kill”! Please note that he gave us no addenda to that commandment, except in the case of the destructive power of His Sword – which is war and other Acts of God! Man must not supersede, change, delete or countermand so much as one of God’s commandments, mandates, laws, decrees, jurisdictions or covenants. If man or woman does so, remember also these words of God from The Book of Sirach, 7:8:
“Do not plot to repeat a sin; /not even for one will you go unpunished”. / May God bless each of you, always.

Fabius
Well said. Direct and to the point.

'an ardent, practicing Catholic"
Truly disgusting, given how difficult it is to be any kind of Catholic.
To paraphrase this moron, innocent life should not impede a woman's right to choose. Why then should freedom impede a slave-owner's right to property? Why then should a woman not be free to practice prostitution?
I hope the bishops get on this & stay on it! They should publicly ex-communicate any 'Catholic' politician that gives so much as lip-service to abortion.

Size Pelosi for a millstone and collar
Luke 17:1-3

Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, but woe to that person through whom they come. It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. So watch yourselves.

MerryColin
So would your myob mantra have applied to the Jewish Holocaust.the Pol Pot killing field,Stalins purges? Mass murder is mass murder.

I find it hypocritical to the max
That the people who have such fits about a homicidal maniac and Cop Killer like Mumia Abu-Jamal, among others, being sentenced to die for their crimes, are absolutely adamant about protecting a woman's right to kill her unborn baby.

It is the first Commandment of the Liberal religion.

1. Abortion being the first law of my church, The right of a mother to kill her unborn baby shall not be infringed.

2. Thou shalt protect a mothers right to abortions above all things, even above thine own life.


I'm sure you get my point. So therefore, Red Nazi is actually keeping the commandment of her church. The Church of Holy Liberalism and Abortion.

Pelosi
This supposed Catholic has decided that she knows more than the Pope, the Catholic church and probably God. The left has an aversion to killing criminials and our country's enemies but seem to take joy in murdering unborn--sometimes even born--babies. I served in Vietnam. When I and other Vietnam veterans returned we were called baby killers by the left. Outside of Fort Lewis here in Washington State a number of months ago, a group of lefties stood outside of the post protesting and screaming at returning Iraq veterans and calling them baby killers as well. Well, I guess we know who the real baby killers are now, don't we?

Nazi Pelosi
Deceitfull, dopey airhead!

Can there be any doubt?
That Sen. Nasty Pelosi is dumber than a box of rocks.
Someone above asked how she gets elected.That's an easy one to answer.
I know this will be hard to believe,but,the dem-o-RATS who elect her are obviously even dumber that she is.

billybob
I think you've summed it up. Not much left to say.

Dumb and Dumber
How dumb are democrats if they can so easily wrest control of this country from supposedly sane, cogent conservatives? Look around and see who is in control of every aspect of our government. It's not by accident or coincidence that virtually every government office is staffed by democrats who are influencing our lives in every way possible. Since they view government with the same convictions as religious zealots view their doctrines and tenants, there is no chance of assuming they will use common sense or logic in making their decisions. It's out of our hands now.

So when we call Pelosi and her ilk dumb, aren't the people who sat on their duffs on election day even dumber?


POPE PELOSI?
Pelosi is just another leftist in a long tradition of Dhimmicrat actors seeking to snooker the rubes (in Obamamessiahspeak -"clingers") by posing as Christians.

Remember Bill Clinton with his huge family Bible in the numerous photo ops at his churches? Remember the "religious" advisor that Al Gore retained for advice on how to appear more religious - to comical effect?

The only place she is Pope is in San Francisco, pastoring her fellow adherents to the religion of Godless Secularism.

Threshold of Hope
Father Matt covered this on Threshold of Hope (EWTN) last night, and essentially said what is said above; however, he added that even St. Augustine who had that odd view of Ensoulment still opined that if two men are fighting and they punch a pregnant woman in the stomach and she has a miscarrige before that point arrives, the men get 10 years; after that point its the rest of their lives.

I have also heard that Nancy Pelosi has now been requested not to present herself for communion in Denver, whereupon she said pertly that this was a decision of individual Bishops and hers in SF was not so picky -- which ought to get him a stern warning from His Holiness, I am thinking!

Obama lied – babies died
Pelosi too!
B.H.O. is no reformer – he’s a gangster-style, old school Chicago hack. B.H.O. is not “The One” – he is by calculative composition a champion of his master’s agenda (Unions, Planned Parenthood, and Mr. Soros et al). B.H.O. will change our capitalist country into one, big union shop run by the Democrats; bent towards the left so far that his socialist European friends will recognize him for the Communist at heart he really is.
I do not fear him; I loathe him for the holocaust of the Unborn (and in some cases the Born) he so adamantly supports. I do not think is name is funny; I think his name speaks defiantly of his family’s murderous, African-Muslim roots.
The more his candidacy is vetted, the more we learn about the puppet-masters behind the scrim of the burka. The G.O.P. will have enormous crossover votes because we love to win, believe our country is the best the world has ever seen, and mightily disapprove of American apologists. We will elect McCain because he actually will put the country first – and has the alarming record of cavorting with Democrats to prove it. John may not have led the perfect, conservative life but no one has, eh? McCain’s life is an open book and Obama’s is shrouded in mystery, deceit, and dope.
See you at the polls!

Sassy retort
She issued a statement in response to the bishops saying that lots of Catholics don't agree with church teaching. They don't agree with her on drilling, either LOL.

The Queen of Hearts
Anybody that watches C span and has seen the performances of the Queen of hearts and her cohort in the Senate, The Mad Hatter, would know that they are both as dumb as a sack of hammers, amd megalamaniacs to boot!

I thought the most telling part of her interview with Brokaw was when she said that she had been studying the issue for a LONG time.I think that is because she left whatever sense of ethics she ever had back in Baltimore a LONG time ago.She has San Francisco values now.

Voila!!!
At last, KP has resolved one of the questions of the ages, when life begins!!! Does it trouble anyone else that the only support she cites is a text by a member of President Bush's Council on Bioethics, no more an unbiased source that the Bishops of the Catholic Church. Senators still take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, not the Catechism of the CC. Thank goodness!!!

Start of Life
Merry Colin is right---it is not when "life" (as pointed out by someone, the sperm and egg are alive) begins, but when does the fertilized egg develop intoa viable (can possibly live on it own)baby. Up to that point, the developing fetus is dependent on the mother to stay alive. As medical technology has developed, the time (in months)has shortened, but the degree of development will not allow it to be less than 5 months or so. So, until somewhere in the range of 5 months, the mother "permits" the fetus to live and she, alone, should have the right to decide on abortion or no. After that, the fetus rights become primary. There is no way an abortion can be justified after that time, except risk to the mother or a "cannot live" fetus. It is immoral to mandate that a woman cannot have an early abortion and, likewise, immoral to permit a later one except in medically justified situations. Finally, it is immoral to deny early abortions unless you are willing to take and care for/raise an unwanted baby.

Life DOES NOT begin @ conception
Life doesn't "begin." Life is passed on. No dead sperm ever yet fertilized a live egg. They both are already alive or the potential human is never realized. The issue isn't whether to mandate the Roman Catholic teaching of when life "begins," (and mandatory childbirth). The issue is viability, which is slippery to define, until then the life is "potential" life, not a "baby." Being a baby and becoming a baby are not the same. The word "potential" is a word the lifers don't like, because it destroys their made up minds. "Process" is another word the black or white crowd can't handle. I mean Ya'll oughta try your hand at biology because your theology leaves an awful lot to be desired. With all the major issues facing our country, the anti's remind me of Obama's robots, in a frenzy over something out of your control. What's it gonna take for you to get it? Women don't have abortions because they like it. But because its the lesser of 2 evils. But you have to be able to think on more than one level to understand that. Single issue folks apparently aren't capable. So a lot of time,$$ is spent on something they can't manipulate. Who's saying anything about kids AFTER they're born? That's not "potential" life, its real life. Ah get a life!

I use to think ....................
I use to think Pelosi was a reasonably intelligent, but very angry person. However, her performances over the last few years convinced me she is not intelligent enough to get angry! That simply leaves dumb!

What is the question?
Andrew, despite your claiming that KP's sources are restricted to Republican sources, there really is no scientific question as to when life begins.

The real question appears to be, when does the fetus receive a soul thereby creating its "humanness". On this point, nobody knows the answer and the only answer lies in religious teachings. Since the Constitution prohibits the State from establishing any single religion, the US Congress (and many of the citizenry) have decided that no religious doctrine can be introduced into legislation or any other act of an elected official. This means that for legislative bodies, they must rely on secular, scientific teachings for their answer.

The definition of pregnant is "carrying developing offspring within the body". Physicians will state that a woman is pregnant at different points due to the imprecision of medical technology, but it is certainly within weeks of conception. As medical technology continually improves and can detect the presence of a fetus at earlier points in time, does this mean that life begins when it is detectable by medical science? Obviously the answer is that life begins at conception.

Best practices in medical science dictate that a woman perform certain acts when she is pregnant; eating correctly, taking vitamins, etc. All of these things are geared at assisting the fetus to grow healthy and properly. These acts are not to commence at 1, 2, or 3 months, rather they commence once it is determined that a woman is pregnant.

Finally, given that many use the "when does life begin" argument to justify abortion and it is not permissable to allow religious doctrine into the debate (presence of a soul to determine when life begins), one would logically conclude that we must rely on secular determinants to answer the question. Those secular determinants resoundingly indicate that life begins at conception.

Piledriver
Women have abortions because it is the greater of two evils. The first evil was opening her legs without fear of the consequences of her actions.
The greater evil is taking it out on her unborn child for totally selfish reasons.

Pelosi is trying to justify...
and appease a guilty conscience. While St. Augustine did struggle with the question of early on, he later commented that the assumption should be on the side of the unborn child. Again this was the 5th century. Augustine referred to Scripture verses such as jeramiah 1: "It was I who formed you in your mother's womb...
With the advances in medical science today there is NO question that within weeks of conception an ultrasound shows a human figure forming in the womb which responds to stimuli.
Pelosi shoud find another church, she is Not and ardent practicing Catholic.
She is a typical liberal cherry picker.

Nancy On Natural Gas
Nancy thinks you don't have to drill for natural gas. Is this what she belives or is it she thinks that the American people are dum enough to not know this. Its a shame on how these people want to rob us of are freedom and liberty and they will if nothing is done about it.

Inconvenient
You know it is amazing the blindness people have to their own illogic! Dave insisted that until the life is "Viable" it is the woman's right to choose. What a crock!

An infant child is not "Viable" without a lot of help, hopefully from mom and dad. We ostracize those parents if they abandon a 3 month old to the elements or nbeglect it in the crib for days at a time.

It is not viability that is the issue, it is value. We should value human life at whatever stage of development. It is not viabiliy, it is not utility, it is solely our assessment of the value of human life. I believe that God, and that we ought to place a supremely high value on human life.

Dave (PA) @ ctjaeger (MO)
Dave, your viability argument does not make sense because it is not logical. An infant is not viable and would not survive long without care from the mother. Another way to look at it is an adult who has sustained injuries and is temporarily not viable and must be assisted by life support does not lose their status as a human being. The idea of connoting viability with being human is not logical.

For an excelent argument read ctjaeger's comment.

Viability? You've got to be kidding...
Dave, PA wrote:
"Up to that point, the developing fetus is dependent on the mother to stay alive"

Piledriver wrote:
"The issue is viability"

Those are two of the stupidest comments I've had the displeasure to read.

Dave my friend, a baby is dependent on its mother for much longer than the point of viability. If you want to view a baby as a leech, than you are forced to view it as such until it is born.

Piledriver, if the issue for you is whether an infant can live on its own or not, then one is forced to conclude that it is medical science that determines when life begins based on our level of technology. That is warped indeed my friend. Furthermore, one hopes that you are never in an accident and are forced to survive on medical . One might conclude that you are no longer "viable" since you cannot survive on your own. Finally, what's with the word slippery? Does that mean that we don't change anything because we can't define it? Your logic worse than those whom you criticize.

The reality of this discussion is that we are now at a point where the issue is whether to provide medical treatment who survives abortion. I defy the viability proponents to think on the consequences of that. The baby survives an attempt on its life, and we wonder if we should help or not.


Developomental Facts
After conception takes place there is no heart beat yet (legal definition of "death" or "unlive") and there is no brainwave activity (medical definition of "death" or "unlive"). Now, using medical and legal definitions of death isn't it logical to use reverse logic to argue when life begins?

FACT: The heart begins to pump (thus called a "heart beat") between 11 to 13 days after conception.

FACT: Even though undeveloped the brain starts to receive nutrients from the blood already being pumped by the heart between 14 to 16 days after conception.

Although not viable and not developed. The heart and the brain are functioning within 2 and a half weeks after conception.

Now for those on the right, one can argue that a "life" has begun at conception, but there is no medical or legal reason to call it "life." To those on the left, aborting a fetus in the second, third, eighth or ninth month is the cessation of life medically and legally as the heart and the brain are stopped and death occurs.

As a conservative I may be wrong saying life begins at conception, but I am medically and legally right in saying abortion at least after two-and-a-half weeks of copulation IS MURDER.

Wake up, Dave.
"So, until somewhere in the range of 5 months, the mother "permits" the fetus to live and she, alone, should have the right to decide on abortion or no."

You know, my daughter couldn't do anything for herself at 5 months OUT OF THE WOMB, let alone IN THE WOMB. Why am I not given the choice of "permitting" her to live at 5 months after she is born? The first ridiculous thing you said is that "the mother permits the fetus to live." So, the fetus is alive, but in your inhumane worldview, the mother deciding that she will no longer "permit" the baby to live is acceptable.

Funny, as someone else pointed out, I believe there has been a dictator or communist ruler or two who had those same thoughts about their working class... Even funnier, the same people who oppose abortion compare our sitting pro-life president to those thugs. Is there no end to the selfishness of the Left?


Close The Gate
Many Democrats sold their souls many years ago. Power meant more. They have sunk so low morally,they see nothing too gross or immoral to be acceptable.

The title of this piece reminded me of an old movie starring James Garner called "Barbarians At The Gate". Barbarian ....a fit title for Pelosi.

Viability
Everyone has their own opinion, but I think life begins when the fetus is viable outside the womb, around 5 months or so. But what irks me about the GOP is that the religious fundamentalists types now control this former wonderful party because of their rigid view on abortion.

If life doesn't begin at conception,
why do we call methods to stop sperm from meeting egg *birth control*?

Any woman who has been pregnant knows from the very beginning she is pregnant.

There is no being a little bit pregnant or having an indefinite pregnancy that is somehow sometime later a *real* pregnancy.

The guys blogging on this site simply reveal their predatory selfishness if they think the life they have promoted through sexual congress is then simply a *nothing* no one can define so that it can be killed without qualm.

We know abortion is killing because all references to abortion mean *termination* or *extraction* or other terms of negation that do not mean living and thriving.

Stupid Nancy.
I think it is possible to be stooopid and deceitful. Rush wonders if she is as stupid as she comes across. I think he wonders that because she is in such a high position in the government. I think it was a strategy of the Democratic Party to put someone in that position that obviously can't think for herself. That way she is controllable. Either that or, everyone in the Democratic Party is that stupid. But nevertheless,yes, Rush, she is that stupid.

Hey Nancy
Show me in your Bible where it talks about a woman's right from God Almighty to terminate the life inside of her. Maybe I don't have the PC translation.

Piledriver
Your whole argument is based on sperms being alive? A plant is also alive. Does that make it human? A sperm is not human. A human is not made until a sperm and an egg unite. Did your parents ever teach you about the birds and the bees?

Piledriver
Explain to me what is evil about being pregnant.

Liberal case collapses
According to the liberal/Leftist, there are no moral truths because if there were, those who held them would be right, whereas those who didn’t would be wrong, and thus unequal, which is not allowed in the liberal/Leftist worldview. The idea of a person having rights was derived from reason. Since moral truths don’t exist (according to liberal/Leftist thought), reason cannot ascertain any, as the Declaration of Independence claims to. Therefore, the liberal/Leftist's own case collapses. How can your "right to choose" be denied if you don’t have any rights to begin with?

Another thing. People naturally seek out that which is good and try to avoid doing evil. Therefore, evil must be presented as a good. Who can argue with "freedom" or "choice"? If abortion involved nothing more morally than choosing Coke over Pepsi, its proponents like Pelosi and Obama wouldn’t have to craft exotic arguments to sell it to the naïve and gullible.

ar
you really couldn't have sounded more ignorant if you sat up all night trying....but I'm certain that "thinking" would hurt your head a lot.

Pope Pelosi
Pelosi's problem, and great mistake, is that she attempted to speak for the Church.And in so doing, may well have led other Catholics into error. The Catechism of the Catholic Church makes it very plain that it is a grave moral evil to take the live of an unborn human person and to support such action.Excommunication is the penalty for doing so. As an "ardent, practicing Catholic who has studied this matter for years" one would expect her to be aware that this has been Church teaching since the first century. I applaud Archbishops Chaput, Wueril and Eagan for speaking up in defense of the Church and her Faith. The Church has been silent too long.

RCB is Right
If Pelosi and Obama truly believe what they say they do, then they should realize that they will one day have a much higher authority to answer to than any of us. If you are a believer and you think there is even a possibility that you might get this one wrong, why would you want to have to face your Maker with the blood of literally millions of innocents on your hands? I don't get how Obama can basically admit that he doesn't know when life begins. He is admitting that he might be advocating murder. How can America say, "Well, yeah, we aren't sure about it, but let's err on the side of death."? The guilt is not just on the mother who chooses abortion any more than the guilt for slavery was just on slaveowners.

We all know when life begins...
that's why we buy billions of condoms and zillions of other birth control products...

A woman has the right NOT TO GET PREGNANT - then her rights end except in matters of a mother's life. Women aren't God.

If we don't know when life begins, then abortion is absolutely immoral -

Pelosi is so dumb she is embarrassing.
Obama, the supporter of infanticide for YOWZA's sake, is the DOPE we've been waiting for -

Nancy Pelosi?
Nancy Pelosi is nothing more than a thirty minute sitcom. Unfortunately not a very funny sitcom at that.
We might get lucky and Cindy Sheehan will beat
her in November. Now that would be a funny sitcom.
As far as the question she answered about when life begins?
She hasn't a clue, for she as a human being hasn't evolved.
She will never get it, and that is a sad thing.
Not for her, but for everyone who is effected by the fact that she is Speaker of the House.
Now that truly doesn't make any sence.

Lord, let me not judge but....
PLEASE never let Madame Speaker anywhere near my PSR class!

I do believe that early on-set dementia is Madame Speaker's problem. Or maybe she has done more than host meetings in their San Francisco home before she entered politics.

And while I might expect such "rationalization" from my 21 year old daughter, someone that was educated in the old pre-Vatican II era Catholic School System in Baltimore, "knows" better. She can lie to all of us, she can't lie to the final exam authority.

Lord have mercy, may she repent before it's too late.

Pelosi 'ardent practicing Catholic'?
I guess she uses as her standard, Canada's MP's, of whom at least 40% consistently are nominal Catholics. Reality is that she's no more a real Catholic than (edit: none of the individuals I'm listing even CLAIM to be Catholic):
(1) Lal Kishan Advani, India's Opposition Leader
(2) Asif Zardari, wannabe-ruler of Pakistan
(3) Gurmant Grewal, Canadian MP
(4) Mohd. Sarwar, UK Peer

For m.a., a minor correction. P Lousy isn't the one LEADING other Catholics into error--as other CINO's before her (including many of Canada's MP's in 1987) embarked on such a path long before she was elected to US Congress.

(Info: in 1987, Canada's parliament voted almost unanimously to remove all laws on abortion--which I saw, even as a total non-Christian as being disastrous; proved beyond doubt in 1988 when a convicted murderess was released from P4W after serving less than half of her term due to then-PM Mulroney's creative interpretations of laws)

Isn't Nancy old
and close to dying or maybe Old Timer's disease? She is for sure getting to be a senile old hag and she is in charge of Congress. We're in trouble as long as she is trying to save the Earth and thinks she knows what is best for the rest of us. The left loons in San Francisco will re-elect her again unfortunately.
We The People certainly have slim pickins when it comes to honest politicians in this country.

Remember
Only women have the right to kill

Pelosi's catholicism is NOT Catholic
If Pelosi is an "ardent practicing Catholic", she needs she needs a lot more "practice" and perhaps to stop blathering and begin to listen to those wise and true teacher of the Faith. If she wasn't so full of herself and her own grandisement, she might just learn something.

The truth is very obvious, but Pelosi thinks SHE is smarter than God Himself.

Watch out Nancy, pride precedes a fall.

It makes this Catholic very angry when these morons expound their ignorance and hide it behind their claim to be Catholic. It is NOT Catholic.

She would best keep her ignorance to herself instead of speaking and showing it to the world.

CATHOLICS & "CHOICE"

.....A pro-choice Catholic is an oxymoron ...one cannot be both and still be a Catholic ...thus both Pelosi & Biden are hypocrites of the highest order .....COLOSSUS

The World is Watching
I speak to several European friends from time to time. They cannot understand why our great country with so many accomplished and well educated people could ever accept an ignoramus like Pelosi in such a position of power. She is a laughing stock and makes our Congress appear as a silly little organization where politics trumps all rational thought.

Yes, she will certainly be re-elected by her radical leftist constituents, but I would even vote for Obama if he committed to having her replaced as Speaker.

Accomplished Self Congratulator
She’s not stupid. She thinks the public is that disengaged. She thinks voters are trite.

I dare say that at some point many of us have met or worked with women such as Nancy Pelosi, in or around our own communities or jobs. She represents the recalcitrant wing of radical feminism very well.

If you’re sitting on a board, panel or work group somewhere, she’s the one pointing out deficiencies in others, raising inane issues and blaming everything on everyone else. This is all done in order to draw attention toward or distract it away from herself as the situation stipulates. The only thing they get accomplished is self actualization.

Pelosi spins webs and baits believers into positions where she if drops enough glycerin to make herself seem sweet, the baying sycophants fall in line. All while she has no compunction about stabbing in the back whoever gets in her way. Stupidity is not a character attribute used to get a position of power. Truth is irrelevant to her. Nuance in deception is precedent, for her and her party.

My first question is, how will this kind of oblivious conceit play to voters? The second is, will they notice?


Two thoughts for consideration
One:
Not that I necessarily agree with this idea, but here is the closest approach I know of to show a Biblical answer to when life begins. See Lev. 17:11-14 and Deut. 12:23. I know these are dietary laws, but they state that life is in the blood. So, when does blood begin to flow in the fetus? I believe it is in the first trimester. Believe it or not I heard this arguement on CSI. Something to think about.

Two:
Obama stated that making a decision about when life begins is above his pay scale. Do you think he is hinting to Planned Parenthood that they are not paying him enough to publicly announce that he supports abortion? Actually I think he does not want the public to know what he really thinks, UNTIL he gets into office! On this or several other issues.

Something to think about.

ADD TED KENNEDY TO PELOSI & BIDEN

.....I almost forgot the biggest hypocrite of all time ..."Blood-on-his-hands" Teddy ...I wonder how many indulgences he had to buy from the Catholic Church after he left Mary Jo to die in a canal? .....maybe the Church should stand by its own doctrines and excommunicate these apostates ...throw John Kerry in there too .....COLOSSUS

MerryCollin
You make a very interesting point when you say that "Life, in this sense, is perpetual. The sperm and egg are always alive."

You go on to say "The question is properly, when does separate life begin?"

I would posit to you that perhapps the question is porperly: when does someone have a right to END a life?

pelosi's stupidity
Asone can see she has people on th that are just as stupid as she.

Soul
Since the soul is a purely spiritual concept, involvement of soul and human life is not subject to proof. Personally, I would say that soul, since it is integral to human life begins when life begins - AT CONCEPTION, whether male or female.

CATHOLICS AND THE DEMOCRAT PARTY

.....A pro-life Democrat is a Pariah in the Party ...so politicians who start their careers as pro-life, such as Clinton, Gore, Lieberman ...soon switch to pro-choice if they want to advance in the Party ...in other words, they sell their souls for political power ...I guess that shouldn't surprise anyone .....COLOSSUS

Arrogance and Ignorance displayed
Pardon me Nancy but your pathetic attempt to be theological stinks. The question still needs an answer. At what point will you liberal spineless, life hating, baby-murdering Demo"rats" take a stand to "give rights" to a "human baby?" Note the clearly defined parameters please. It is a HUMAN BABY. You have given rights to blind cave fish and spotted owls and lesbians and homosexuals but you are unable to determine "rights" for a human baby? Demo"rats" continue their abysmal non-performance and double-speak to avoid the truth. Nancy Pee-lose-eeee . . . needs to lose her next re-election effort and these lame-brained, vacationing politicians need to learn that we, the people, expect them to work for the good of our country and not for the party platform. This arrogant answer from Nancy Pelosi not only displayed her character but her ignorance. Study some more Nancy! Plus listen to the people as we rate you lower and lower every day. Start counting the days to your unemployment checks begin.

Nancy P is another nuanced ignoramus! How shameful. "We the people" must not listen to their rhetoric and deception when we vote. Just vote the incumbents out of office!

Do not vote for this idiocy to continue. Nancy has to go to the retirement home ASAP!

To all Liberals out-there
I must congratulate each and everyone of your mothers...according to all of you they had a choice to abort or keep you...aren't you blessed!
Nancy Pelosi is an insult to womankind. She is a hearless wench. There needs to be a serious contender for her seat. Hopefully a conservative who will help shape the future of San Fran...all the scandalous things comming out of that city makes Sodom and Gomorra look like a scout campout.

Pope Nancy I
So, what's new under the Sun? Nancy Pelosi came from Baltimore where her family, the D'Alesandros, dominated Baltimore politics for many years. When she migrated out to the Left Coast, it was her perfect niche: She could mouth liberal cliches and babble incoherent positions without challenge. The real joke is that Madame Speaker now believes the whole nation is going to swallow this pablum. Please don't hide her, Barack. Keep her front and center where she is most entertaining.

Catholics and Pelosi
Ms. Parker wrote a nice piece. All rational and interesting and correct. However, the subject I expected to read about was the Catholics answer to Pelosi's grevious error in her comments about what the Catholic church thinks about abortion. There was one comment opinion by a Catholic priest. There was actually a torrent of response by Catholic Bishops and priests, but not in this story.

Good Point, Greg
"Stupidity is not a character attribute used to get a position of power. Truth is irrelevant to her. Nuance in deception is precedent, for her and her party."

I always thought that ol'Nancy was just plain stupid, but your comments make sense. She must be so very arrogant, thinking that all others are stupid, that she believes she can deceive all around her. This makes her even more dangerous. The problem is, those that should rightly oppose her have done a very poor job of standing-up to her. Her arrogance has been magnified by the fact that she is seldom challenged and rarely loses.

Maybe we should not condemn just Nancy, we should probably question those who have enabled her, the media, her fellow liberal Dems and those cowardly moderates and conservatives who allow her to "ply her trade".

Oh, and her constituency will support a conceited, radical feminist with gusto!

'Pope' Pelosi vs US Bishops
Mrs. Pelosi and Mr. Biden should be reminded by the Bishops that calling attention to their Catholic faith and in the same breath voicing support for abortion rights, a public act of scandal, as defined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (Nos. 2284-6), is committed. Paragraph 2286 is directly applicable to people in their position. It reads: “Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion. Therefore, they are guilty of scandal who establish laws or social structure leading to the decline of morals....”

Both also show a startling ignorance of then Cardinal Ratzinger's, now Pope Benedict XVI, analysis and reasoned rejection of the erroneous belief in the primacy of one's own conscience or the subjective conscience. Since Vatican II the liberal wing of the Catholic Church has promulgated the superiority of one's own, or the subjective conscience, and in February 1991 he delivered the Church's response in his presentation 'Conscience and Truth" delivered at the '10th Workshop for Bishops; in Dallas Texas. A brief summary if his conclusion is found in the following extract, "It is of course undisputed that one must follow a certain conscience or at least not act against it. But whether the judgment of conscience or what one takes to be such, is always right, indeed whether it is infallible, is another question. For if this were the case, it would mean that there is no truth - at least not in moral and religious matters, which is to say, in the areas which constitute the very pillars of our existence. For judgments of conscience can contradict each other. Thus there could be at best the subject's own truth, which would be reduced to the subject's sincerity."

Pelosi
What a shame to have a House Speaker who is a hypocritical Catholic who does not know her Catholic religion. She is a Catholic in name, but not in practice. And yet in her own words she considers herself as an "ardent devout Catholic"? I don't know what Catholic school she went to, because her theology and actions are conrary to the Magisterium, tradition and the Bible. She must be founding a new "catholic" religion of Modernism which has been condemned by several Popes. She has to answer a lot of questions when she dies and faces Jesus because by virtue of her powerful position on earth she is very influential in making people candidates for hell. I hope she realizes her errors and makes a good Confession to a traditional priest, not to a modernist one. She has a lot of potentialities to promote the correct Catholic Catechism and she might even succeed better than many catechists in evangelizing people. If she does this, I wouldn't be surprised if, like some former great sinners, e.g., St. Mary Magdalene and St. Augustine, she might be canonized someday as St. Nancy Pelosi. --- Roland "Skull-ant-tea"

pelosi and when life begins
Pelosi is not a very ardent catholic if she still believes , we can kill the child whenever we feel like it. That is basically what she said in her usual round about way. If the dems think O.Hussein is going to bring about change, think again, unless we stop killing our innocents there will never be peace on earth.

Pope Pelosi Stay Home - Resign Your Seat
She may be at the gate but there's a big surprise for her. Her Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Ike Skelton, is finding himself in a huge battle to keep his seat in the House. The Republican Challenger, Jeff Parnell, is up by 8 points, 54% to 47%. The loss of a committee chairman won't sit well with the other Liberal Dems in the House and this could spell the end of her as Speaker in the 111th Congress.

Organization of Conservative Americans
http://www.ocamericans.org

regarding Pelosi
In the early days of the Catholic Church, Saints were canonized by acclamation. Could we excommunicate by acclamation?

Psalms
I don't argue with fools. If she's a catholic, she obviously hasn't read the Bible. I didn't write it, I just read it and understand!

Psalm 139:12-14 (New International Version)

13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.

14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.


Parker writes a fine article


Grade A exposition by Kathleen Parker; most of all in the last paragraph.

Do not pretend not to know at what point human life begins.

Which, when it's clear to you; you are free not to care. Just declare your liberty in the matter. DO NOT, Madam Speaker, declare yourself an ardent, faithful Catholic.

That is what's at the bottom of this row with our Catholic bishops. They've informed her she is NOT in communion with the Catholic Church. We've known for a while she's a dishonest woman. But this time she's lying about even what the Catholic Church teaches. What's more, she KNOWS she's lying; and still receives the Holy Eucharist!

She can't feign ignorance about abortion, having lived all her adult life in the Church. It has been declared EVIL throughout the centuries in theological circles.

So much so that even the fundie Born Agains are in line with the Holy Spirit in this theology.

With all the loose talk about "impeachment" current today; here is one TRUE cause, a Democrat who insists she is infallibly authorized to demagogue even God! Pelosi out to be ramrodded out of office for that!

Dear Skull in Maryland
I'm in accord with you.

You say, though:

"I hope she realizes her errors and makes a good Confession to a traditional priest, not to a modernist one,"

Which is pointless. Her confession is equally effective with a modernist so-called; but ONLY IF she repents this dishonest and corrupt evil she's fallen into. If she isn't contrite and willing to reform, the traditional priest is no more effective than a Novus Ordo priest.

The ball is in HER court, as of this week.

A question for the pro choice..
If life doesn't start until the baby is born. Then why bother worrying about smoking or drinking while pregnant?

LIBS DONT REPENT OR APPOLOGIZE
Democrats have a knack for weakening this nation and prepping it for attack. Clinton's botch of the Somolia problem gave AlQueda confidence and his policy toward the CIA and FBI made it nearly impossible to get by the beaurocrats and red tape to discover the plot beforehand. With her ruling the house as if it were the United States of San Fransisco, she has allowed our energy problem to compound itself in our country while making our non-allies freakishly rich. Now Russia is feeling it's oats and there really isn't much we can do about it. Over 60% of americans want domestic drilling and her reply is she's "saving the world?" She has taken narcissism to a never before seen level. She needs to be ejected from the Speaker seat and escorted out of the capital by security. She is guilty of what is tantamount to treason.

EOLOSI AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
There is no doubt in my mind that Peolosi is
not a Roman Catholic. Canon Law in the church
States "IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE WHAT WE BELIEVE(THE CHURCH) you are not a Catholic or as they put it you are excommunicated. Check Father
Corapi's blogs if you do not believe it.

Fix the problem, not the blame
Before prolifers get carried away with judging Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama and the Democrat party, it would better serve the interests of our nation if we would acknowledge that the responsiiblity for addressing the moral travesty of abortion choice is one that we all share. Rick Warren in asking Barack Obama about when a baby has human rights has put the focus on abortion choice right where it belongs. We need to make the most of this opportunity to rid our nation of this moral scourge, and to commit ourselves anew to the moral vision of our founders.

nervous systerm
A babies nervous system starts developing at 6 weeks. It does not complete development until the child is 6 months old. That is 13 1/2 months for the most complicated system.

Developing that means the body is alive.
Anything that is not alive cannot develop.
Rocks do not develop.

A woman is pregnant or she is not. There is no half way being pregnant. The moment of conception there is a new life. The mother may not even know it but that in no way diminishes the pregnancy.

Pelosi Title
A better title for Madam Pelosi would be Tsarina, as a card carring member of the American Socialest Party with great Communist credentials, its more fitting.

TSGT Uvin A Clough Jr., USAF, RET.

Abortion
ends the development of a human life, no matter at what time during the pregnancy.

I have a question for the men reading or responding to this column.

What would your answer be if your wife was pregnant and a doctor said that your wife would die unless an abortion was performed?


Pelosi, a Godless Catholic
A Godless comment from a "religious" person

And so the personhood
of a human being has no relationship to whether it is okay to kill that human?

Why is murder then illegal? Why don't we just all go around killing anyone who gets in our way or inconveniences us?

This, of course, is exactly where "abortion rights" have brought us.

As Ronald Reagan put it so simply yet eloquently, "Anything that diminishes human life for one, diminishes it for all of us." (I'm paraphrasing here, as I don't have the actual quote in front of me.)

Seems Pelosi is as good a Catholic
As she is an American.

This woman is a wild eyed idiot if one has ever existed

Barbie
Your point about the nervous system taking 13 and 1/2 months to develop is interesting. Neither geographical location nor development turns one into a living human being.

Human life is a process of evolvement, development and change from the moment of conception. We are all in state of change of some kind or another until the day we die. There is no magic line that people cross that suddenly changes them into living people.

An intrauterine child develops, thus it is alive. It also receives nutrition and metabolizes that nutrition into energy. A non-living entity cannot do this. Another determining factor of life is the ability to reproduce. An intrauterine child has all of the components necessary for reproduction, although not yet fully mature.

There are other, easily determined, criteria that the scientific community traditionally used for many years to define life. But once abortion became a “right” those previously accepted standards were discarded and now everyone acts like they just can’t figure out when life begins.

Truth is, they don’t want to know.

For TxPastor
Sample of Biblical references which show that foetus is alive prior to birth:
(*) Gen 25:22-24 (albeit, not commonly referenced)
(*) Deut 7:13
(*) Judges 13:5-7
(*) Job 3:11; 31:15
(*) Psalm 22:10; 58:3 (not commonly referenced); 139:13
(*) Isaiah 44:2, 24;
(*) Jeremiah 1:5; 20:17
(*) Hosea 12:3
(*) Luke 1:15, 41

If NASA found a fetus on Mars
Would they declare they found life?

If NASA found a human cell, that was alive onn Venus, would they say they found life?
Any questions?

human rights
The cleverness of Rick Warren's question lay in its essence: it implied neither a scientific nor a theological determination, it merely asked for a politian's view of the law, that is, when does the baby (or fetus) get human RIGHTS?
Obama was boxed because he not only supports abortion up to to delivery, he has argued against saving born alive failed abortions! He used a too clever by half subtrafuge to avoid answering the question, the now infamous "above my pay grade" which was entirely nonsensical for a legal/political question.
That's exactly what our elected people are supposed to do: make legal/political decisions.
One may disagree with McCain's answer, but it was an answer to the question which Obama inartfully dodged.
But we know his answer: the woman holdss all the cards, the baby is beaten by a flush.

Godless Democrats
Mrs.Richie-Rich Pelosi is just one of the many Democrats who have traded their souls for getting to the top.

If you are against abortion,there is no place for you in the hierarchy of the Democrat Party.They are the party of legal murder.

They have the nerve to stand at a podium and castigate Republicans for our faults. We are not pro-legal murder. Unlike them,our souls are intact.


POPE PELOSI
St.Augustine believed in hominization, defined as "the evolution of the human traits that set the genus Homo apart from its primate ancestors". If fetal imaging hasn't convinced these apostates will they believe the latest scientific findings? Once the sperm fertilizes the egg and the zygote is formed it is now known that it contains a person's entire DNA.
Pope Pelosi, FYI, the earliest teachings of the Church, written near the end of the first century, entitled,"Teachings of the 12 Apostles" , states:"...thou shalt not kill a child by abortion, neither shalt thou slay it when it is born". BTW, does that clear up Bishop Obama's confusion about living birth's.

reply to clyde
He asks:

"I have a question for the men reading or responding to this column.

What would your answer be if your wife was pregnant and a doctor said that your wife would die unless an abortion was performed?"

We've had a similar decision in our family. A sister was advised by a woman doctor to abort. The ostensible reason was she'd been exposed to radiation (X ray) from which her fetus might suffer abnormalities.

By chance, I have a good friend who is a radiologist of long experience. I privately asked him what he thought.

He said there was NO DANGER to the unborn baby, and explained some of the reasons to me. I relayed that info to my Sis. Her daughter was born later on.

That daughter is now 30 years old; a lovely woman.

Ask for second if not third opinions. Many doctors are infected with abortion derangement syndrome. ADS, and think they know it all! They know BEANS! They are wrong to predict a woman will die for certain just giving birth. And, one could always have a C Section, in any case.

Abortion is murder!

.

Birds of a feather.........
Pelosi and Obama share the elitist attitude. They both know better than you (the "common citizen). They know better how to spend your money on every issue and especially they know that as long as abortion is legally authorized by the federal government that anything so authorized must then be paid for by said government for those who can't afford it. Thus, despite my objection to it, my tax dollars pay for it.

I also saw recently that as a state legislator in Illinois Sen. Obama voted against helping a baby that survived a botched abortion. Such intervention was counter to the "Aborting Females" (I cannot use the term "mother" for a woman like this) intent. So the newborn is simply allowed to die on its own as would any newborn given no care of any kind.

Any woman who did this to a child at any time after she takes the baby home would be charged with criminal negligence. But as long as the state says "it's ok" well, enough said.

Thanks to "Pope Peloser"
for opening the discussion on the beginning of life. Because of her stupid declarations, she's got a bunch of Catholic Bishops speaking out, forcefully on the beginning of life. Everyone of them has defined, clarified the Church teachings from the beginning of it's time. When have you heard so many of them speaking on life? The "debate" is on with the Bishops telling it "like it is" and the media is ground to nothing. Thanks, Ms Peloser!

Pelosi
is a disgrace. I have been writing her that message for a long, long time now. Speaker Pelosi - you are a disgrace. Previous to this week I meant that as a politican she is a disgrace. Now after a lot of study she has come to her own conclusion on when life begins and many of her Catholic relatives also agree with her stance on abortion. As a Catholic she is a disgrace!! Dear Nancy - leave the church because you obviously do not understand your religion - do not disgrace yourself any further - leave the church and tell your relatives that agree with your ridiculous views on the subject - that they should also transistion to another religion. Really, how dumb is Nancy Pelosi??

Mistakes
Dying isn't the problem if you're a liberal. It will be facing your murdered children when you come to judgment.

How much pain has been caused by abortion. I know; I killed an unborn child (being a "liberated" woman) and now as a grandmother, I wonder about that baby boy. And how he would have enriched my life. So sad, so heartbreaking.

I HOLD THE BELIEF
The murder of innocent life is the worst sin short of denying absolute and true witness of diety. Since not many are even able to do the latter, pro-choicers are the they who will be looking to hide from God because they will not be able to debate it with Him.

While I believe abortion has few acceptable reasons, the choice to have unprotected sex resulting in pregnancy is not one of them. Libs believe they are required to relieve people of the consequences of their choices. The result is a society of irresponsible people.

Choosing between Baby and Mother
This argument is always touted but in fact, there are not very many situations where this is really a choice. Aborting the baby is not likely to save the mothers life. Sometimes the mother is kept alive on life support so that the baby may develop and have a better chance of survival. There are some cases of a mother with cancer that needs chemo that will harm the baby and I have seen the mother CHOOSE to delay chemo rather than harm her baby. Most abortions are done for the inconvenience a baby presents for the mother. Not that these mothers would bother to take care of birth control issues ahead of time.

Pope Nancy
Botox Nancy is confused about her position in this Society and Government.

She seems to believe that she has been elected “Queen” instead of “Speaker of the House.” Her job is to speak for the Majority and Represent the People and facilitate their wishes. She is NOT supposed to DICTATE to the American People what they can and cannot do and have.

She personally as a “majority of one” decided that the Congressional Representatives cannot decide about whether to drill or not to drill for our Energy Resources. She has taken it on herself to prevent the “People’s Representatives” form having that vote. She has decided that “SHE” knows what is best for the American People. We do not deserve to have our Elected Representatives vote what they believe is best. No, we must follow her “Dictates.”

The same was true for Howard Dean and the Democrat Party who decided that the individual States could not select their own Primary Election Dates. Sovereign States MUST have the Democrat Party tell them when they can and cannot have their own elections. And if a State such as Michigan or Florida do not follow “Dictator Dean’s” wishes; then they will not be allowed to count all their votes. Then the Super Delegates can make the choice for the people who their Candidate will be.

Now, we see Pope Nancy dictating what is Church Doctrine. Is there any limit to the amount of Socialism Dictatorship that the Democrat Party is willing to inflict on the American people? NO! There is no limit. They believe they have the Devine Right to Dictate what America should be.

And Please Remember, - - - The Green Movement is the New Socialism and the New World Order that the Democrats are trying to FORCE on the American People in order to control what Communism and Nazism could not do.

Nancy Pelosi is so pathetic.
She and other liberals accuse pro-lifers of being in the Dark Ages, and then she cites a medieval theologian as her authority for when life begins.

With an idiot like this at the helm, is it any wonder that the current Congress has the lowest approval rating of any Congress in history?

Pelosi is IGNORANT!!!
Just go to http://www.abortionno.org and see for yourself that having an abortion is murdering your unborn baby!!! (If you can stomach looking at the video and pictures!!!)
Karen
Montana

JUDY IN FLORIDA
Thank you for your perspective on this. Very ralely will someone share their feelings about this. Thank you.

Pelosie abortion subject.
I am pro life anf believe that life starts at conception. The only gray area for me would have been in the births of people like Pelosie, Feinstein,Boxer,Reed,Mertha and n\many more in the liberal party, although the list would be too numeruos to mention.
















Unbelievable
It's amazing how someone in such a position of power can be such a moron. Baffles my mind. God help us.

Thank You

Thank you all for such thoughtful postings. Special thanks to Dr. Kaye and Butch.

I wish we could send them all to the "Queen of Hearts". and to N.O.W..

We have honor killings in America now, arranged marriages where the bride is 13 or 14 years old,and women in full muslim garb with netting over their eyes so they can see to walk, thanks to the influx of Muslims. Silence from N.O.W..about any of these atrocities. But just let someone try to take away the "RIGHT" of a woman to choose. Then they come out full force. They lack any moral code, just like the Speaker.Cowards ALL!

Interesting too that one of Barry Dunham's V.P. considerations was Gov. Kathleen Sebiliuos of Kansas. She is a champion of Tiller the baby killer.

And while I'm at it....,Barbara Boxer and her buddy Dianne Feinstein believe just as Nancy does.Such cows!Apologies to the cows.


ctjaeger wrote
"The real question appears to be, when does the fetus receive a soul thereby creating its "humanness". On this point, nobody knows the answer and the only answer lies in religious teachings."

Not to disagree with your intent, but there is one secular document that defines the question pretty clearly. It states:

'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.'

That pretty clearly states that all men have a RIGHT TO LIFE and it begins at CREATION. This is not the law of the land, but the author was a pretty smart fellow who went on to take a large part in crafting the laws of the land.

Regardless of one's religious bent, all citizens can base their anti-abortion belief on this powerful statement that announced the beginning of this nation.

St. Augustine Was Pro-life.
Augustine wrote,

“Sometimes their sadistic licentiousness goes so far that they procure poison to produce infertility, and when this is of no avail, they find one means or another to destroy the unborn and flush it from the mother’s womb. For they desire to see their offspring perish before it is alive or, if it has already been granted life, they seek to kill it within the mother’s body before it is born.”

Augustine was clearly Pro-Life.

Pelosi’s makes the most monstrous assertion when she implies the great Doctor of the Catholic Church may have been pro-abortion.

Augustine believed that hominization, or ensoulment, occurred after 40 days for males and 80 days for females. As the article correctly points out, this was based upon the limited biological knowledge at the time. It was also based upon a culture that gave more weight to a male than a female.

No theologian today would argue that ensoulment occurs at a different point in time depending on gender. Above all, the church’s teaching today is clear. Ensoulment occurs at conception.

Pelosi really should read up a bit first, and then think for a really long time before speaks.

She is either a world-class ignoramus or a liar.


Come ON...
Ms. Parker, ya know she couldn't be Pope Pelosi... she couldn't even be Priest Pelosi... or Father Pelosi... it's against the RULES, don't ya know ???
Sister Pelosi is as far as she could go... not a glass ceiling but a cathedral ceiling for the women folk here... get it right next time... Sister Pelosi is as far as she could possibly advance within the framework you've provided.

CHARLES IN FL
You would be justified in punching non-repentant child killers and their supporters if you by chance pass a pro-choice rally. I'd be glad to be on that jury (even though I wouldn't) - you'd get a pass from me. Stories like yours and others reaffirm my view on this horrible proceedure.

Charles
I cannot imagine the pain of carrying a child to term and it not survive. Also,pain and disappointment for the rest of the family. Once is too much,two is almost unbearable to think of.

Life is so precious,it is beyond my comprehension how anyone could purposely take one of these innocent babies lives. Those who do wvidently have no heart.You and your family have my sympathy.

To: Clyde #89
You asked, "What would your answer be if your wife was pregnant and a doctor said that your wife would die unless an abortion was performed?"

Here's my answer. If my wife will die without an abortion, and if my child will die with an abortion, then someone will die regardless of my decision. In that case, I would support saving either person, since both are of equal value as persons. Personally, I would save my wife. However, my wife has said she would want the baby saved. It would be a terrible decision to make, but it would not be an immoral decision either way because, as stated, someone will die regardless of the decision.

To: Clyde #89 - A bit more
Two related points to my last post:

First, understand that your "wife would die" scenario is exceedingly rare in real life. Of the 1 million plus abortions performed annually in the US, far fewer than 1000 are for this reason.

Second, we're talking here about the LIFE of the mother not the HEALTH of the mother. The vast, vast majority of women abort because "I'm not sure I'm ready to become a mother. This is causing me tremendous stress. The stress is harmful to my health. I'm aborting to remove the harm to my health”. This is why I, like all pro-lifers, support exceptions for the LIFE of the mother, but oppose exceptions for the HEALTH of the mother.

What the scientists say about life
For those like Mrs. Pelosi who claim that the question of when life begins is undecided here are the scientists who appeared before the Senate. Nots Bene: no scientists appeared to dispute or refute these findings.
"--------------------------------------
In 1981 (April 23-24) a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee held hearings on the very question before us here: When does human life begin?

Appearing to speak on behalf of the scientific community was a group of internationally known geneticists and biologists who had the same story to tell, namely, that human life begins at conception. Though offered the opportunity to provide opposing evidence -- none came forth.


--Dr. Micheline M. Mathews-Roth, Harvard medical School, gave confirming testimony, supported by references from over 20 embryology and other medical textbooks -- that human life began at conception.

--"Father of Modern Genetics" Dr. Jerome Lejeune told the lawmakers: "To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion ... it is plain experimental evidence."

--Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic, added: "By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."
To be continued


Dear Fabius Cunctator
Good point:

"absence of that Amendment means that this nation is morally sick.
Pelosi's weakness is just a reflection of the nation's collective ambivalence and sinfulness about banning abortion."

We must acknowledge that all of our modern societies; not just America, are in a sad state. Even in Poland! Spain! Ireland!

They've also neglected their glorious religious heritage; allowing abortion to become law.

Not only we here!

The devil is rampant in the world today. I see it as his last fling; antichrist and the apocalypse right under our noses. God has permitted him the freedom to tear away all souls who have lapsed into lukewarm and reluctant sheep and abandoned their sheepfold. It will be his final short interval of power on earth. Then will the faithful say those words near the end:

Maranatha; Come, Lord
Jesus!

And HE WILL -- He said it and He'll come at last.

What the scientists say about life
Continued
--Dr. McCarthy de Mere, medical doctor and law professor, University of Tennessee, testified: "The exact moment of the beginning of personhood and of the human body is at the moment of conception."

--Dr. Alfred Bongiovanni, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, concluded, "I am no more prepared to say that these early stages represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty ... is not a human being."

--Dr. Richard V. Jaynes: "To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous."

--Dr. Landrum Shettles, sometimes called the "Father of In Vitro Fertilization" notes, "Conception confers life and makes that life one of a kind." And on the Supreme Court ruling _Roe v. Wade_, "To deny a truth [about when life begins] should not be made a basis for legalizing abortion."

--Professor Eugene Diamond: "...either the Justices were fed a backwoods biology or they were pretending ignorance about a scientific certainty."

JUDY

.....I am sorry that you had to learn the hard way the consequences of your decision ...

.....COLOSSUS

Jews and Eskimos are pro-choice
There are a couple of issues here, but the bottom line is that no Catholic who follows the Pope's positions is qualified to be president of the United States. Quod Erat Demonstratum. Such Catholics should be outlawed from being president. Here are the issues.

1. Did God really say that abortion is a sin? If God said it Joe Lieberman and most other Jews must be deaf. Bottom line. God didn't say it. The Pope did. But the Pope doesn't speak for God.

2. Slightly nuanced is this question. Is abortion really a sin? Only if God says it is so that everyone can hear, including Eskimos and the Pre-Christ Romans. God apparently whispered in a few, select ears, if he did say it.

3. We live in a democracy in which the president is expected to represent all Americans, even those he disagrees with; and, ideally, he is expected to take those who don't agree with him into consideration when making policy (ideally). No Pope following president can represent Americans who support abortion. Under such a president we are disenfranchised. Such a president vitiates democracy.

4. When does a baby get human rights? When he reaches the age of 30. Human beings are still learning to be human beings up until that age and don't qualify to be called human. It's a learning process not a declaration by fiat.

5. But, anyway, one of our human rights is the right not to be invaded and murdered by the United States. If we're going to say that abortion violates an individual's human rights lets be consistent about human rights. The United Nations has a good list of human rights.

Obmanation
Pelosi should be Ashamed of herself as a human being, a mother, a daughter, a sister and someone with authority in the government. She isn't a Catholic in any way, and in my opinion not even Christian. And Obama and his INFANTICIDE is 1000 times worse. What kind of person do you have to be to vote for absolutly no medical help to be given to aborted babies born ALIVE? Now it's not only in the womb they want to kill, but also outside the womb. I would vote for a dog before I'd ever vote for Obama. The dog would have more compassion. You Democrats who are moderate to conservative should be cringing at this canidate repesenting you and them telling you to just get in line and support this evil killing machine. Stand on your morals and values and send the far left a message of " no way does he represent me" this November. VOTE FOR LIFE FOR ALL!!!

What about Freedom and Liberty?
On 99.9% of other threads on Town Hall conservatives tell us that freedom and liberty are among the highest, if not THE HIGHEST of conservative principles, ie, personal responsibility.

Life's not fair. Abilities are unequality distributed, thus we live in an unfair world. But government shouldn't try to correct this. Government should do only a few things, mainly national security and should not intrude on the liberty of the individual to make his/her own decisions.

Consistently and logically women should have the freedom and liberty to choose abortion.

If God doesn't like it that's between her and the woman who gets an abortion. It's not up to her neighbors to lobby government to interfere with the freedom and liberty of an individual just because they don't like the choices she makes with her freedom and liberty.

That is, if you have any regard for consistency and logic. That is, if you don't let your emotions make your decisions.

Pro-Abortion President
Proud Liberal opines that no pro-life president can represent Americans who support abortion. If that's so, then no pro-choice president can represent Americans who support pro-life. Under such a president WE would be disenfranchised!
Same old liberal bull!

Proud Lib.
Wow! Q.E.D. Perhaps you believe yourself to be well versed in critical thinking.

As you presented a fallacy, instead of a proof, I have to wonder if you even understand what Q.E.D means.

When you become capable of presenting a non-fallacious argument, or proof, as to why a pro-life “Catholic should be outlawed from being president,” get back to me.

If you can present a proof, there is no need for a dialogue.


Sovereignty of God in Life…

‘…human life begins at conception…On this matter at least, the church and science are in agreement.’ -Kathleen Parker


Why does the church believe life begins at conception? Why is the argument limited to the beginning of physical life? The Bible is clear that God is sovereign over all things including life. Debate over this issue indicates our deficiency in Biblical Theology.

Spiritual life begins when the Spirit quickens men who are dead in their sin. It is written of these men that they are known before the creation of the world. Their persons are foreknown…

‘And those who dwell on the earth will marvel, whose names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world’ [Revelation 17:8; 13:8].

This is something also known by the Old Covenant church…

‘Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.
And in Your book they all were written,
The days fashioned for me,
When as yet there were none of them’ [Psalms 139:16].

Persons and everything about them are foreknown. If men believed this doctrine of the sovereignty of God in life, then we would honor the unborn child as an image bearer of the Creator of life and do what is necessary to preserve their life.

Where there is life there is the great potential of an image bearer of God and the hope of redemption.

GOD given right to choose
The human organism at conception through birth is physically incapable of making decisions. Culturally speaking a child of two might start making decisions, the first of which is usually "no."

I say this because conservatives often point out that the fetus is incapable of making its own decision about life or death, hence those who are able to make the decision for the fetus, ie, protect the rights and the humanness of a fetus, should make the decision for life.

But God, so at least one poster has declared, as recognized by the Declaration of Independence,has given individuals the right to life.

Elsewhere, conservatives cite freedom and liberty as GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.

And, another poster, has lamented that she, now a grandmother, had an abortion many years ago and feels now that she made a bad decision back then.

There's a question about what one does with their God given freedom and liberty. Is a child of 2 or 5 capable of making human decisions? What about a young person of 14 or 18? It would be of interest to know how old this grandmother was when she made her poor decision.

Conservatives seem unwilling to recognize that age needs to be considered when judging how human an individual is; they seem unwilling to acknowledge that the right to the bundle of human rights is in the hands of people other than the individual and is granted serially as one ages and is capable of making better decisions.

WaydownSouth/Jack
Waydown: I was joshing with the QED. Sorry you missed that.

Jack: You are absolutely right. The thing is that the presidency is larger than the man, including the Pope man. When the president seeks to do what is right for America he should define America as it consists of an inordinate number of groups with different beliefs and agendas. Synchronizing and integrating the desires of ALL AMERICANS is his job.

The logic is that we enable people to choose how to live their own lives to the extent possible, which means that those who want abortions should be able to choose them. The presidency is larger than the man.

It's curious how the Democrats...
...continually ATTACK Christianity with all of their heart and soul, UNTIL the few months leading up to an election cycle.

Then they literally stumble over each other in an effort to convince us how spiritual they are.

Fortunately TALKING about how religious you are rarely rewards them with extra votes.

Educated, intelligent Christians know better.

Science Weighs In
So, it is safe to assume that this scientific knowledge is "an inconvenient truth"?

Never Enough
Baseballdoc writes:

"...'Blood-on-his-hands' Teddy ...I wonder how many indulgences he had to buy from the Catholic Church after he left Mary Jo to die in a canal?"

I don't think the Catholic Church "sells" indulgences anymore. That abominable and sacrilegious practice went out with the Council of Trent and the Counter-Reformation back in the Sixteenth Century.

He could, however, secure indulgences by prayer and other acts of piety. But knowing Kennedy (by reputation only, of course), he would never perform anything remotely resembling an act of piety, and he probably hasn't said a prayer of any kind since he was ten years old (and I may be overly generous in saying that).

More to the point, even if he were the least bit inclined to do anything that could secure an indulgence (plenary or partial), I don't think Kennedy could possibly pray enough or perform enough acts of piety to secure the indulgences he would need.

Mark my words: That man is going to spend a considerable amount of time in Purgatory, IF HE'S LUCKY!

Obama = Pelosi
Every time someone spins that nonsense about McCain being a 3 Bush term, Repub's need to point out that Obama will be a 1st term for Pelosi, that she will actually be calling the shots on what agenda gets acted on.

That should scare anybody.

SonofTed
When I was growing up the mainline protestant churches always seemed me to be the mainline churches, mainly presbyterian and methodist. Though I imagine that in the South other religions (which we called the Holy Rollers) were, perhaps, the main churches.

From my perspective, in the intervening years evangelicalism has spilled over from the South into the rest of the country, but more importantly, has had a great edge in public relations and spin, owing a lot to TV evangelism.

And, in the old days, a person's religion was their own business and we deemed it a poor thing to bring it into politics and the government.

You seem to be defining religion narrowly. The mainline, though weakened is still there, and the Catholic group on Social Justice is still here as well.

developement vs life
development is not life. human developement begins,... not the same as human life begins. the author manages to change the whole menaning of ther quoted authors in one sentence. this is a terrible way to use someonme elses auithority. by the way i do know what st augustin would say about life and abortion he tp;d me yesterday. . it is not what she says he would. i am always quoting the present day utterences of long dead humans.ts roughly the same as republicans constantly talking about what would reagan do. only i really know and im not telling any more then the pope will tell you what was said at Fatima (I beleive)

Proud Liberal
Proud Liberal, you've convinced me. I am now pro-abortion. I don't want to abort helpless babies though, I want to abort ignorant, soul-less Liberals. Please give me your address so I can come to your home, puncture your skull as "Doctor" Tiller would & suck out all that useless garbage inside your head. God knows there's no brains in there! Proud Liberal, you would make Dr. Mengele proud. Liberals & Democrats are tireless in their efforts to keep the Nazi's "Final Solution" alive & thriving! Seig Heil Proud Liberal!

She's ALREADY Excommunicated
Jeff C asks:

"In the early days of the Catholic Church, Saints were canonized by acclamation. Could we excommunicate by acclamation?"

Only the Pope (and by extension, the bishops) can officially excommunicate someone. If there was ever a provision for "excommunication by acclamation", it went the way of "canonization by acclamation".

It really doesn't matter, though. By virtue of the fact that she has openly and obstinately denied an official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, and by virtue of the fact that she has also openly and obstinately disobeyed the Church's official authority, Pelosi is already excommunicated "ipso facto".

Every priest in the country--and across the world, as well--would be well within his rights and his authority to not only deny Pelosi Holy Communion, but also to refuse to hear her confession, to administer Extreme Unction to her if she were to become terminally ill or seriously injured, and to refuse her a Catholic funeral and burial if she shoudl suffer a sudden and unprovided death.

If it were possible to "excommunicate by acclamation", however, I'd be very much in favor of doing that to Pelosi. And she wouldn't be the only one, either.


Pro-Abortion Religions
Proud Liberal scrawls with his pink crayon:

"Jews and Eskimos are pro-choice."

While I can't speak for the Eskimos, that statement would come as a news flash to most Orthodox Jews.

Reform Jews ARE pro-abortion; that can't be denied. And so are Unitarian Universalists, who actually wear their support of taxpayer-funded abortion on demand as some perverse badge of honor.

These two are the only religious groups that I'm aware of that are unabashedly pro-abortion. Most other religions are either unabashedly pro-life (Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Southern Baptists, Orthodox Jews), officially neutral with pro-life tendencies (Lutherans, High Church Anglicans, Conservative Jews) or officially neutral with pro-abortion tendencies (Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists).

Ken
Oh boy do I ever agree with you!! Thanks!!

Re: Subject: Obama = Pelosi
You may be on to something, Chuck.

Have you sent the McCain Campaign an E-mail suggesting that they run a series of "Ubama = Pelosi" ads? I think they'd be chillingly effective.

If you haven't, go for it. The country you save may be your own.

Unalienable Rights
The U.S. government is responsible for securing the rights that the Creator granted.

If rights come from God, than they are unalienable. One may not deprive another of such rights regardless of their power or position.

If rights come from man, they are not unalienable. One may deprive another of their rights for any reason and at any time the depriver chooses. The depriver only needs to possess the power to prevail over the deprived.

If rights came from man and not God, there would be no overriding ethical proscription against one person murdering another.

This is Barbarism. This is Totalitarianism. This is Evil!

Abortion Apologists
Pro-abortionists will give any excuse to avoid taking blame for murdering a child. They always talk about rape and incest. I would like to know the percentage of abortions that are the results of that.

When incest does occur,many times the abortion is performed and the guilty one is not prosecuted because of family shame. I have read that rape rarely results in rape.Although it can.

Many young girls are encouraged to have abortions and they suffer guilt the rest of their lives. One trauma piled onto another.

I may be a fanatic,but I believe our country will suffer internally as long as this monstrosity continues. How can God be pleased when we are murdering his little ones?


Re: Abortion Apologists
Rowly inquires:

"Pro-abortionists will give any excuse to avoid taking blame for murdering a child. They always talk about rape and incest. I would like to know the percentage of abortions that are the results of that."

According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the OFFICIAL RESEARCH ARM OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD, fewer than ONE PERCENT of the 1.5 million abortions performed in the United States each year are "therapeutic"; performed for the so-called "hard cases" of rape, incest (which is really just rape; the rapist's relationship to his victim is totally irrelevant), severe and irreparable fetal deformity and serious risk to the life or health of the mother.

The remaining ninety-nine percent--by Planned Parenthood's OWN ADMISSION--are purely elective; performed because the woman, for egocentric or economic reasons, doesn't want to have a baby.

It can be--and has been-argued that the interests of justice are not served when laws are absolute; that we must allow for exceptions. While the pro-abortion crowd wants everybody to believe that this is their argument, it really isn't. Their actual argument is that we should make the EXCEPTIONAL CASE (rape, etc.) the BASIS OF THE LAW; that is, since some women become pregnant as a result of having been raped, and since it would be unjust to force them to live with this tragic "consequence" of having been violated, we must make abortion available at any stage of a pregnancy to any woman who wants one for any reason, and that if she can't afford to pay for an abortion herself, the taxpayers should foot the bill for it.

The interests of justice are not served when exceptional cases become the basis for the law.

Rand Lamberth
Not so - Commandment Six is still valid to all christians.

Explanation, Please?
Rich D. writes:

"Not so - Commandment Six is still valid to all christians."

I presume by "Commandment Six", you mean the one that says, "Thou shalt not kill."

In the Roman Catholic Decalogue, "Thou shalt not kill" is Commandment Five. Commandment Six is, "Thou shalt not commit adultery."

In any case, Rich, please explain what I wrote that is "not so."

Condi and Laura Bush are pro-choice
Perhaps we'd better get their answer about when a baby gets human rights.

Don't Ask Us To Pay For Abortions
It's bad enough that abortions are legal, but to demand that pro-lifers fund abortion through their tax dollars is just outrageous.

Make women wanting abortions pay for the abortion themselves. That alone should decrease the number of abortions; these women would find alternative birth control methods rather than abortions. Why should they "be responsible" when they don't have to? Too many people don't stand up and take responsibility for their own actions; it's always someone else's fault they are losers.




Apples and Oranges
Proud Liberal scrawls with his pink crayon:

"Condi and Laura Bush are pro-choice."

Even conceding that this is true, Proud, it's totally irrelevant for two reasons. First, neither Laura Bush nor Condoleezza Rice are Roman Catholics who are misrepresenting Church teaching on abortion, as Pelosi is. Second, neither Mrs. Bush nor Miss Rice are public officials in positions of direct influence over public abortion policy, as Pelosi also is.

When you compare apples and oranges, you demonstrate your total lack of credibility.

Say-so is not fact, Ms. Parker
What, are you a Logical Positivist now? Science before philosophy? I will be sure to use that against you the next time you write a column having anything to do with anything that can be measured, weighed, and observed by science. And I always have more "experts" on my side than you do.

Once again, a socon equivocates between "life" and "human being." A fetus is a potential human being, not an actual one. As such, it has no rights. Only actual human beings have rights.

The out-of-contexts assertions of ANYONE carry no weight whatsoever. "This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual." No, it doesn't - not if by individual, he means a human being. A fertilized egg is not a human being, and saying so won't make it so. Reason is clear on that point.

Unlike a baby, a fetus is unformed, is biologically parasitical, and cannot observe the world and mentally integrate its sense perceptions. "Brain waves" and "heartbeat" are arbitrary, meaningless, totally non-objective criteria with no significance whatsoever. You've got nothing.

BIGSKYER Says:
"One more thing, Science has long shown pictures of those wiggly things in sperm. Women have things called eggs, so the wiggly things and the eggs are alive right, for if they weren't how could they produce a living thing?"

And this just proves my point that the socon must eventually come to the position that since sperm and eggs are alive and "human," they should be granted the status of human being with individual rights.

Miss Know-It-All
Wendy scrawls with her pink crayon:

"Only actual human beings have rights."

Okay, Wendy. Since, in your infinite arrogance, you think you know everything, suppose you define an "actual human being" for the rest of us!

And then what?
Since all human beings have inalienable rights (you do still agree on that point, don't you?), and a fetus has these inalienable rights and so does the mother, how do you resolve this conflict of interest? Certainly you would not suggest that a fetus has a right to enslave another human being. A woman certainly has a right to not be forced to carry and feed another human being. What is to be done with all the fetuses removed? Certainly you are not an advocate of socialized medicine, giving a class of human beings expensive health care for free until they die in an hour? How is that morally different from just letting them "sit on the shelf?"

If you were to suggest that a fetus does have a right to parasitize off another human being, that would make you an advocate of big government, collectivism, statism. You would have no principled argument on any issue against the liberals.

Rand Lamberth
Sure. An actual human being comes into existence at childbirth. That would be natural childbirth, when the body expels the fully developed organism at full-term, not when a doctor removes an aborted fetus, as socons like to redefine. Glad I could clarify that for you.

To Proud Liberal
RE: Just a thought on your response to SonOfTed

I respect your belief that religion shouldn’t play a part in politics, but our laws are based soundly on morality. Our law clearly states it is a crime to unlawfully take a life because that would be murder and murder is also a moral issue - so the lines cross. On that note, Pelosi said Thomas Aquinas believed life begins at 3 months because that is when the child receives their soul. There’s the rub on the whole issue of abortion – when does “abortion” become “murder”? What if a woman has misjudged the number of days she’s been pregnant? From a moral point of view, can we be certain when it moves from “abortion” to “murder.” Is it an abortion and just “eliminating a fetus” at 29 days, yet on day 31 it is “eliminating a life” and becomes murder? The people from The Party that devoutly defends a Woman's Right To Choose can’t give a definitive answer on whether that woman’s choice involves murder. Obama has now moved this argument to a whole other level because he can’t even say that life begins outside the womb because he voted 3 times against the “Babies Born Alive Act.” As a note of interest, the ultrasound was not invented when Roe v Wade became law. There is a video on YouTube made by one of the founding members of NARAL that completely changed my position on the matter of abortion. It is a video not for the faint of heart called The Silent Scream. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek

Here's "What"
Wendy scrawls with her pink crayon:

"Since all human beings have inalienable rights (you do still agree on that point, don't you?), and a fetus has these inalienable rights and so does the mother, how do you resolve this conflict of interest?"

Who says there's a "conflict of interest" between the unborn baby and the mother? If in fact there IS a "conflict of interest", it's only in the mind of the woman seeking the abortion.

And that "conflict" can be summarized in one word: SELFISHNESS.

Wendy scrawls further:

"Certainly you would not suggest that a fetus has a right to enslave another human being."

No mother that I've ever known--or would CARE to know--ever referred to pregnancy or motherhood as "slavery".

Your view of motherhood is very warped, Wendy. And you're to be pitied because of it.

Wendy scrawls again:

"A woman certainly has a right to not be forced to carry and feed another human being."

This is true, Wendy. But there is a time for her to make that choice. And the proper time for her to make that choice is before she gets married and before she has sex. Once she has conceived, the decision is made for her.

(To be continued.)

Here's "What"--Part II
Wendy scrawls with her pink crayon:

"An actual human being comes into existence at childbirth."

You're wrong, you're wrong, you're ABSOLUTELY WRONG!

At the moment a child is conceived, she is marked with a HUMAN GENETIC SIGNATURE, a genetic signature that is TOTALLY DISTINCT from that of EITHER of her parents. Her DNA is HUMAN. She cannot be anything OTHER than HUMAN.

To argue otherwise is the depth of intellectual dishonesty.

Wendy scrawls further:

"That would be natural childbirth, when the body expels the fully developed organism at full-term . . . ."

So premature babies aren't "human", is that what you're saying, Wendy?

Wendy scrawls again:

"What is to be done with all the fetuses removed? Certainly you are not an advocate of socialized medicine, giving a class of human beings expensive health care for free until they die in an hour? How is that morally different from just letting them "sit on the shelf?"

This is a false choice; one of the favorite propaganda tactics of the pro-abortion left.

In the first place, who says the unborn babies have to be "removed"? Again, you are alleging a "conflict of interest". And in your view, the determination that "removal" of the unborn baby is in order would be made by the mother.

And again, the rationale behind this determination can be summarized in one word: SELFISHNESS.


I've stopped being 'green'
Since the planet now apparently wants to euthanize the aged and the decrepit, annihilate the unborn babies and tolerate the voluntary abortion or selling of little girls into sexual slavery, I'm voluntarily stopping my recycling and my efforts to save the planet. If you're going to tell me that salamanders and amoeba and forests without limit trump human life you'll have to to do without my efforts since I still happen to think that 'Gaia' doesn't trump God or His most favored creature.

As for Pelosi, I have to keep reminding myself: Love the sinner, hate the sin..but boy howdy she makes it hard not to want to throw her into North Korea and Afghanistan and see how far all her caterwauling will get her there.

Dear Rand,

We are at that point Jesus Christ was telling His disciples about.

"Do not cast your pearls before swine; because they will turn and trample them, and tear you," (paraphrased.)

When all is considered, these odd humanoids are flattered that you're offering them a platform. Snip off the lifeline they desperately need from us.

Roger, Wilco, Over and Out!
Dreadnaught admonishes:

"When all is considered, these odd humanoids are flattered that you're offering them a platform. Snip off the lifeline they desperately need from us."

Message received and noted, Dreadnaught.

Rand
I presume by "Commandment Six", you mean the one that says, "Thou shalt not kill."

No, I mean the one that reads "Lo tirtzach" (No murder, meaning taking innocent human life).

Presbyterians are not officially neutral on that issue, and I doubt that the others are.

A Distinction
Rich D. clarifies:

"Presbyterians are not officially neutral on that issue, and I doubt that the others are."

Probably not. But their (Presbyterians, et al) official squishiness on abortion indicates that there is at least an element in their official governing circles for whom an unborn baby doesn't fit the definition of "innocent human life."

For Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Southern Baptists, Mormons and Orthodox Jews, the definition of "innocent human life" OFFICIALLY and UNEQUIVOCALLY includes unborn babies.

That's the distinction I'm drawing here.

Maybe you're trying to convince yourself
Wendy

Reply # 157

"Since (sic) all human beings have inalienable rights (you do still agree on that point, don't you?), and a fetus has these inalienable rights and so does the mother, how do you resolve this conflict of interest?"

What's the conflict? They can both live.

"Certainly you would not suggest that a fetus has a right to enslave another human being."

BWAHAHA! When does this "slavery" end? When the kid gets a job at 14? 18?

"A woman certainly has a right to not be forced to carry and feed another human being."

You seem to becoming a caricature of yourself. The silver is gone from your looking-glass.

"What is to be done with all the fetuses removed?"

We can swiftly take them down to the Swift's meatpacking plant. The sell Placenta Helper (tm), too, for really hungry working men.

Church Conviction
Wonder if any Bishop or Priest has the fortitude to refuse Nanny Pelosi communion, let alone excommunicate her from the church, and not just talk about it.

The church needs to enforce their own rules, on all the Pro-Death Catholics in the public eye. Stop giving confession, refuse communion and excommunicate them.

If they, Nancy-Teddy-and John are truly Catholics, this is condemnation to their hell.

VIABILITY IS NOT THE ISSUE
How pathetic that we as the people of the greatest nation on earth are having this kind of discussion!  We have been so blessed because our nation had its beginning as a result of Christians that desired freedom OF religion and not freedom FROM religion.  Freedom FROM religion is what our Democratic leaders now desire.  Their desire to take God out of everything will take this great country to its grave.  It's what has led to the greatest hollocaust this world has ever known -- the murder of 40+ million innocent babies. The Bible states that God knew David before he was formed in the womb. The fact that God "knows" a human being, that "being" from the moment of conception has a soul and is a unique individual in God's eyes, and we do NOT have the right to take that life. I read the back of the BOOK. God wins! End of story!

God "knew" David....
I believe that God has a plan...and we're all in it and part of it...which is why I can't imagine one human being denying another human being---life...I've heard the tired argument that poor women are the ones getting the abortions because poor families can't afford another mouth to feed...baloney!!! Statistics will prove that most abortions are perpetrated by white, middle to upper class women who don't want to be "inconvenienced" by another child. I often wonder if they even discuss this with their husbands before they go to the clinic...

"America, America, God shed his grace on thee"....but not for much longer if we continue to keep God out of our everyday lives...




Pelosi on Abortion.
I am a 72 year old grandmother, had a 9 th grade education, and at the age 13 was well aware when life began for each and every human being, it was taught in 1st qtr biology class's, "when sperm meets egg",call it conception or fertilization, it's as simple as that. That's the way God intended it. ssoldie

proud liberal who should be ashamed.
"Perhaps we'd better get their answer about when a baby gets human rights."

Why? Do you let Laura Bush and Condi Rice do your thinking for you?

Naah! You're a liberal. You only let Democrats do your thinking for you.

P.S. More women are pro-life than men.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.