Some abortion opponents finally "get it right"

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

no comment...because my opinion does not mean anything in this forum.

[Woody]

Thanks Shane. This is a start. Perhaps you could put the definition in a preface to the politics thread. Another suggestion might be to get the approval of the other moderators and Admin. From my observation they have different ideas about a definition which promotes confusion.

[teresaq]

The purpose of that forum is to help suffering people and not provide an arena for people to fight and argue with each other.

[doug yowell]

In a very interesting news article in today's NYTimes, the fact that there are some abortion opponents who have sound Biblical principles which preclude murder reveals itself within their community:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/11/us/11roeder.html?ref=todayspaper

The following words are quite poignant since they reveal an understanding of the fine differences between abortion and murder:

“This trial isn’t meaningful for the movement,” Mr. Newman said last week. “What happened is antithetical to the Christian cause and to the stated foundation principles of pro-life.”

I feel relieved that there are at least a few pro-abortionists who don't feel it's justified to murder doctors just because they do abortions and still feel comfortable wearing the cloak of Christianity.

I'm a little perplexed as to why the thread is entitled "Some Abortion Opponents Finally Get It Right"! Not only did the NYT article not conclude those sentiments, but the gist of the article indicated just the opposite. It is indisputeable that there are millions,perhaps tens of millions of anti-abortion supporters in the US. The most well known anti-abortion organization is probably OR and it's leader condemned Tiller's murder!He also noted that those who supported it were a miniscule(?) group of "wing nuts". Even in attempting to portray a divide in the pro-life movement, the Times reporter could only provide one (that's 1)interview that supported the murder.And the number of petition signers in support of Roeder's despicable act, estimated by the one,no-name woman interviewed,was a paltry "around 20". So, there is really no "contingent of abortion opponents" that have any significance in the pro-life community. Compare that to the % of Muslims that support Al Caida's murders (at least 10% or approx. 100 million Muslim's). Equal treatment? So why the title and why the comment "I feel relieved that there are AT LEAST A FEW...WHO DON'T FEEL IT'S JUSTIFIED TO MURDER DOCTORS"? A few???

[teresaq]

I'm a little perplexed as to why the thread is entitled "Some Abortion Opponents Finally Get It Right"!

Even in attempting to portray a divide in the pro-life movement, the Times reporter could only provide one (that's 1)interview that supported the murder.And the number of petition signers in support of Roeder's despicable act, estimated by the one,no-name woman interviewed,was a paltry "around 20".

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/11/us/11roeder.html?ref=todayspaper

But for a contingent of abortion opponents — those who argue that the killing of an abortion doctor can be considered justified by the abortions it prevents — Mr. Roeder’s case has become a rallying point.

“He’s a hero,” said Regina Dinwiddie, a longtime abortion opponent from Kansas City, Kan., who was once ordered by a federal judge to stop using a bullhorn within 500 feet of abortion clinics. “His case is certainly the most important in my lifetime,” added Ms. Dinwiddie, who said she and several others intended to travel to Wichita for the trial....

Yet Mr. Roeder, who has pleaded not guilty, and his supporters have made it clear that they hope the trial will focus less on who killed Dr. Tiller than why — ....

http://www.prochoice.org/pubs_research/publications/downloads/about_abortion/violence_stats.pdf

[Tom Wetmore]

Here is my impression of the political question -

If the the discussion of the topic of abortion stuck to the morality or medical/science/biology of the matter or even its psychological/emotional and/or sociological implications it wouldn't be political.

It is when it veers off into the government's role, advocating for changes in the law currently allowing abortion, and those organizations and specific persons stridently supporting abortion rights or opposed to legal abortions that the topic tempts the fate of political banishment.

What will decidedly be the tipping point into the political poo pile is when the comments plunge into a partisan political party pissing contest, name calling and personal attacks for or against Republicans/conservatives or Democrats/liberals or any prominent persons from either of those parties.

But that is all inherently a subjective determination, a smell test of sorts. It is sort like the infamous Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's definition of now defunct threshold determination of obscenity in pornography - "I know it when I see it." ( for more info - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it )

(The same could be said for the political tipping point of many of the other hot button topics such as climate change, creationism/evolution, gay rights, etc.)

Personally, I don't see this particular thread as having reached that tipping point... yet. But I think it is getting closer and it is only a matter of time before something goes POOF and this thread mysteriously disappears into the political poo pile. We will have to wait and see what it takes to press that magically subjective moderator button... And I suspect, Redwood, after that happens we will all remain as unenlightened as ever as to that political tipping point.

Tom

[abelisle]

Please forgive me if my phrase "get it right" in this thread title didn't sit well with some of you. I simply meant that some of those rabid anti-abortionists see a distinction between the murder of a person and the termination of an unborn fetus.

And now that I have just written this, I bet some will take me to task as to defining "termination of . . ." Personally , I leave that to God and the woman in whom that fetus resides.

My problem with abortion is that verse that says "I knew you before you were born" in Jeremiah 1:5. I understand this as implying that if God has plans for you, you will not be aborted. But since I haven't be able to ask God personally, I don't know?

Alex

[phkrause]

Here is my impression of the political question -

If the the discussion of the topic of abortion stuck to the morality or medical/science/biology of the matter or even its psychological/emotional and/or sociological implications it wouldn't be political.

It is when it veers off into the government's role, advocating for changes in the law currently allowing abortion, and those organizations and specific persons stridently supporting abortion rights or opposed to legal abortions that the topic tempts the fate of political banishment.

What will decidedly be the tipping point into the political poo pile is when the comments plunge into a partisan political party pissing contest, name calling and personal attacks for or against Republicans/conservatives or Democrats/liberals or any prominent persons from either of those parties.

But that is all inherently a subjective determination, a smell test of sorts. It is sort like the infamous Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's definition of now defunct threshold determination of obscenity in pornography - "I know it when I see it." ( for more info - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it )

(The same could be said for the political tipping point of many of the other hot button topics such as climate change, creationism/evolution, gay rights, etc.)

Personally, I don't see this particular thread as having reached that tipping point... yet. But I think it is getting closer and it is only a matter of time before something goes POOF and this thread mysteriously disappears into the political poo pile. We will have to wait and see what it takes to press that magically subjective moderator button... And I suspect, Redwood, after that happens we will all remain as unenlightened as ever as to that political tipping point.

Tom

Awesome post Tom, I do think you have hit the nail with the hammer right on center.

pk

[phkrause]

Please forgive me if my phrase "get it right" in this thread title didn't sit well with some of you. I simply meant that some of those rabid anti-abortionists see a distinction between the murder of a person and the termination of an unborn fetus.

And now that I have just written this, I bet some will take me to task as to defining "termination of . . ." Personally , I leave that to God and the woman in whom that fetus resides.

My problem with abortion is that verse that says "I knew you before you were born" in Jeremiah 1:5. I understand this as implying that if God has plans for you, you will not be aborted. But since I haven't be able to ask God personally, I don't know?

Alex

Some mighty fine points Alex.

pk

[GreatLakesGramma]

Alex, it wasn't the "get it right" part I had a problem with. It was the "some abortion opponents finally"... part, because it seems to be implying that the majority still have it wrong. If you had "some rabid anti-abortionists finally get it right", the meaning would have been more clear.

[doug yowell]

Please forgive me if my phrase "get it right" in this thread title didn't sit well with some of you. I simply meant that some of those rabid anti-abortionists see a distinction between the murder of a person and the termination of an unborn fetus.

And now that I have just written this, I bet some will take me to task as to defining "termination of . . ." Personally , I leave that to God and the woman in whom that fetus resides.

My problem with abortion is that verse that says "I knew you before you were born" in Jeremiah 1:5. I understand this as implying that if God has plans for you, you will not be aborted. But since I haven't be able to ask God personally, I don't know?

Alex

Alex, Why haven't you asked God personally? I did, and He told me that your understanding of Jer 1:5 was correct.But,I suggest that you not take my word for it and ask Him yourself. Remember,"If any of you lacks wisdom,let him ask of God, who gives to ALL liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him." (James 1:5)"Ask, and will be given to you; Seek, and you will find it; Knock, and it will be opened to you." (Matt.7:7)

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Originally Posted By: abelisle

Please forgive me if my phrase "get it right" in this thread title didn't sit well with some of you. I simply meant that some of those rabid anti-abortionists see a distinction between the murder of a person and the termination of an unborn fetus.

And now that I have just written this, I bet some will take me to task as to defining "termination of . . ." Personally , I leave that to God and the woman in whom that fetus resides.

My problem with abortion is that verse that says "I knew you before you were born" in Jeremiah 1:5. I understand this as implying that if God has plans for you, you will not be aborted. But since I haven't be able to ask God personally, I don't know?

Alex

Alex, Why haven't you asked God personally? I did, and He told me that your understanding of Jer 1:5 was correct.But,I suggest that you not take my word for it and ask Him yourself. Remember,"If any of you lacks wisdom,let him ask of God, who gives to ALL liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him." (James 1:5)"Ask, and will be given to you; Seek, and you will find it; Knock, and it will be opened to you." (Matt.7:7)

You've talked to God personally? Face to face? I'm impressed.

ntmomitf

[teresaq]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_viol.htm

Frequent violent protests against abortion clinics, in the form of arson, firebombing, and vandalism, started in the early 1970's in the U.S. after the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v. Wade theoretically gave abortion access to all women -- at least during their first trimester.

Then, as now, most of the violence appears to be mainly criminal activities by individual religiously-motivated individuals acting alone. However, cases in the 1990s involving the assassination and attempted murder of abortion providers in both the U.S. and Canada have shown that some perpetrators appear to have been sheltered by a network of sympathizers. That shows a degree of organization and conspiracy.

James Charles Kopp (a.k.a. Atomic Dog) was indicted in 1999-JUN for the murder of Dr. Slepian. He was on the FBI's "10 most wanted Fugitives" list for years until he was arrested in France and returned to the U.S. for trial. It is obvious that Kopp was helped to remain out of sight by an underground group.

Between 1998 and 2000, more than 80 letters which threatened Anthrax contamination were sent to U.S. clinics in 16 states. Anthrax is a potentially fatal bacteria if its spores are inhaled into the lungs. All of the letters turned out to be hoaxes.

Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington on 2001-SEP-11, similar Anthrax letters started appearing in political offices and news media in New York, Washington, and other cities. Some letters actually contained the deadly bacteria. In late October, abortion clinics in 13 states throughout the U.S. received about 150 letters marked "Time sensitive security information enclosed" with return addresses from law enforcement groups. They were mailed from five states. Inside was a powder and a death-threat letter allegedly signed by the "Army of God." That group allegedly advocates violence against abortion providers.