I can not stay quiet ...

[funscout 11]

I know that my antiabortion views are repulsive to some of you, but I feel called by God to share this story:

 

Many years ago, I almost disobeyed God's call to me when I wanted to keep quiet as fellow teachers discussed the upcoming election. I was one of only a few Republicans in the whole school, so I usually kept my opinions to myself. After all, why would I want to rock the boat when I had to work with these people every day?

 

That day I could barely eat my lunch as I wrestled with God's urging, and my own desire to avoid conflict. Finally, God gave me the courage to do as He wanted, and I stated that I could not vote for anyone who condoned abortion, and that I always voted for the candidate who most closely followed God's laws. Some were quick to say that Democrats were better at helping kids after they were born, which I diagreed with, after all, look at how the welfare program has hurt generations of poor people by encouraging them to remain in poverty. Also, even if Democrats WERE better at helping kids after birth, how did that make it okay to kill kids before they were born? Of course, no one could answer that. I knew that many of my Democrat co-workers considered themselves Christians, so I can only guess that they just didn't allow themselves to think about the reality of abortion.

 

Later that day I discovered why God had been so insistent that I speak up. One of my co-workers privately came up to me and thanked me for reminding her of her Christian values. She admitted that she had never let herself think about abortion, and instead voted for the candidate that she felt would best help HER personally. She told me that she felt ashamed for all the times that she had previously voted for a pro-abortion candidate. I was nearly in tears as I confided to her how ashamed I was of myself, because I had almost done what would have been better for me personally (kept quiet) rather than what was better for all God's children (speaking up.)

 

Now, I know very few people's minds will be changed by my story, but I'm not going to ignore God's call to me this time, either. Whether you agree or diagree with my views, I hope everyone will at least join me in praying that our elected leaders will make the right choices in the eyes of God.

 

 

[Beavah 205]

Yah, I reckon a lot of us struggle with this one, eh?

 

No question, abortion is murder of a human being, pure and simple.

 

Problem for me is always that da world of politics is so darn complimicated.

 

Now, my barber, I know he's a bit of a democrat. Should I stop usin' my barber, because what I pay him for a haircut might end up bein' donated to a candidate who supports abortion? Best secretary I ever had was pro-choice, largely because her sister had made a mess of her life through some bad choices. I wonder if I should have let her go, rather than risk supportin' pro-choice causes through givin' her a paycheck?

 

If I support a president who claims to be personally anti-abortion, but who has condoned the kidnap and torture of innocent men, have I really done the right thing? I admit I've known some anti-abortion politicians who were dumber than a peck of turnips in the sun. Is electin' them really helpin' anyone? Aren't I responsible for the harm they do?

 

Yah, complimicated. I decided that neither my barber nor my secretary really has much ability to affect abortions. Neither does POTUS. Manipulatin' the makeup of the courts is a fool's errand. Abortion is a question that can only be answered by the voice of the people themselves.

 

The job of a proper Christian is to win hearts, not win votes.

 

I reckon I don't win the heart of my secretary by removin' her from her job. Havin' grown older and wiser, I think it's obvious that we don't win hearts by tryin' to game the system or stack the courts either, eh? More than half the time, it's the politicians that are manipulatin' us, usin' an anti-abortion platform to get money and votes and then not doin' much of anything anyways.

 

Gettin' rid of the scourge of abortion is a ground war, fought heart to heart a person at a time until we build a true robust majority. Though I reckon there'd be some bonuses to lettin' in a lot more of those Mexican Catholic illegal immigrants to help tilt the scales, eh? Those Democrats might not be all bad .

 

Beavah

 

[Mr. Boyce 13]

Abortion is a low and mean and nasty business any way you view it. Should be outlawed as barbaric. I feel the same way, intuitive dislike, toward capital punishment. I'm a political moderate. It's good you spoke up: more and more it seems people are finding real problems with the practice of abortion.

[funscout 11]

Beavah, I understand your point about everyday people who are pro-choice. I would never condemn someone for their beliefs. If I feel they are going against God, then I pray for those people, I don't condemn them. Also, barbers and secretaries don't have the power to change the laws, only elected officials do. That's why I don't vote for people who condone abortion. That doesn't mean I can't be their friend. I do have friends who are pro-choice, and I pray for them.

 

By the way, I actually considered myself pro-choice back when I was in my twenties. Although I was personally against abortion, I didn't feel it was my business what other people did. I was one of those Christians who chose to avoid thinking about the reality of abortion. It wasn't until I saw the ultrasound of my own child, in my womb, that I realized how wrong I had been. I wish someone had spoken up to me back in the 1980s, but whoever God had called to "awaken" me, apparently decided to keep quiet.

[Rooster7 11]

funscout - good post.

 

What is the greater call?

 

Is it to vote for someone who you think will bring the most prosperity to you, your family, your friends, and the country?

 

Or is it...to vote for someone who you believe is in step with God, His values, and the worldview that your faith has instilled in you?

 

Personally, while I hope/pray for both, I place the greater emphasis on the latter...because that is what I feel God is calling me and others to do.

 

And another thing...

 

For those who would criticize folks for allowing their faith to sway their votes - I say God is in everything, not just the building we worship in on Sunday mornings. If your God is confined to a particular space and time, then good for you. I suppose thats convenient for some. My God extends his hand into my life on a daily basis and is not confined to a single arena and time.

 

[John-in-KC 311]

As Beavah said, one mind, one heart at a time, through prayer and conversation.

 

One side comment: Being pro-life does mean setting in place the various support systems (health, education, training, jobs) which enable Mom and Dad to rear the kids they sire. Even there, though, we can only spend a tax dollar once, so we must pick wisely.

 

 

[Eagletrek 10]

First let me state that I'm Roman Catholic, pro-life (all four aspects of it), and a registered Republican. That said, I have to agree with Beavah and John in KC on this one.

 

Beavah states: "If I support a president who claims to be personally anti-abortion, but who has condoned the kidnap and torture of innocent men, have I really done the right thing? I admit I've known some anti-abortion politicians who were dumber than a peck of turnips in the sun. Is electin' them really helpin' anyone? Aren't I responsible for the harm they do?

 

Yah, complimicated. I decided that neither my barber nor my secretary really has much ability to affect abortions. Neither does POTUS. Manipulatin' the makeup of the courts is a fool's errand. Abortion is a question that can only be answered by the voice of the people themselves.

 

The job of a proper Christian is to win hearts, not win votes."

 

 

I couldn't agree more. We've had plenty of pro-life presidents but has it stopped abortion? If we outlaw it tomorrow, will women cease having them? While most like to think that outlawing the act will solve the problem, I tend to disagree. It's not a matter of law but a matter of the heart.

 

 

Lastly, as John in KC states: "As Beavah said, one mind, one heart at a time, through prayer and conversation.

 

One side comment: Being pro-life does mean setting in place the various support systems (health, education, training, jobs) which enable Mom and Dad to rear the kids they sire. Even there, though, we can only spend a tax dollar once, so we must pick wisely."

 

 

Once again, I couldn't agree more. One heart at a time not through the imposition of law but through a change of heart by way of prayer.

 

[nolesrule 58]

Various religions have varying views on the status of a fetus and whether or not abortion is murder. It's not a black and white issue (especially when you start throwing in gray areas for exceptions). The government should not be in the business of legislating religious morals. It's a slippery slope that can lead to a religious-based police state.

 

I agree that what Beavah said. Communication, and not government interference, is the right way to get the message across.

[WilVick 10]

These are tremendous thoughts, and I truly appreciate them. I, too, am a practicing Catholic and consider myself to be very pro-life. I do not favor abortion, nor do I agree with the act of Capital Punishment. Respect life to its natural end.

 

In addition to my Catholicism, I am a registered, proud Democrat. While I can not say that I vote the party line in all instances, I do find myself agreeing more with the overall picture. I can not vote one issue because every candidate brings more than one issue to the table. I am a teacher, and I want to see my students prepared to go into the world. They will never prove their ability by regurritating a set of memorized facts. They have learned when they are able to apply them. An "education leader" is an essential to prepare an American youth who need to learn to think beyond the books.

 

 

[Rooster7 11]

"One heart at a time not through the imposition of law but through a change of heart by way of prayer."

 

"The government should not be in the business of legislating religious morals."

 

Every law ever created is based on someone's idea of morality. When we create jay walking laws, the government is saying they have a moral right to protect you from harm and/or that drivers have a moral right not to be hindered by your selfish desires to casually cross the street at your convenience.

 

The above said, should we just pray for jay walkers? Should we just pray for pedophiles who seduce "willing" children? After all, what business does the government have to impose "religious" morals on us? What makes a moral - religious? If I intuitively feel something is wrong and bring it in the public sector for debate, no one discounts my opinion as being "religious". But if I believe in something else (i.e. the bible), some seem to think that I should just pray about it? What right does anyone have to claim something is moral or immoral (the rightness or wrongness of something as judged by accepted moral standards). Who has exclusive claim on this country's moral standards? If no one, then my view and the views of others (religious or not) should count as much as anyone else's. Religiosity aside, I feel in my heart that abortion is wrong...just as I feel murder, rape, and torture is wrong. If enough people feel the same way as I, it makes perfect sense to seek the election of officials who would create laws against abortion - just as it makes sense to seek officials who are "tough" on murder and rape. Yeah, I will pray. But I'm also going to work within the law to get my position heard, noted, and "implemented" by way of elected officials.

 

[nolesrule 58]

Most laws are based on safety, civil rights and the balance of civil rights when they are in conflict. They have a basis in historical morality some of which go back thousands of years to a time before organized religion. As you add laws, they need to based on what has come before in this particular country and not on any specific religion's point of view...after all, there are thousands of forms of Christianity all based on the same set of books.

 

If you want to be more specific on the religious nature of whether or not abortion is murder, think about this. The bible provides a scenario in which a person causes injury to a pregnant woman and this woman has a miscarriage as a direct result. The fetus is killed. Murder, right? The punishment for this is not the same as that for murder (it's not even close).

 

None of this has anything to do with my personal stance on the abortion issue. I'm just trying to make a point about how the government of this country is supposed to work...tyranny of the majority and all that jazz.(This message has been edited by nolesrule)

[Rooster7 11]

Most laws are based on safety, civil rights and the balance of civil rights when they are in conflict.

 

Thats a point of view but I dont think its very accruate. There are many examples of laws created in this country that dont have anything to do with safety or civil rights.

 

They have a basis in historical morality some of which go back thousands of years to a time before organized religion.

 

Wow, how old are you? Do the Gieco commercials disturb you as much as they do that other guy?

 

As you add laws, they need to based on what has come before in this particular country and not on any specific religion's point of view...after all, there are 20,000 forms of Christianity all based on the same set of books.

 

Another nice quote, even with facts (20,000 forms of Christianity) but I think youre missing my point. It doesnt matter if someone claims a particular religion or not or even if they claim that to be their personal motivation for a establishing a particular point of view. My ascertion is -Everyone, not just the non-religious, should be able to seek the election of officials who represent their worldview. Tagging somes viewpoint and/or candidate as a religious choice, is a dishonest way of trying to discount someones viewpoint or political candidate.

 

If you want to be more specific on the religious nature of whether or not abortion is murder, think about this. The bible provides a scenario in which a person causes injury to a pregnant woman and this woman has a miscarriage as a direct result. The punishment for this is not the same as that for murder (it's not even close).

 

Nor do we give the death sentence for someone who accidentally kills someone while driving under the influence. But when someone intentionally drives over someone, then we seek murder charges and the appropriate sentence. Your example is lacking substantially.

 

None of this has anything to do with my personal stance on the abortion issue. I'm just trying to make a point about how the government of this country is supposed to work...tyranny of the majority and all that jazz.

 

Yeah - tyranny, the jay walkers battle cry

 

[packsaddle 753]

OK, this thread is one more rehash of stuff we've been through before. Here's one that I couldn't stay away from. The abortion debate starts on page 5: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=126517#id_127851

Then there's this one, about the same vintage but very short because it is where Rooster7 put himself into exile. Rooster, I hope it doesn't bring back bad memories: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=129006#id_129068

In short, my view is that the subject is a red herring. No law will eliminate abortion because the technology is too easy and too pervasive. Nor should the central government dictate personal moral decisions of women who bear the responsibility of those decisions. Moreover, life does not 'begin' at conception...unless you are one of the last people on the planet to believe in spontaneous generation. Life is a continuum and haploid life is life nevertheless.

Finally, no one that I can remember has provided a good answer for my question about ectopic pregnancy. http://www.medicinenet.com/ectopic_pregnancy/article.htm These occur. "Ectopic pregnancy remains the leading cause of pregnancy-related death in the first trimester of pregnancy." About 50% of the time both mother and fetus will die if there is no intervention. The fetus almost certainly will not survive no matter what. For those of you who want to make this decision for everyone else, who do you think must die? Fetus...or both? (This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[Beavah 205]

Yah, OK, I'll answer da question about ectopic pregnancy. Just for you, packsaddle, because yeh said nice things about Mrs. Beavah .

 

It's just like bein' at the scene of an accident with multiple victims. One man is trapped, in critical condition, but there's nuthin' you can do for him. His mother is also critical, but you can get to her. So you save her, knowin' as you do that that her son is sure to die.

 

Nuthin' wrong with that. Your intention is to do all you can to save a life. The death of another is a completely unintended consequence. You'd try to help if yeh could, but you know you can't. Some things are in God's hands alone.

 

I reckon that's a very different thing from intentionally killin' a child so that you can live a more affluent or less encumbered lifestyle, eh?

 

One interestin' political solution would be to establish the beginnin' of life da same way we establish the end of life, eh? By heartbeat. A fetus with a detectable heartbeat is the same as a car crash victim with a heartbeat - alive and subject to the protections of the law. Yeh could even use brain activity. Seems like we should be able to agree that life begins usin' the same signs we use to detect when life ends, and then leave earlier issues as a matter of personal conscience.

 

Problem is, both would effectively prevent all elective abortions, and the pro-choice folks won't have that, no matter how logical it may be. It's more important to live a less encumbered lifestyle at another's expense, eh?

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[TheScout 10]

This should not even be a national political issue.

 

The Supreme Court had no right to rule on abortion the penumbra of privacy was something made up. Look for it in the Constitution. It's not there.

 

This should be a state issue like it was before Roe v. Wade. That way the people of each state can make laws through their elected legislators according to the traditions, values, and history of the state. The liberals of California can make it legal, and the conservatives of Wyoming can outlaw it.

 

This country was supposed to be a federal one, with the vast majority of issues being decided at local levels closer to the people. That is most conducive to liberty.