And yes, I agree. After 35 years, I see *NO* movement in the Republican party to making abortion either illegal or rare. In fact, their economics seems to suggest the opposite- that they’re for the same form of Eugenics as Planned Parenthood is for, killing off the poor.

I’m not, and never have been Catholic, so I might be misunderstanding this. I took an ethics class in college and the teacher taught that accordign to Catholic ethics, treatments that would save the mother’s life, even if they had the forseen consequence of killing the fetus were considered acceptable. IE, treating uterine cancer or an ectopic pregnancy by removing the uterus or fallopian tube was acceptable, because the treatment itself was necessary to save the woman, even though the treatment would kill the fetus. Aborting a fetus because the mother had kidney or liver problems that the fetus was causing a straing on would not be acceptable, because the treatment itself didn’t directly treat the problem, only indirectly.

About Republicans & the pro-life issue. Elected Republican officials have no intention of making abortion illegal (in spite of what they say.) Twice Ron Paul introduced the Sanctity of Human Life act in congress, and even with a Republican majority his bill went nowhere. Republicans do seem more willing to put restrictions on abortion (parental notification, etc.), but they are just fishing for votes when they say they will make it totally illegal.

I get so tired of feeling like I have to defend my faith just because I believe in this stuff. So thank you for saying what I could never find the words to say myself.

Oh dear, i just realized that i have no idea what district I am in. Even if my vote really does not matter, I want to exercise my right. I better make some calls!!!

And yet, it’s the one clear cut case where even the Roman Catholic Church claims that abortion is a necessary evil. The specific case, btw, is an unplanned ectopic pregnancy- if allowed to come anyplace close to term, the baby will kill itself and the mother. And if it’s unplanned, there is a *very* slight chance that *any* emergency room doctor will, in the course of a 30 year career, once or twice will be given that choice with less than 5 minutes to decide.

Slightly more common, and a lot less clear cut, is the case of uterine cancer in combination with a pregnancy, there’s a very famous Canadian Catholic Saint from the 1950s whose 5 children, including the one for whom she died in childbirth, got to see Pope John Paul II canonize their mother. She could have had her cancer treated- it would have caused an abortion, but she could have taken the chance and had another kid later and it would have been theologically acceptable as a Catholic- but she took the hard way instead.

Thus, despite being pro-life, I have to argue that medically necessary abortion must remain legal. I don’t have to like it, but one cannot accept that God is in charge of life and death without also accepting medically necessary abortion.

Oh, yes, libertarian- I’ve been told many times in the confessional that pride is one of the seven deadly sins.
Incest, rape, teen pregnancy, deadbeat fathers, the lack of living wage jobs; those are social ills we can work on to reduce abortions. But as long as our medical science is imperfect, extreme triage, including medically necessary abortions, must remain legal.

At this time, I can see both sides of the situation and I find I’m no longer on either extreme of this issue, but instead I’m more moderate. On the one hand, it’s baby killing and it’s a terrible thing, and it’s not a choice I could ever make for myself. But on the other hand, I feel like a woman must retain the rights to her own body and I don’t like the idea of the government telling a woman what she must be forced to endure for either 9 months or 18 plus years. Especially if the man in this scenerio gets off scott free and no one is willing to help fund the child that results. And not every child born can or will get adopted. Look at the thousands of children who are already growing up in foster care. There are no easy answers.

It just seems to me that this issue is WAY more complex than either side is willing to acknowledge, with much more gray area. It’s definitely not black and white. At least, not to me. But I can appreciate a good soapbox moment, so feel free to climb back on. Oh, but I do think you need to research whether the fax you got about Obama was true or not rather than despising him before you find out for sure.

Lisa, my original post hit a lot of the points in your post, but then I erased it and wrote this instead. I support the rights of gay people to get married, and I don’t honestly understand why people are so up in arms about the issue. If my neighbor who is straight gets married, it has nothing to do with me, and if my neighbor who is gay gets married it also has nothing to do with me. How is it even my business? How does it impact me at all? I just don’t understand the hatred, and I don’t think I ever will.

Josh, that sounds lovely. You are lucky to have grown up in such a balanced way.

Libertarian, Well, you are right, of course, but I never said I was perfect. But you’ve given me something to think about, so thanks.

jaz, well I’m glad someone agrees with me! Thanks!

samcarter, I don’t purport to be a Christian, I AM one, and I’m voting for Obama because I believe he’s the best candidate by far for a plethora of reasons. Abortion is just one of many important issues, and I don’t agree with you about his abortion record anyway.

Ted, your example of triage where the DOCTOR gets to decide whether to take the mother’s life or the baby’s was chilling. I really hope we NEVER get to that place as a country. And I’m not sure I understand the rest of your points about sex, but, whatever.

Being a feminist means that I am all for women’s rights and womans issues, not that I think God was female or any such nonsense. Yes, you can be a Christian and be a feminist. I am, and so are many people I know. Feminism is not just one thing, and I refuse to put it in a box.

It’s more that as parents, we’re called to different roles in the family. Yes we can mix up those roles somewhat; but we do so at our peril and at the peril of our children.

Having said that, back when I was more egalitarian and before I could vote, I was very much for the Equal Rights Amendment- especially for what it would do to the draft!

And even now, I think we’d end a lot of problems if we’d just value, say, motherhood economically above a CEO.

Still, though, in the end, what we pray for as Christians and members of the orthodoxy is indeed, in the end, the rulership of one immortal man- NOT a democracy, NOT equality between the sexes, NOT gay rights, NOT rights for humankind at all beyond that which Christ and God choose to give.

And that, in the end, means man as hunter, woman as gatherer, man as life giver, woman as life carer. Even matriarchial societies such as the Kwakwala were organized thus, and I think, for good reason based on evolution.

By far, who makes the decisions will always be the minority. And personally, I think that, in the end, is why worship and sacrifice is seen as being to God Father and Son, where women share in honor, even the hyperdevotion as is given to saints such as Mother Mary.

Tried to translate latria and dulcia there and I think I failed……some concepts just don’t translate.

But to me, feminism means that women are equals to men. Why should a man be paid more money for the same work? Why wouldn’t I be able to vote? Why are my thoughts and ideas less important? The fact that the Pope has to be a male does not have anything to do with equal rights for women.

Now I am singing “Anything you can do, I can do better…” a la Ethel Murman (again, spelling?). Yes I can Yes I can Yes I can!

I just can’t see how feminism can be reconciled with that. Mother Mary notwithstanding, our dulcia may be with the feminine but our latria has been reserved for the masculine.