The Catholic Judge and Roe v. Wade
Catholic justices aren't morally guilty if they fail to restrain abortion. But no judge can invent or support spurious 'rights.'
04/30/2007 03:23:03 PM
If these Catholic judges are so "pro-life" then why do they continuously uphold the constitutionality of capital punishment? I don't understand how one could claim to be a Christian – a follower of a man who was brutally executed by the state – and then condemn men and women to be brutally executed by the state! O’ the irony… and the horror!
02/01/2006 05:44:49 PM
Is there any value higher than life in God's plan? no , it's not most human abortions happen spontaneously ... besides, most organisms, including humans before the advent of modern medicine ..died in infancy or as juveniles....in mammals a lot die as fertilized eggs because something goes wrong in development there are superstitious beliefs about facts and then there are the facts
11/08/2005 03:58:57 PM
I wonder when B'net is going to publish a similar article on Catholic Judges and equal rights for gay Americans? Just askin'.
11/08/2005 03:56:49 PM
keegon, "It really astonishes me, that in this time and age that everyone knows how babies are made. Don't want them? Don't make them." That's easy for you to say. A lot of good Catholics are forbidden from even trying to prevent making one. Hey, I've got an idea. You don't believe in abortion? Then don't have one. Gee, that was pretty easy.
11/08/2005 03:54:56 PM
henry1 Just an FYI, "liberals" do NOT consider (let alone "worship") abortion as a high holy sacrament, but merely a woman's right to choose or reject. It's called choice, and the RRR don't want women to have choices. As for Concerned "Women" for America, dontcha find it odd that the head of that organization is a MAN???
11/07/2005 03:50:09 PM
I need to add to the forgoing that federal-state or federal-provincial contentions are just red herrings, and have nothing to do with human moral obligations to each other or indeed all sentient beings.
11/07/2005 03:42:51 PM
It is the responsibility of Faith communities to deal with these issues themselves and not to lobby secular governments to meet their agendas. I know that couselling a woman to have an abortion is one of the grounds for defrocking a Buddhist monk, another one is theft of anything worth more than two cents. Human life represents an opportunity to exercise moral judgement in a cosmos which would benefit from more of it. Communities which exercise the best moral judgment sustain life beter and will eventually supplant those which do not.
11/06/2005 09:20:06 AM
Even if Roe v Wade were struck down, individual state legislatures would still allow or disallow abortion according to voter wishes. However, since 1973 the killing of as many as 50 million unborn has become a form of birth control and convenience to many. The next step, euthanasia, is already on the table in several states. If we truly believe in God and a final judgment after we die, we will be held accountable for what we did and didn't do. Is there any value higher than life in God's plan?
11/05/2005 09:06:29 PM
"You people who believe in abortion, what would have happened if your parents choose it?" Ah, but they didn't so no point worrying about what didn't happen. You can stop worrying about that, too. But think about this: it's not unusual for a woman to have an abortion when she and her husband can't feed another mouth, but later to have a child that's better cared for and thrives better.
11/05/2005 02:15:50 PM
It really astonishes me, that in this time and age that everyone knows how babies are made. Don't want them? Don't make them. Every child is a GIFT from God and should be treated as such. You people who believe in abortion, what would have happened if your parents choose it?
11/05/2005 06:47:51 AM
I not suprise of the polls. Most of the people uphere are the prolifers, although over 60% of Americans favor a women's right to abortion. If you allow this right to the states, then NO POLITICIAN THAT'S PRO-LIFE WILL EVER WIN IN ANY ELECTION. Because this would force women to vote in their own interest. And this would also make abortion an issue every time an election is done. I don't care if Roe v Wade is overtuned. Because once it is, you will find out how many pro-lifers there actually is.
11/04/2005 08:47:37 PM
The constitution is the supreme law of the land and all judges should be constrained by it not to interfere with state rights. The federal goverment should have nothing to do with abortion rights. That should be left up to the individual states. Hopefully this new judge will recognize that, place the adjudication back with the states, and keep the federal government out of the family.
11/04/2005 12:59:03 PM
I feel less depressed about the results of the poll when I read the many thoughtful, intelligent, insightful comments here. :)
11/04/2005 12:33:47 PM
As a Catholic I am still in a quandary as to why my pro-life church allows politicians who are anti-abortion claim the pro-life title. Claiming to support the sanctity of life means you support all life and the last time I checked that included being anti death penalty and in-vitro. If all life comes from God and that is one of the bases of the church that means all life. The last time I checked no one in Congress or this administration has even proposed legislation to outlaw the death penalty or in-vitro or even required that all embryos be implanted. I guess it’s just the church that is being used to get votes.
11/04/2005 12:02:57 PM
Lacking both vagina and womb, I have no business telling a woman what she may or may not do with hers.
11/04/2005 11:33:56 AM
Poll question leaves wiggle room for restrictions. Like: Current Supreme Court nominee who upheld law that a wife must tell husband, or California's Proposition 73 requiring teenage girls to inform parents. Neither allows for husband rape, incest, other relative or not rape or abusive situations that telling husband or parents would exacerbate. As one wrote if you don't want an abortion don't have one. Leave the rest to make their own decisions.
11/04/2005 11:06:35 AM
Best quote so far in the media on this story: "Maybe with Jimmy Carter saying things he never uttered before, more liberals will rethink their worship of abortion as the high holy sacrament of liberalism." -Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute at Concerned Women for America.-
11/04/2005 09:52:21 AM
Granted, Roe is only a stop gap measure. However, until we begin to sincerely address all sides of the question, it is the best we will ever do.
11/04/2005 09:47:40 AM
We seem to be stuck on only one side of the question and forgetting the other. OK, thou shalt not kill. But does ending killing bring anything to life? Perhaps in a limited way, but it seems only a beginning. What about the other side of the issue - affirming life? What are we doing about that?
11/04/2005 07:15:51 AM
“given Roe's dubious legal origin and expansive scope, abortion-rights advocates should be less concerned with counting the number of Catholics on the bench, and more concerned that perhaps the day is nearing when the Supreme Court will return to the separation of powers and follow the law of the Constitution as written--an obligation binding upon all judges, Catholic or not.” The reasoning is circular. Catholics judges don’t have to violate national law and therefore may fulfill their obligations as judges so let’s just wait until this law of “dubious legal origin” is overturned and our courts start to act according to the “real” law “the Constitution as written". For reasons to many to write here, the term “constitution as written” has no legal standing. It means to the authors, the constitution "as I which it were decided." PS: These are not scientific polls and have no interpretive meaning.
11/03/2005 11:30:35 PM
I am rarely more depressed than when I look at the results of the beliefnet polls. -->merc
11/03/2005 10:19:37 PM
You beat me to it Arbela. That's good thinking Brigid and well stated.
11/03/2005 10:10:26 PM
11/03/2005 09:41:24 PM
Catholics should, however support measures which help mothers who want to have their babies, and allow these children to be raised as healthy and valued citizens. Too many conservative "pro-life" groups are the same people who devalue children, by supporting cutting back on health benefits, subsidized day care, and a living wage for working poor. It is as though they think that the right to life ends at birth. Abortions will loose importance as an issue when this culture values children and no longer makes them a liability for their parents.
11/03/2005 09:31:54 PM
This country is not a theocracy. Judging by theocracies in othe part s of the world, it is not a good model for responsible government. This is a diverse country. The founding fathers knew that, they also knew that many groups came to this country to escape religious oppression. Indeed, if there was no separation of church and state in the early days of this country, the Know-Nothings and other anti-Catholic groups would have driven the Church out of this country and jailed it's members. It is, therefore, hypocritical for Catholics, especially, to support theocratic measures.
11/03/2005 09:14:51 PM
I believe that is the reason most of them left. although the moment they got here they immediately started forcing their beliefs on others which is also the reason for the creation of several of the colonies that were from people fleeing religious persecution in the older colonies.
11/03/2005 07:56:27 PM
and judges got their jobs because someone believed they could and would uphold the law. this country was founded on the principle of separation of church and state for precisely this reason - so certain, powerful people couldn't and wouldn't use their power to force their beliefs on everyone else. that's why the founding fathers left england, isn't it?
11/03/2005 07:54:25 PM
if you don't want an abortion...don't have one.