Progressive Revival

Progressive Revival


A wonderful and refreshing new theological look at the abortion debate

posted by Eric Sapp

It is not often that one comes across a way to approach the abortion debate that is new…so imagine my surprise and delight when I read the challenging piece on faithfuldemocrats.com that raised theological questions about this debate I had never heard nor considered.   Democrats and progressives have been making significant strides by focusing our messaging around abortion reduction (click here to listen to the ad playing on Christian radio during the March for Life in DC), which moves the debate onto more fertile rhetorical and policy grounds.  But this post is neither strategic nor polemic but mere thoughtful and questioning.  It is well worth the 2 minutes it will take to read…and then the good bit more time you will take pondering the points afterward.  Beyond the abortion debate, it raises important questions (that require struggle as opposed to simple answers) about the grey area people of faith enter when they try to faithful utilize the sword of the state.  Click here to read the post.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(16)
post a comment
Asinus Gravis

posted January 22, 2009 at 4:11 pm


The faithfuldemocrats.com post is quite striking. It is a new approach–at least to me. And I agree that it is quite refreshing.
It gives a new impetus to “choose life.” That is radically different from having the state say, “forget it, we chose for you.”



report abuse
 

Rahm Emanuel

posted January 22, 2009 at 4:46 pm


As with the abortion issue, I agree that we should try to reduce slavery—however it must remain legal. We can produce commercials that celebrate freedom, and we can choose not to own slaves ourselves, but by all means slavery must remain legal and subsidized by taxpayer funds.
Anyone else agree to this kind of thinking? This is the “refreshing new approach”?
No, folks, democrats believe what they legalize and financially subsidize, and don’t ever think differently. What is the Democratic Party’s position on abortion with Obama at the helm? The full legalization and taxpayer subsidization of abortion. Governments have no greater means of sponsorship than to legalize and subsidize. The fullest government sponsorship of abortion will take place under Obama.
Don’t get fooled again.



report abuse
 

Lauren

posted January 22, 2009 at 5:19 pm


Rahm,
If abortion is made illegal, what do you think should be the punishment for women who get them illegally?



report abuse
 

Michael Stephens

posted January 22, 2009 at 5:54 pm


Democrats and progressives may indeed have made headway in ensuring babies will continue to be aborted legally in this country. The issue is framed as this: We will never support a prohibition of abortion, but let us find a way to reduce the incidence. Yet, never is there opposition to funding abortions; rather it is an issue of social justice that the poor should have abortions paid for by the state as a form of “health care.” The argument also gets made that abortions will continue even if made illegal, so keep it safe. Perhaps our concern for the health of thieves should lead us to allow theft to be legal, since they will do it anyway.
As for the column cited in the link, it is an interesting perspective. It is a shame, however, that the commitment to saying “yes, I am willing to bear a child” isn’t part of the decision to have sex. Instead, it appears the issue is pleasure and an expression of love, and if a pregnancy occurs, now we have a really big decision to make: do we allow the child conceived to come to term, or not. To compare that decision, where presumably the participants KNOW pregnancy is biologically possible to Mary’s decision to accept the biologically impossible is mistaken. The cases are not at all analogous.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 22, 2009 at 6:31 pm


This post wasn’t meant to focus on the new ideas put forward on faithfuldemocrats instead of abortion reduction, but since the comments have centered on reduction, I’ll respond. I continually hear people claim that the Dem-approach is government-funded abortions and then tie that argument into statements about how Dems support promiscuity, etc. Just to be clear, government funds abortions through Medicaid only in the case of rape or incest or health of the mother…and we do so because a majority of Republicans voted for that ability.
I find it remarkable and disappointing that certain members of the Pro-Life community would rather feel self-righteous about not compromising than actually take actions to save the unborn. Republicans have appointed all but 2 of the Sp Ct justices. Bush and the GOP controlled all branches of government for two cycles following 9-11 when they had virtually unchallenged power. Yet Roe still stands and there are as many abortions now as when the GOP first put Pro-Life in their plank in the 1970s. Lip-service and allowing yourself to be manipulated for political gain does nothing to save unborn children. People who really care about the problem should applaud politicians trying to find viable solutions to the problem that can actually pass and would actually work. Those who care only about just shouting their beliefs from street corners to be seen by others may get their worldly reward, but they do nothing to save babies.



report abuse
 

Rahm Emanuel

posted January 22, 2009 at 6:55 pm


Dear Your Name,
WTF are you talking about that Pro-Life isn’t taking actions to save the unborn? For the past three decades the Pro-Life movement has passed Parental Notification Laws, Parental Consent Laws, Informed Consent Laws and other common-sense restrictions on abortion—all of which reduce the number of abortions. It’s hard work getting all that legislation going through at the State level. But Obama’s upcoming FOCA Act aims to repeal all these good laws in one Federal Mandate, because he believes in abortion on demand, and believes in taxpayer subsidization for such.
Moreover, we are now just ONE judge away from repealing Roe. Just ONE judge away. Sadly, you are right that some of the pro-abort judges were appointed by Repubs, but that was back when Americans naively thought that judges were unbiased impartial and unpolitical readers of the constitution. We’re much smarter now, and we know that many judges ignore the constitution and simply legislate from the bench based on whatever they want to decree.
Make no mistake about it: practically ZERO Democratic politicians are seeking viable solutions to shut down Big Abortion in this country, and the industry just keeps reaping in billion$$$ on a macabre service: baby killing. Meanwhile Democrats think Wal-Mart is evil. Sheesh, what unthinking rubbish.



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted January 22, 2009 at 7:44 pm


WTF are you talking about that Pro-Life isn’t taking actions to save the unborn? For the past three decades the Pro-Life movement has passed Parental Notification Laws, Parental Consent Laws, Informed Consent Laws and other common-sense restrictions on abortion—all of which reduce the number of abortions.
Funny how they don’t affect the rate. It’s stayed steady despite those laws. The only thing that’s changed has been that abortion providers and women have to jump through more hoops.
You want to knock the abortion rate in half? Give free birth control and contraception to any man or woman who wants it, and educate them in the use of birth control.
But of course, that would expose the agenda of the leaders of the “pro-life” movement as a sham – a means of expressing their deep anxiety over their masculinity in the age of feminism. For so many of the men in the movement, it isn’t about saving babies – it’s about controlling women’s sexuality.
We’re much smarter now, and we know that many judges ignore the constitution and simply legislate from the bench based on whatever they want to decree.
Where in the Constitution do you find a mandate to criminalize abortion? Please show me where in the Constitution that is stated.
Moreover, we are now just ONE judge away from repealing Roe. Just ONE judge away.
Which makes it all the more important to keep electing Democrats, so that a woman’s right to choose what to do with her body continues to be recognized in this country.
Make no mistake about it: practically ZERO Democratic politicians are seeking viable solutions to shut down Big Abortion in this country
Odd… because I seem to recall that it was the Republicans who torpedoed the expansion of the children’s health insurance program. I seem to recall that whenever we want to expand educational opportunities for women by increasing education funding and expanding college grants, it is Republicans who stand in the way. I seem to also recall that Republicans stand for abstinence-only sex education, which not only fails in its stated goal to keep kids abstinent, but also fails to teach kids how to use contraception, the widespread use of which would significantly decrease the rate of unplanned pregnancies.
But of course, the ideology that demands that one religion’s specific values on women’s sexuality and one political viewpoint’s kneejerk fear of government actually being effective at something (witness the planned incompetence of the Bush administration and Republican “governance”) trump any pragmatic concern would demand that we not do things that have been demonstrated to reduce the abortion rate.
and the industry just keeps reaping in billion$$$ on a macabre service: baby killing.
Cite sources, please. Let’s see a link to a reputable, independent, nonpartisan source indicating that abortions are a billion-dollar industry, and that they produce massive profits for all involved.
And while we’re on the subject, let’s not continue the pathetic joke of calling those who want to criminalize abortion “pro-life” when it’s more than clear that they don’t give a rat’s tuchus about a life once it’s exited the womb and ceased to be a means of controlling women’s sexuality. They’re pro-criminalization, plain and simple. They oppose any means of reducing the abortion rate aside from criminalizing it or putting legal restrictions on abortion providers, because that would mean decreasing this nation’s downright immoral wealth inequality and institutional sexism. They support a party that thinks that unprovoked and immoral wars that kill hundreds of thousands of innocents are okey-dokey, that thinks the torture of prisoners is a morally acceptable practice, that thinks it’s better that a child die of a preventable disease than that we have “socialized” health care.



report abuse
 

Rahm Emanuel

posted January 22, 2009 at 8:34 pm


Those laws only exist piecemeal in 35 states, sadly, but it does reduce abortions to have parents involved—and it’s just plain right that parents be involved.
If you want to knock the abortion rate down by 80%, make it illegal. That will shut down Big Abortion. Or if that’s not possible under a Democratic Party, perhaps we could levy a windfall profits tax or a sin tax.
Pro-Life is all about saving babies from infanticide. Pro-choice is all about infanticide. Plain and simple. Pro-aborts are bad people.
Where is there a mandate to criminalize abortion? If States ban it, it’s banned. End of discussion. Whenever the U.S. Constitution is silent, the legislative issues are decided at the State level of government. Didn’t you take government classes?
A woman must not ever, ever, ever be said to have a right to choose murder. A baby in a womb is its own person, its own body. A woman never has the right to murder, James G.
Neither abstinence-only nor contraception madness will prevent teen sex and pregnancy. Only strong parental supervision can keep boys and girls separate after puberty. Any two teens that spend mega time alone will have sex. It’s nature for this to occur. Parents alone can create the rules to keep kids from getting that alone time. However, if school sex ed taught that sex and baby-making are virtually the same thing (with repeated action), kids might be less gung-ho about the prospect.
I don’t have to cite sources that Big Abortion is a Wal-Mart like industry. Look it up. Abortion = exploitation ca$$$h.
James, you a Democrat, of all people, must realize that Democrats ban everything they don’t want, and they legalize/subsidize everything they want. Don’t think you’re the only Party that understands government strategy. The Pro-Life movement knows that murder ought always be illegal everywhere, and you’re damn right we’re going to make sure this is the case. Babies have a right to live.
As to wealth inequality, America distributes the greatest amounts of wealth to the greatest number of human beings anywhere in the world. Your socialism fails everywhere it’s tried. Moreover, it ultimately creates a rich ruling dictatorship while the masses go hungry.
And by the way, the U.S. doesn’t torture. If you want torture, you’ll have to try Smoking Gun’s web expose: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0524072torture1.html



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted January 22, 2009 at 10:17 pm


If you want to knock the abortion rate down by 80%, make it illegal. That will shut down Big Abortion.
Again, you have yet to demonstrate that such a thing as “Big Abortion” exists.
Making abortion illegal will also drive up the rate of mortality for pregnant young women, as they seek dangerous back-alley abortions. It will also drive up the number of babies found in dumpsters and high school bathrooms.
Additionally, making abortion illegal would violate a woman’s right to decide what to do with her own body… which is really the only argument that actually should matter in the criminalization debate.
Pro-Life is all about saving babies from infanticide. Pro-choice is all about infanticide. Plain and simple. Pro-aborts are bad people.
Please demonstrate conclusively that pro-choice equals pro-abortion. I’m pro-choice and personally quite opposed to abortion. I don’t think it rises to the level of murder, and I don’t believe I should have the right to impose my moral beliefs on others, but I think abortion is a terrible thing. I’d suspect that most pro-choice people would agree with me on this.
Where is there a mandate to criminalize abortion? If States ban it, it’s banned. End of discussion.
No, not the end of discussion. Many states banned interracial marriage until the court system recognized that such bans were a violation of human rights. We live in a Constitutional Republic, in which human rights – such as the right of a person to choose what to do with his or her body – are understood as trumping the will of majorities or legislatures.
Whenever the U.S. Constitution is silent, the legislative issues are decided at the State level of government. Didn’t you take government classes?
Yes, I did, and in those government classes I learned about the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees the right to privacy, and the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees equal treatment under the law. I also learned about the Supreme Court and the court system, which has been tasked with interpreting all the laws, including the Constitution, and has understood the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee of privacy as extending to a woman’s right to choose.
Oddly enough, the Bible doesn’t seem to agree that a fetus in the womb is the equivalent of a human life. Look up Exodus 23:20 – which sets the penalty for accidentally causing a miscarriage as a monetary fine, but the penalty for harming a pregnant woman as an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
Neither abstinence-only nor contraception madness will prevent teen sex and pregnancy.
You’re right in that no sex education can diminish the former; contraception, however, will significantly decrease the rate at which the latter occurs.
Only strong parental supervision can keep boys and girls separate after puberty. Any two teens that spend mega time alone will have sex. It’s nature for this to occur.
Of course, it’s your moral values, in which sex shouldn’t happen before marriage, that should be understood as the norm, right?
Parents alone can create the rules to keep kids from getting that alone time.
I agree that parents are incredibly important.
However, if school sex ed taught that sex and baby-making are virtually the same thing (with repeated action), kids might be less gung-ho about the prospect.
In thousands of years of recorded history, that fact has never made kids less gung-ho about sex. Teenagers aren’t big on considering consequences. Best to prepare them rather than pretend it isn’t going to happen.
I don’t have to cite sources that Big Abortion is a Wal-Mart like industry. Look it up. Abortion = exploitation ca$$$h.
No, you really do have to cite sources. When challenged on a point of fact, you should be able to provide evidence. Let’s see it… nonpartisan, independent, respected sources. I’m not going to do your homework for you.
James, you a Democrat, of all people, must realize that Democrats ban everything they don’t want, and they legalize/subsidize everything they want.
I, a Democrat, am well aware that such a simplistic and infantile view of the Democratic Party and the diverse peoples that comprise it is generally found in the discourse of know-nothing blowhards like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and the charlatans of the Christian Right.
The Pro-Life movement knows that murder ought always be illegal everywhere, and you’re damn right we’re going to make sure this is the case. Babies have a right to live.
The crux of your argument is the notion that abortion is, in fact, the equivalent to a murder. You have not established that point.
And again – if you’re going to call yourself pro-life, please point me to your numerous postings, blog comments, and letters to the editor protesting war. Otherwise, you’re pro-criminalizing abortion, and nothing else.
As to wealth inequality, America distributes the greatest amounts of wealth to the greatest number of human beings anywhere in the world.
In terms of accumulated totals or in terms of percentage of gross domestic product? Please provide detailed evidence from an independent, nonpartisan, respected source.
Your socialism fails everywhere it’s tried.
Who said I was a socialist?
Moreover, it ultimately creates a rich ruling dictatorship while the masses go hungry.
Again, please provide detailed evidence from an independent, nonpartisan, respected source. Make sure that evidence takes into account the many social democracies in Europe, to say nothing of the social democracy of Japan, in which the consequences you indicate don’t seem to be in evidence. I’d like numbers and details. Let’s see ‘em.
And by the way, the U.S. doesn’t torture.
Again, evidence. You aren’t going to get away with blanket statements lacking documentation around here. Let’s see documented evidence that the United States has not engaged in any practices understood by the international community to be torture. Be sure to find evidence that takes into account the verified fact that our interrogators have engaged in waterboarding and stress positions as well as physical violence in the treatment of detainees.



report abuse
 

Rahm Emanuel

posted January 23, 2009 at 12:31 am


Those laws only exist piecemeal in 35 states, sadly, but it does reduce abortions to have parents involved—and it’s just plain right that parents be involved.
If you want to knock the abortion rate down by 80%, make it illegal. That will shut down Big Abortion. Or if that’s not possible under a Democratic Party, perhaps we could levy a windfall profits tax or a sin tax.
Pro-Life is all about saving babies from infanticide. Pro-choice is all about infanticide. Plain and simple. Pro-aborts are bad people.
Where is there a mandate to criminalize abortion? If States ban it, it’s banned. End of discussion. Whenever the U.S. Constitution is silent, the legislative issues are decided at the State level of government. Didn’t you take government classes?
A woman must not ever, ever, ever be said to have a right to choose murder. A baby in a womb is its own person, its own body. A woman never has the right to murder, James G. Sorry, but you’re a sicko if you think otherwise.
Neither abstinence-only nor contraception madness will prevent teen sex and pregnancy. Only strong parental supervision can keep boys and girls separate after puberty. Any two teens that spend mega time alone will have sex. It’s nature for this to occur. Parents alone can create the rules to keep kids from getting that alone time. However, if school sex ed taught that sex and baby-making are virtually the same thing (with repeated action), kids might be less gung-ho about the prospect.
I don’t have to cite sources that Big Abortion is a Wal-Mart like industry. Look it up. Abortion = exploitation ca$$$h.
James, you a Democrat, of all people, must realize that Democrats ban everything they don’t want, and they legalize/subsidize everything they want. Don’t think you’re the only Party that understands government strategy. The Pro-Life movement knows that murder ought always be illegal everywhere, and you’re damn right we’re going to make sure this is the case. Babies have a right to live.
As to wealth inequality, America distributes the greatest amounts of wealth to the greatest number of human beings anywhere in the world. Your socialism fails everywhere it’s tried. Moreover, it ultimately creates a rich ruling dictatorship while the masses go hungry.
And by the way, the U.S. doesn’t torture. If you want torture, you’ll have to try Smoking Gun’s web expose: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0524072torture1.html



report abuse
 

Rahm Emanuel

posted January 23, 2009 at 12:38 am


Sorry for that double post, James. The captcha got me on that one.
James, Big Abortion–with its assembly lines, sales commissions, and high volume sales–is raking in cash. A million plus baby killings at $400 to $500 per head is nearly a half-billion revenues annually, and that’s without taxpayer subsidies.
Banning abortion could reduce the 1 million plus annual baby snuffings to about 200,000 or less. Most women will just have their babies. After all, it’s just pregnancy—women and men have been doing it for millions of years. It’s nature, for crying out loud. You may have some crazed person die here or there from a black-market service, but very few people are that nutty. And the gain in human babies saved more than makes up for the handful of those who could have a botched procedure.
Making abortion illegal would reassert the rule that your rights end where another person’s rights begin. In this case, the woman’s rights end with the child’s rights to live. Last time I checked, “baby” was not listed in the medical guide to women’s body parts.
Pro-choice is pro-choice to murder a baby. The Center for BioEthical Reform has done much good documentation worth your time: http://www.abortionno.org. You may think that you don’t have a right to impose moral beliefs, but that is what all law is. Laws are codifications of some moral or ethic made punishable by fines and other penalties, so as to suppress or eradicate the behavior.
The U.S. constitution does not anywhere grant a person a right to an abortion. Therefore, it’s a states rights issue. Welcome to our government. Babies have the same exact right to live as the mother and father do. We cannot by law kill any of these three people.
Next Exodus 21:22-24 says nothing about a miscarriage. The Hebrew word “Yasa” means to come forth, and is often used of live births throughout Old Testament usage. The Hebrews had a word for miscarriage (“Nepel), and it is not used in that passage.
Contraception does not reduce teen pregnancy, for the contraceptive message is a permissive promotion of sexual activity among teens, driving up the expectation that teens should be having sex as normative fun—like going bowling in the 1950s. Decades ago teen pregnancy was rare, but only because society kept boys and girls separate, so as to avoid prolonged “alone time” leading to inevitable intercourse. We’ve since created the very culture of sexual expectation so that a teen who is not out having sex is “a loser, a dweeb, a geek, a weirdo.” That’s insanity.
I am absolutely in the right to say that Democrats ban by decree everything they don’t want, and they legalize and subsidize every behavior they do want. That’s the beauty of Democrats, in my opinion. I wish Republicans could have figured out the tools of government by now.
Biology 101 says that human life begins a conception. And we now have fully traced the rapid human development and life of the baby in the womb. Abortion murders a living breathing feeling being. Again, I encourage you to do your homework at the The Center for BioEthical Reform http://www.abortionno.org.
Yes, American capitalism causes the greatest amounts of money to flow among the greatest number of citizens, raising the quality of life for the masses far beyond that of any other country. Yes, inequities occur, but that’s only bothersome to the envious. I’d rather have the masses free and moderately well off with some pockets of filthy rich folks (Oprah, George Soros, Obama) than to have the masses begging bread with a rich dictator or king as their master.



report abuse
 

eric

posted January 23, 2009 at 12:57 am


Let’s look at that argument for a minute. If we overturned Roe, the decisions on abortions would be left to the states. If you look at the states where legislatures have sought to significantly limit abortions (parental notification, etc) OR where the majority of the population self-Ids as Pro-Life, only 12% of abortions in this country take place in those 18 states, which makes sense. So if Roe was overturned, and all those states outlawed abortion completely, and none of the women in those states went across the state line to get an abortion, the best we could hope for is a 12% reduction in abortion. Abortions went down by more than that during the Clinton Administration! Or another way to look at it is that 30% of abortions are to women in poverty. So if you cut poverty in half, you’d do more than overturning Roe.
It’s also worth noting that for all the talk about ending late term abortion to save babies, more babies died last year in this country after they were born b/c of lack of access to healthcare than all late-term abortions combined. If the GOP really cared about kids, they’d stop vetoing legislation providing them with health care…after all, I’m quite certain the Bible doesn’t say that our responsibility to Life doesn’t end when a child is born.



report abuse
 

Rahm Emanuel

posted January 23, 2009 at 8:56 am


Eric: If you look at the states where legislatures have sought to significantly limit abortions (parental notification, etc) OR where the majority of the population self-Ids as Pro-Life, only 12% of abortions in this country take place in those 18 states, which makes sense.
Rahm: What you’re probably noting is that our more religious and conservative states produce religious conservative people who at higher percentages believe “Thou Shalt Not Kill” applies to babies. Maybe the Blue States should “get religion.”
Eric: the best we could hope for is a 12% reduction in abortion.
Rahm: Perhaps. But that’s 156,000 saved babies annually. And, just as with eradicating slavery, the Pro-Life movement wouldn’t stop at those states. They would keep working and working through all available means to end the legalized slaughter of innocent children. It’s hard to imagine anyone arguing thus: “Don’t try to ban murder in 18 states, for you’re still going to have the other states accept and subsidize murder.” OR, “Don’t try to ban slavery in 18 states, for you’re still going to have the other states accept and subsidize slavery.” Intrinsically evil behaviors perpetrated by people have to be made illegal.
Look, Eric, perhaps if Pro-Life Democrats (the few hundred of you) could start launching national advertising campaigns/viral marketing campaigns and public events to promote the virtues and good of keeping and raising our babies. That non-governmental promotional tool could help impact the culture. You work on non-legal channels while the rest of the Pro-Lifers work in banning the practice, and together will beat back this evil to the pit of hell it came from.



report abuse
 

eric

posted January 23, 2009 at 11:29 am


Rahm, it’s a side note, but there are many more than a few hundred Pro-Life Dems. In fact, close to half of new House members are Pro-Life. And what you talked about is exactly what Dems have been pushing. Read speeches given by Rep. Shuler, Sen. Casey, Rep. Davis, Rep. Bright, Rep. Griffith, Rep. Ryan, etc. They all focus on personal responsibility and societal responsibility. And it’s the Dems that have been pushing better adoption services and easier access. That is one of the key planks to the abortion reduction legislation.
The number one reason women give for having an abortion is that they fear they can’t raise the child right and can’t afford to do so. Abortion reduction also provides improved pre- and post-natal care to help remove that stress. It provides better childcare services. It has a program for women who get pregnant in college to be able to go back to school after giving birth. It provides improved services for pregnant women who come from abusive relationships to get out of those relationships so they can feel safe in bringing a child into the world and raise that child in a safe environment.
So what I don’t understand is why you and other Pro-Lifers so strongly dismiss these efforts. They will do more for babies and families than overturning Roe…and more importantly, they actually stand a chance of passing. And if y’all are willing to settle for 12% reduction at best by overturning Roe, why not focus instead on cutting poverty, which matches up with the commands of Christ throughout the Bible and would save more babies? It’s the condemnation of Dems who are doing really good things that would address this problem while a pass is given to the GOP for vetoing children’s health and undermining programs that help women chose life that I just don’t understand.
Heck, liberals do the same on some social programs saying that we just need to fund more or add another program when we know they aren’t working properly and that we’ll never be able to build the political will to provide the funding required. But I’m not a big fan of that approach on our side either, and I’m thankful that the Party is wising up and starting to focus on really tackling our problems. After the last 8 years, shouldn’t all Americans be ready for leaders who actually want to do something that will work instead of just talk and spin while doing nothing? I think you should give the Dems championing these approaches a chance…and support.



report abuse
 

Rahm Emanuel

posted January 23, 2009 at 12:20 pm


Eric, I agree with much of what you’re saying. I always have agreed to those points. I applaud *all* efforts to reduce abortion, and it warms my heart to think of a pro-life movement within the Democratic Party. BTW, adoption services and single-mother care have always been tied to the conservative pro-life efforts.
Next, abortion happens for many reasons, as you say. Some fear they can’t raise the child; others simply view it as another type of contraception. The point is that we have to teach society that abortion is unjust and evil, and the chief way societies do this by prohibiting certain acts by law, and enforcing those laws.
The efforts you propose are absolutely fantastic. There are many cultural ways of suppressing behaviors. However, I disagree with your apparent belief that making something illegal does nothing. Laws and enforcement can eradicate or severely reduce nearly any behavior one can think of. I was just reading today how the head of stem cell firm Geron was complaining that Bush’s ban on embryonic stem cell research had brought that entire enterprise to a screeching halt. Amazing what laws can do. But the Dems know this, for they ban everything they don’t want, and they legalize and subsidize everything they do want. Dems do this because they know it works.
Finally, I’m all about reducing poverty. Let’s all get together on plans that have been proven to work: education, sponsorship of marriage, stigmatization of child abandonment, technical training. But don’t forget that plenty of rich educated folk also get abortions.



report abuse
 

eric

posted January 23, 2009 at 4:03 pm


It is so nice to have a comment chain wrap up with people actually listening to each other and finding common ground…that happens so little in the blogosphere. Thanks to all who commented on both sides. I’ll close by repeating Rham’s words. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could all get together to reduce poverty and get behind proven plans to reduce abortions. Wow…imagine if that actually became the political norm in this country! The truth is that no matter the challenge, it will take Dems and GOP working together to reach viable and lasting solutions. So it’s nice to see a small but hopeful start here on this post. Blessings all.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Progressive Revival. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Faith, Media and Culture Prayer, Plain and Simple Happy Blogging!!!  

posted 2:50:10pm Aug. 27, 2012 | read full post »

Why Jews Around the World are Praying for the Victory of the Egyptian Uprising
Originally appeared on Tikkun Daily BlogEver since the victory over the dictator of Tunisia and the subsequent uprising in Egypt, my email has been flooded with messages from Jews around the world hoping and praying for the victory of the Egyptian people over their cruel Mubarak regime.&nb

posted 1:48:39pm Feb. 01, 2011 | read full post »

When Generosity, Love, and Kindness are Public Policy, the Violence We Saw in Arizona will Dramatically Diminish
The attempted assassination of Congresswoman Giffords and the murder of so many others in Arizona has elicited a number of policy suggestions, from gun control to private protection for elected officials, to banning incitement to violence on websites either directly or more subtly (e.g., Sarah Palin

posted 2:44:04pm Jan. 19, 2011 | read full post »

The Spiritual Messages of Chanukah and Christmas -- and Their Downsides
Christmas and Chanukah share a spiritual message: that it is possible to bring light and hope in a world of darkness, oppression and despair. But whereas Christmas focuses on the birth of a single individual whose life and mission was itself supposed to bring liberation, Chanukah is about a national

posted 12:59:53pm Dec. 02, 2010 | read full post »

Obama (and Biden) Have No Clue About What's Bothering Their Political Base
Shortly before the California Democratic primary in 2008, the San Fransisco Chronicle invited me to write a short article explaining why I, chair of the interfaithNetwork of Spiritual Progressives, was supporting Barack Obama. Like most other progressive activists, I understood that a pres

posted 1:44:11pm Sep. 30, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.