So the government almost shut down over abortion? Wow.

Baby Feet

You may see baby feet. Some in our government keep their eyes closed, it seems.

An abortion ends a human life. I don’t think even the most willfully ignorant supporters of [a woman's right to choose] denies that these days.

Ends.

a human life.

We’re not talking hardened criminals who have killed children, raped grannies, and violated election laws. We’re talking humans who haven’t even been allowed the opportunity to spill some milk. Abortion kills them.

It’s the sort of thing that a somewhat healthy society might tolerate if it didn’t interfere with the regular operation of the other organs of society, but would rightly and quickly jettison when it became messy and a major roadblock.

It’s the “peculiar institution” of our day. It’s the sort of thing that the professional politicians try to ignore as long as possible for the sake of pats on the back, comity, and getting other things done, until the day comes when the respective parties’ bases and the national condition will not allow it to be ignored.

That day, apparently, nearly came. And those beholden to Big Abortion could not bear to jettison today’s peculiar institution. They nearly forced a government shutdown rather than agree that government-funded abortion is in some way inappropriate. “Government-funded,” of course, means funded by you and by me and by millions of others who morally, deeply, viscerally oppose abortion with every ounce of our being, or at least find abortion unpleasant and wrong enough that it is not the sort of thing the government ought to be spending our tax dollars on. But that doesn’t matter; today’s abolitionists should just get over it, apparently.

But no, our president, the Senate majority leader, and many others in our government think it okay to regard an entire class of human persons as unfit for basic rights, and they seemed to think it is more important to preserve the right license to summarily kill those persons in utero than to keep the federal government operating. A late-hour deal that mostly defers the question to a guaranteed later vote seemed to be all that brought about a deal.

Then you add in the irony that the president most supportive of and beholden to the modern “peculiar institution” would have been in a very different life situation in this country had he lived during the reign of the previous “peculiar institution,” and this just become amazing.

We live in interesting times, indeed.

892 views

Categories:Uncategorized

10 thoughts on “So the government almost shut down over abortion? Wow.

  1. Peregrine says:

    No. You are wrong. Abortion does NOT end human life. When fetuses are aborted, the most remote definition of consciousness does not yet exist. The most YOU can say is that abortion removes a potential for human life to exist, and under that definition, abortion is no worse than any other birth control method, such as condoms.

    If you are still opposed to it, I understand and respect your own point of view. But stop selling your point of view to the ignorant masses as ‘stopping murder’. You aren’t. You are stopping birth control.

    The only way there can be a reasonable debate over issues like this is if everyone involved understands the issues sufficiently. Dumbing down or biasing abortion as ‘murder’ does not help anyone understand the issue better, it just angers up the god-fearing, gun-toting Americans.

    Once again, if your point of view is anti-abortion, I respect that you have your own opinion and it would be rude of me in the extreme to try and force my opinion on you. But if you’re going to talk about an issue, do try to present it accurately.

  2. anya says:

    but the govt does NOT contribute money towards abortion – planned parenthood receives money through a title X program which specifies that the money cannot be used towards abortions – the funds for abortions come through fees and donations.
    planned parenthood distributes birth control and screening for reproductive cancers (breast, cervical,etc..) as well as stds
    Abortions are 35 of what planned parenthood does…and ALL of the funding for abortions comes from non-governmental sources.

    1. Tom Crowe says:

      Anya– money going into a company’s coffers is like water going into a bucket: you may have used two or more separate hoses to fill the bucket, but once the water is all in there together it is no longer distinguishable by source. Think of it this way: you have a family. You need braces for Susie, piano lessons for Tommy car repairs, and you want to buy a new plasma TV. If you have limited money and cannot afford all of these things, you will likely forgo the plasma TV first, and probably the piano lessons next. If, however, someone came to you with a special fund set up to pay for girls’ braces, but stipulated that the money could ONLY be spent on braces, you’d take the money, pay for the braces, and then buy the plasma TV you now have money to afford– money you only have because of the braces program. See how that works? So eve if PP “only uses the amount of money they get from fees and donations on abortions each year, that means they don’t have to use that much money from fees and donations on contraceptives and couseling. So in the end, all of the money in their “bucket” is just as culpable for funding a abortions as all their other money, regardless of source. Cheers.

  3. Susie says:

    Two issues: I did state to you that the Catholic Church, including a nun who visited often, would do nothing to stand up for the abuse in a local nursing home. They stood with the “hometown” judges and lawyers rather than take a stand for the elderly. Yes, to the public, it all looks good until one must act.

    How can I prove that this issue should not be on one end of the life spectrum? This “wedge” issue has decided many votes in elections for much of my lifetime! If you will all look at the other end of life (again, no difference in value!!), you will find that the same loudest speakers stand up for the for-profit nursing home industry, often bought by big corporations! When you help them with this one wedge issue, you make them strong to take away rights for the elderly, disabled, etc. You give them a wide open field to abuse, rape, neglect, and even murder the elderly by voting to support them based on only one wedge issue. Stude this more, and you will see.

    My lifetime church has looked the other way as priests raped and abused children, especially little boys. I have always felt thankful that it didn’t work out for my sons to be altar boys! My lifetime church continues to not take a stand on abuse of the elderly. The fact that my lifetime church is so involved in abortion issues and little white crosses does not fool me because I have lived too long and am informed.

    Please consider how your asking for votes based on this one wedge issue does harm the elderly and disabled by putting into power those who will take away any funding and support for the less fortunate. You cannot logically separate these two issues. Your only reason for doing so would be because “everyone” else follows without analyzing the ultimate results.

    Thanks for listening.

  4. Susie says:

    I am being very serious. I understood your post completely. I am a lifetime Catholic. What I cannot accept is the little white crosses for the “unborn” and lack of compassion for the “born” who become disabled, old, feeble, etc., mostly elderly who get no support. We tried to enlist the support of a nun who visited the nursing home regularly, and she couldn’t get involved to say one word. Politically incorrect? Why is everyone so willing to stand up for a “person” until birth (and, yes, the spilling of the milk event) and then decide that at some time in the “life” that person can now be harmed–raped, abused, neglected, and yes murdered because that is how the lack of care does turn out in the big for-profit industry of nursing homes. (To be even more clear, that same spilling of the milk in old age can bring on verbal or physical abuse. Is that OK at either age? Remember, it’s for PROFIT, so the best care is not usually provided.) Are you watching the funding being taken away even further for care of these “born” throw-away persons? You need to be more Christian and more inclusive. These issues are about human life, and not even you can prove that they are not connected. Let’s get the child born–but what is your plan for the next 60-90 years of that life? Could the government shut down over this much harm of the elderly? Is all the talk of “death panels for Gramma” a big smokescreen? Did I mention that I am a lifetime independent voter? This is not a partisan issue. As a senior citizen, I look at everything with a common sense approach. Thanks for listening.

    1. Tom Crowe says:

      Well, Susie, now I’m just confused… You seem to think that since I focus in this post on the dedication of a group of people to preserving government funding of abortion that I necessarily don’t care about the abuse elderly endure in nursing homes. I just don’t see how that follows. Additionally, since you are a lifetime Catholic you must know that no institution on earth does more to care for the elderly (and the sick, the poor, the crisis pregnancy, the young, the vulnerable, etc.) than the Catholic Church, so my support of the Catholic position at one end of life must suggest a dedication to the Catholic position at the other end of life. And you must also acknowledge that it’s not possible, or wise, to write about every single important issue or every single part of every issue in every post about an issue. So while yes, your points are valid with regard to preventing the abuse of the elderly, the problem is a separate part of the discussion of the defense of the dignity of life than a post on the immorality of holding the government hostage to the abortion lobby. Do you propose that my care for the unborn necessarily means I think it’s okay to rape the elderly? If so, how on earth can you prove that?

  5. Susie says:

    Are you serious? You erally don’t care about raped grannies!!! Grannies are abused, neglected, and, yes, killed in nursing homes all over this country. I cannot understand why that doesn’t get the same attention as abortion? Why are they less valuable. So the child has to spill some milk. Then is that when they become a throw-away person? Please figure out what the true value of “a life” is. Please!!

    I am a senior citizen who has observed abuse in a nursing home. I am a lifetime Catholic and independent voter. I have four children and would never have an abortion! But I will work forever for these throw-away raped grannies that you don’t care about. Do you see how you don’t ring true when you choose an age (or event such as spilled milk) to change a “born” person’s value to throw-away?

    1. Tom Crowe says:

      Um, Susie, I’m not sure if you were being sarcastic or serious, but if you were serious then you seriously need to re-think what the point of that post was, what I wrote about, and what I didn’t write about, and then evaluate your comment accordingly. Because you appear to be arguing passionately against a very different thing than I wrote.

  6. JayJay says:

    Except we aren’t talking about just ‘government funded abortions’. The issue at hand would pull funding for Planned Parenthood, which you may or may not know, is where the majority of birth control is given out, for free.

    …meaning, if funding gets pulled, in about a year or so, you would be seeing a sharp increase in the # of abortions, regardless of how they were funded.

    I can’t understand how a group who is so against abortion can advocate the pulling the funding of the organization in which one of their major missions to deliver products that PREVENT abortion.

    1. Tom Crowe says:

      JayJay, a few things. 1) I guess you’re not aware that a good number of abortions are procured as a form of after-the-fact birth control. As in, efforts to prevent getting pregnant in the first place failed, so the resulting child is killed. ——– 2) I guess you haven’t noted the coincidence that abortions have become more socially acceptable at pretty much the same time frame that contraception has become the norm for the vast majority of the population. An increase in use of contraception hasn’t decreased the number of unintended pregnancies. ——— 3) I guess you’re not aware that in countries in Africa where international organizations pass out condoms to prevent HIV, the infection rate of HIV has continued unabated. Which suggests that a) people are still engaging in promiscuous and risky sexual activity; and b) they’re not using the condoms or the condoms are breaking. If the sexual contact is heterosexual and can transmit HIV, it likely can also lead to pregnancy. But there is a solution, as they tried in Uganda. The absolutely undeniably most concrete way to prevent the spread of HIV and to prevent getting pregnant, of course, is to refrain from illicit sexual relations. A stretch for some people, I know, but it’s really possible. ——- 4) And last but certainly not least, I guess you’re unaware that here at CATHOLIC Vote dot org, we’re also opposed to the use of contraception, viewing it as an offense against God’s design for human love and reproduction. So defending Planned Parenthood by saying, “but they give out contraceptives!” really just digs deeper around here. Cheers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

STAY CONNECTED


DON'T MISS A THING

Receive our updates via email.