Nicely written article overall Steve. I particularly appreciate this paragraph: "If you’re a Christian and opposed to abortion (which you should be as a spiritual practice), but you condemn the scared teenager who gets one, or shames the pregnant girl at a high school, or looks down at the promiscuous teen who fails to practice abstention or use contraception, you’re a Pharisee. You’re the one who wouldn’t accompany Jesus to the Gates of Hell because the place is associated with pagan goat sex and child sacrifice."
My observation is that over the past few decades the pro-life movement has largely come to recognize that a woman who wants and/or receives an abortion does not deserve condemnation or judgment, but is in need of compassion, understanding and perhaps counseling (which does not mean the person offering the compassion, understanding and counseling needs to agree with the choice of the woman). This has been a step in the right direction for the pro-life movement and this is the way to win hearts and minds to the pro-life position IMO.
LOL there is literally a bill in Louisiana now that just left committee that proves all of this is a lie. Pro-lifers have been the most disgusting people around in the last 50 years. Ask anyone who has ever had to enter a PP.
Y’all have written my next piece. Do not confuse the moral imperative of pro-life that opposes a national preservation of abortion on demand with the politics of abortion both against and for. They are two very distinct things. They are intertwined and overlapped but do not possess the same DNA.
I think you take the wrong point from the history of abortion: the point being that women have since time immemorial seeked out abortion for various reasons, using various methods and "medicines".
I really am baffled as the desire to insert government into this matter from a conservative standpoint, as it removes agency and self-determination from women. Do you not trust women to make decisions for their own lives?
You don't know if a pregnancy is a healthy one or not, without modern medical care - which, if I recall correctly, those opposed to abortion are often also opposed to the ACA or universal healthcare.
My wife had preeclampsia both pregnancies: it was detected via routine testing at her 36-week checkups. Both situations involved inducing delivery. Without those routine tests, my wife and possibly my child would have died.
Simply being anti-abortion is not pro-life: you also need to provide routine medical care before, during, and after pregnancy. Just reducing supply, not demand - and that's going to lead to a lot of pain.
What happens when a pregnancy results in premature delivery/NICU stay/etc... and medical bills over $1mil. While often that is reduced to 20%...will the full amount be paid by the government if abortion is outright illegal, or will you now saddle people with large amounts of debt as well?
You may be able to cover it if you revoke churches' tax-exempt status and a little bit from the collection plate goes towards paying for those costs.
I'm not actually suggesting that as a policy yet (sorry, Scott C), but if the Pro-Life Movement is serious about caring for and protecting children, they have to show that their concern extends beyond the time when the child takes its first breath out of the womb. Not a lot of movement (and open wallets) on that front that I'm seeing.
I have a problem with any religion that grooms children. Or tries to force others to live by their code(doubly so when they don't expect it of themselves). I have zero issue with personal faith.
I will be the first to admit I have a personal grudge against christianity as a whole. One that's deserved a million times over. No other religion has cause the harm to me that christianity has.
Nicely written article overall Steve. I particularly appreciate this paragraph: "If you’re a Christian and opposed to abortion (which you should be as a spiritual practice), but you condemn the scared teenager who gets one, or shames the pregnant girl at a high school, or looks down at the promiscuous teen who fails to practice abstention or use contraception, you’re a Pharisee. You’re the one who wouldn’t accompany Jesus to the Gates of Hell because the place is associated with pagan goat sex and child sacrifice."
My observation is that over the past few decades the pro-life movement has largely come to recognize that a woman who wants and/or receives an abortion does not deserve condemnation or judgment, but is in need of compassion, understanding and perhaps counseling (which does not mean the person offering the compassion, understanding and counseling needs to agree with the choice of the woman). This has been a step in the right direction for the pro-life movement and this is the way to win hearts and minds to the pro-life position IMO.
LOL there is literally a bill in Louisiana now that just left committee that proves all of this is a lie. Pro-lifers have been the most disgusting people around in the last 50 years. Ask anyone who has ever had to enter a PP.
Y’all have written my next piece. Do not confuse the moral imperative of pro-life that opposes a national preservation of abortion on demand with the politics of abortion both against and for. They are two very distinct things. They are intertwined and overlapped but do not possess the same DNA.
I think you take the wrong point from the history of abortion: the point being that women have since time immemorial seeked out abortion for various reasons, using various methods and "medicines".
I really am baffled as the desire to insert government into this matter from a conservative standpoint, as it removes agency and self-determination from women. Do you not trust women to make decisions for their own lives?
You don't know if a pregnancy is a healthy one or not, without modern medical care - which, if I recall correctly, those opposed to abortion are often also opposed to the ACA or universal healthcare.
My wife had preeclampsia both pregnancies: it was detected via routine testing at her 36-week checkups. Both situations involved inducing delivery. Without those routine tests, my wife and possibly my child would have died.
Simply being anti-abortion is not pro-life: you also need to provide routine medical care before, during, and after pregnancy. Just reducing supply, not demand - and that's going to lead to a lot of pain.
And an addendum:
What happens when a pregnancy results in premature delivery/NICU stay/etc... and medical bills over $1mil. While often that is reduced to 20%...will the full amount be paid by the government if abortion is outright illegal, or will you now saddle people with large amounts of debt as well?
You may be able to cover it if you revoke churches' tax-exempt status and a little bit from the collection plate goes towards paying for those costs.
I'm not actually suggesting that as a policy yet (sorry, Scott C), but if the Pro-Life Movement is serious about caring for and protecting children, they have to show that their concern extends beyond the time when the child takes its first breath out of the womb. Not a lot of movement (and open wallets) on that front that I'm seeing.
Apology accepted. Although I don't wanna tax churches, I want people to stop going to them.
Are you okay with Pan worship though?
(Looking forward to reading about the religious wars between the Cast Iron and Non-Stick sects of that creed.)
I have a problem with any religion that grooms children. Or tries to force others to live by their code(doubly so when they don't expect it of themselves). I have zero issue with personal faith.
I will be the first to admit I have a personal grudge against christianity as a whole. One that's deserved a million times over. No other religion has cause the harm to me that christianity has.
Before, during, and after pregnancy.
Also, expect increases in sales of things like fenugreek.
And also increases in Satanic Temple membership.