My soul magnifies the Lord,
And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.
For He has regarded the low estate of His handmaiden,
For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name. And His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation.
He has shown strength with His arm:
He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree.
He has filled the hungry with good things;
and the rich He has sent empty away.
He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy;
As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to His posterity forever.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen
Scripture text: Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition
(Special thanks to Women for Faith and Family, http://www.wf-f.org)
Monday, December 24, 2007
Thursday, December 6, 2007
"...Except in cases of rape or incest"
The above words have been troubling me recently. In almost every poll or newspaper article about society's attitude toward abortion, you will inevitably see those words. People seem to be thinking "Oh, yes, abortion is wrong and all, but what about the poor woman who has been raped? Or impregnated by her father or brother? Well, in that case, abortion is fine and dandy!"
Is it? Why? If a baby is conceived during such a horrible crime, why must the baby pay the ultimate penalty of death? Even the rapist gets more leniency!
Another thing that bothers me about this argument is this question: How often does conception of a baby actually happen when these crimes are committed? I have done some research, and found out that really, nobody actually knows. But as much as the catch-phrase "...except in cases of rape or incest" is bandied about, you would think a whole bunch! I don't deny that it happens, I just think it is probably very rare.
But what I have found out is that when it does, and the woman is facing the abortion of the child, or indeed has one, she once again feels victimized.
Consider this profound finding: "In a survey of 192 women who became pregnant through rape or incest, nearly 80 percent said that they regretted their abortions, while NONE of the women who carried to term said that they wished they had not done so or that they had chosen abortion instead..." (www.physiciansforlife.org) The article goes on to say: "Many of the women in the survey also reported that they felt pressured by family members or health care workers to undergo abortions, and that they did not freely choose abortion for themselves," Reardon explained. "This was especially the case for those who became pregnant through incest; in almost every case, the abortion was chosen by the girl's parents or tragically, by the perpetrator himself. In some cases the abortion was used to cover up the incest and the girl was returned to the same abusive situation to be victimized again."
"...Except in cases of rape or incest..." Troubling, indeed.
Is it? Why? If a baby is conceived during such a horrible crime, why must the baby pay the ultimate penalty of death? Even the rapist gets more leniency!
Another thing that bothers me about this argument is this question: How often does conception of a baby actually happen when these crimes are committed? I have done some research, and found out that really, nobody actually knows. But as much as the catch-phrase "...except in cases of rape or incest" is bandied about, you would think a whole bunch! I don't deny that it happens, I just think it is probably very rare.
But what I have found out is that when it does, and the woman is facing the abortion of the child, or indeed has one, she once again feels victimized.
Consider this profound finding: "In a survey of 192 women who became pregnant through rape or incest, nearly 80 percent said that they regretted their abortions, while NONE of the women who carried to term said that they wished they had not done so or that they had chosen abortion instead..." (www.physiciansforlife.org) The article goes on to say: "Many of the women in the survey also reported that they felt pressured by family members or health care workers to undergo abortions, and that they did not freely choose abortion for themselves," Reardon explained. "This was especially the case for those who became pregnant through incest; in almost every case, the abortion was chosen by the girl's parents or tragically, by the perpetrator himself. In some cases the abortion was used to cover up the incest and the girl was returned to the same abusive situation to be victimized again."
"...Except in cases of rape or incest..." Troubling, indeed.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Monday, December 3, 2007
Green Vs. Pro-Life, Part II
As I said in my previous post, nobody wants a dirty, unlivable planet. I've not met any "conservative", "moderate", or "liberal" who has ever wanted such a thing. That being said, a well-balanced plan for keeping our world clean, beautiful, and healthy is something I think all can agree on.
But it seems that there are now extremists who think that by having abortions and sterilizing themselves will "save the planet" because having babies is such a "selfish" thing to do! This is happening now!
Sound incredible? Could people really come to believe such a thing? Please read the following article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=495495&in_page_id=1879.
This is going on across the Atlantic, but I'm sure you'd find plenty of U.C. Berkeley students and professors on board with this. It is only a matter of time before it becomes a real political issue here in the U.S. China has been forcing abortions for years now. I would hold that the politicians in this country who are whole-heartedly pro-"choice" would have no problem with this supposed "enlightened" idea to save the planet. How ironic that the same people who would want so much power are asking their constituents to cause their own extinction.
There is a lot more going on here with this so-called "green" movement than meets the eye, and it is beyond the scope of this blog to go into detail.
We all need to do our homework, watch, and listen very closely to what is going on in the world today. The wizard of Oz said, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain", but it is there where we will find the truth behind this odd concept of "environmentalism".
But it seems that there are now extremists who think that by having abortions and sterilizing themselves will "save the planet" because having babies is such a "selfish" thing to do! This is happening now!
Sound incredible? Could people really come to believe such a thing? Please read the following article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=495495&in_page_id=1879.
This is going on across the Atlantic, but I'm sure you'd find plenty of U.C. Berkeley students and professors on board with this. It is only a matter of time before it becomes a real political issue here in the U.S. China has been forcing abortions for years now. I would hold that the politicians in this country who are whole-heartedly pro-"choice" would have no problem with this supposed "enlightened" idea to save the planet. How ironic that the same people who would want so much power are asking their constituents to cause their own extinction.
There is a lot more going on here with this so-called "green" movement than meets the eye, and it is beyond the scope of this blog to go into detail.
We all need to do our homework, watch, and listen very closely to what is going on in the world today. The wizard of Oz said, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain", but it is there where we will find the truth behind this odd concept of "environmentalism".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)