Voting as a Catholic is CONFUSING!
#61
(10-15-2012, 06:45 PM)Walty Wrote:
(10-15-2012, 04:36 AM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: I tend to think that unjust wars that destabilize entire regions and affect the lives of millions of people and institutionalized usury are also relevant when making voting decisions, but perhaps that's just a personal eccentricity of mine.

Never disagreed with you at all.

Though, even the deadliest recent American war didn't kill 4,000+ a day, every day.

To be fair, neither do the direct actions of the American government with regard to abortion. Ultimately, it is the mothers and abortionists who are the agents of that horror.
Reply
#62
(10-15-2012, 06:54 PM)rbjmartin Wrote:
(10-15-2012, 06:45 PM)Walty Wrote:
(10-15-2012, 04:36 AM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: I tend to think that unjust wars that destabilize entire regions and affect the lives of millions of people and institutionalized usury are also relevant when making voting decisions, but perhaps that's just a personal eccentricity of mine.

Never disagreed with you at all.

Though, even the deadliest recent American war didn't kill 4,000+ a day, every day.

I don't disagree.  In fact, I usually argue that abortion and the war(s) are the MOST important issue because they deal directly with life and death.  Everything else is important, but much, much less so.  I don't think those other issues should be put alongside these other two as equals.

To be fair, neither do the direct actions of the American government with regard to abortion. Ultimately, it is the mothers and abortionists who are the agents of that horror.
Reply
#63
Then we're pretty much on the same page, I think.
Reply
#64
One final point regarding the exceptions argument for rape/incest/life of the mother. Abortion has been illegal in South Korea since 1953, with exceptions for rape, incest, and severe genetic disorders. Yet, South Korea has a very low birth rate and a high number of abortions for a country where it is illegal. A 2005 estimate puts the number between 300 and 400 thousand annually. This is because the exceptions clauses provide wide loopholes that are difficult to enforce (and no one wants to enforce them). For example, if a woman claims she is pregnant due to rape, how can she actually prove it? Would a conviction of her attacker be required first? That could easily take longer than nine months. Does her doctor have to disclose what she has told him/her in confidence about this incident in order to be cleared to perform the abortion?

In a situation where a woman is very motivated, the rape/incest exception is an easy loophole to navigate, and we will have a real cultural mess on our hands if woman are made to feel that they must prove to society that they have been raped. The accusations of a "war on women" will really fly then. Meanwhile, will the number of abortions be significantly reduced? It's hard to say. But the problems presented by adopting a rape/incest exception policy only shed light on the fact that the real problem lies at the personal, moral level. This is where abortion has to be addressed more than anywhere else.
Reply
#65
Well, perhaps they should require police reports. Also, to prove molestation and incest, why not force the woman to press charges on the offender?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)