Father Barron has this knack for saying the exact thing I would say if my IQ were a lot higher. Another great one from Fr. Barron.
HT World on Fire
January 25, 2011
Abortion, fr. barron
January 25, 2011 at 5:15 am
January 25, 2011 at 10:04 am
Why hot air? That's not an argument Anonymous, that is merely a display of ignorance. Try to answer his arguments so we may debate rationally.
January 25, 2011 at 10:42 am
Fabulous, Father Barron.
41% rare? New York the city of Saint Unborn, he is a African American saint.
January 25, 2011 at 2:53 pm
Hot as hell.
January 25, 2011 at 4:54 pm
"Hot air," huh.
It always amuses me to see just how poverty-stricken the other side's arguments are. Thanks, Anonymous 12:15 AM, for reminding us of how little logic, reason, and courtesy are on your side.
I wonder, Anonymous: what temperature of air would you say is involved when one is discussing the murders committed by Kermit Gosnell? Or is it more fun to discuss air temperature than to contemplate the cold-blooded murders of living but helpless infants?
January 26, 2011 at 12:01 am
I adore "Anonymous"!
Sometimes he hits the nail on the head and I realize like Chesteron, he's what's right with the world.
And of course, sometimes he's a no-skin-in-the-game cynic that drops the value of the discussion to near zero. "Hot air" is one of those times.
Get back on the wagon Anonymous!
January 26, 2011 at 2:07 am
Anonymous you're too stupid to understand stupid is what a stupid does.
January 26, 2011 at 2:23 am
I always thought the arguments that abortion is a "right" and that it should be rare is very peculiar. How many other rights do we say should be rare? People should rarely peaceably assemble? Free speech? Nobody even argues that guns should be "safe, legal and rare." Of course it is easy to find the right to bear arms in the Constitution, so we don't have to dissimulate (except if you want to take away that enumerated right).
January 26, 2011 at 11:41 am
You're thinking too rationally about "rights." Most abortion supporters who use that argument are being very deceptive insofar as they would agree with you that it's a specious argument. They might even recognize, if pressed, that it's an empty argument offered up for the sake of appearances, i.e., as a paean to the notion that maybe what is destroyed in an abortion is not simply an amorphous blob. But do they really believe abortion should be rare? Of course not, at least theoretically.
The most honest among abortion supporters are now beginning to acknowledge this fact in not so subtle ways: they admit that they don't think a "right" like abortion must be rare. Indeed, the Democratic Party platform has now changed subtly wrt abortion: no longer is "rare" included in it, but rather it must be kept safe and legal.
It seems to me that Fr. Barron broaches a very big open secret about abortion: the radical feminists who so often scream so loudly in demanding that abortion is an absolute right are usually not the ones getting most of them. Heck, look at how many of the pro-aborts protesting at the March for Life in DC and in San Fran were all well past their child-bearing years! Instead, they are demanding unlimited sexual freedom without consequences, and doing so under the umbrella of protecting abortion rights. That's why they simply ignore or even attempt to justify the evils of abortion clinics in many poor neighborhoods, e.g., Kermit Gosnell and his chamber of horrors in Philadelphia. They simply don't care about those women or their abortions, and if they put up too much of a fuss about such examples, then it could mean restrictions on their absolute right to have sex freely and without consequences.
Listen to honest abortion supporters closely, and this is almost invariably what you'll hear, even if they can't or won't express their arguments so starkly.
January 26, 2011 at 3:55 pm
Kermit Gosnell? I'm sorry Paul, did you drop this name?
January 26, 2011 at 8:31 pm
Actually, I've been in the midst of a very revealing discussion with several pro-choice moms (this particular group all have 4+ kids)and it seems that your everyday pro-choice woman on the block truly thinks that forcing a woman to bear a child that is unwanted is to not be compassionate. They think access to safe/legal abortion is essential to ministering to a woman facing an unwanted pregnancy.
Many of them have been unable to admit that a fetus=a human being. They refer to a fetus's 'personhood' while refusing to use the word human. Jen Fulwiler had an exellent article about why otherwise 'good' people can justify killing another as in euthanasia, abortion, genocide etc…and she really hit it home about our tendency to de-humanise the victim.
I do not believe that most of these women have ever truly examined their beliefs about their absolute right to have sex without concequences or the fact that they because they are pro-choice means that they believe that some human beings are worthy of basic individual rights and some or not. In fact, when that is stated, in plain words before their eyes, they do not make those connections-they simply refuse to.
January 27, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Tracy, I wonder if any of them have read the following article about Harold Cassidy:
Of course, it's in Mother Jones, so the combox discussion is stomach turning, but the article ought to be eye opening for anyone who thinks women don't suffer through abortion.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
© 2021 Creative Minority Report — Powered by WordPress
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑