I think that voting for Barack Obama is not something to be ashamed about if you are Catholic, think of all the Catholics who voted for Republican candidates soley on their stance on life. Now think about what those candidates have done for the cause...NOTHING. I am a Catholic and I truly do belive abortion is murder but their are more pressing and dire things to worry about now that are effecting the people already alive. And it has been shown that the number of abortions go down during Democratic presidency, that is because women only get abortions because they feel they cannot take care of them, but if people could get out of poverty they might feel a sense of hope and choose to keep their baby. Being a Democratic Catholic are not oppisites, they are the same.

Posted by Lucy Lund on 11/16/2008 @ 07:42PM PST

To build on what Lucy wrote, being pro-choice is decidedly anti-Catholic. The Catechism is really clear on the issue: "since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law." 
But that's not the only issue, and there are other evils that affect life at stake as well. Things like health care, poverty, war, and so on are all inherent moral evils. It's up to the individual voter to decide what's best, and while the USCCB is generally heavy handed, that's the central point of its involvement in the election. There were a few bishops who were overzealous about the abortion issue in 2004, but in 2008, they weren't as overt: I read it as, "look, you can't ignore the abortion issue, and in turn, other moral evils. It's got to be part of your decision in the voting booth." The majority of Catholics took that, considered the implications, and still decided that Obama was the better choice. There's been a little talk about excommunication in 2004 and even now, but that gets stamped out quickly by the Vatican.
I'm not sure how explaining to the flock what Catholicism's teachings are is legislating the government: Catholics ought to vote for the candidates who best serve their interests. It's what makes a democracy a democracy. 

Posted by Mark Trapp on 11/16/2008 @ 08:06PM PST

Being pro-choice is DEFINITELY anti-Catholic! Whoever thinks it is not needs to revisit the Bible and teachings of our Lord and Savior. Last I checked, one of the Ten Commandments is "Thou Shall Not Commit Murder." So you do the math. Pro-choice = abortion = murder....hmmmm.....breaking a commandment is breaking God's law in any religion. I'm so sick of people making up their own rules. Plus, I hope everyone realizes they elected a man who not only supports abortion, but he also has been so STUPID to say he supports partial-birth abortion. And he calls himself a Christian? Get real. God save this nation.

Posted by Linda Lee on 11/16/2008 @ 08:22PM PST

Let's face reality.  Without life, there's absolutely nothing.  After Roe v Wade in 1973 was passed, approximately 50 million unborn children were killed.  Killed for what reason?  Inconvenience?  Lack of responsibility?  Illness or defects?  Laziness?  Immaturity? 

Posted by Gary Nardo on 11/16/2008 @ 08:38PM PST

Haven't most Catholics historically been supporters of the Democratic Party? I wonder what the exact history of the Democrats is on abortion and how those two things correlate.

I too am pro-life, but I think that the majority of Catholics and I agree that Barack Obama was the better candidate in this election and he deserved our support in spite of disagreements on certain issues.

Posted by Peter Stanton on 11/17/2008 @ 03:03AM PST

This entire idea that Roman Catholics cannot be pro choice is ludicrous. Pro Choice does not mean that one is pro abortion ( in spite of what the  pro-life pundits say), it means that you do not want the government regulating what a woman does or does not do with her body.
If the Roman Church is truly pro-life, then they would speak out more strongly against prejudice, discrimination (women and gays included), war, hunger, the environment, etc., not to mention their cover up for years of sexual abuse by clergy.
This one issue stance mirrors the churches myopic response to the 21st century and the real needs of men and women.

Posted by cliff kroski on 11/17/2008 @ 08:48AM PST

I am a Pro-Life Democrat.  I struggled with voting for Obama, although I knew that besides the abortion issue he was by far the best candidate.  I plan to work very hard against Obama in passing any "pro-choice" legislation.
I believe in Pro-Choice - when you make the choice to have sex your choice has been made.  Now live with the consequences.  We need to stop being a disposable society and take responsibility for our actions - including having sex!!

Posted by Kate Dennstaedt on 11/17/2008 @ 10:57AM PST

I'm anti-Catholic. I'm Pro-Choice. In that order. Where in the bishops' statement is there any alternative to one or the other? Abolishing the gag-rule would be antagonistic to the Chruch? Why wasn't imposing it antagonism directed at me? As well as ruthlessly contemptuous of decency, mercy, rationality, reason and personal freedom. tracey

Posted by tracey martin on 11/17/2008 @ 12:24PM PST

Have representatives of the Vatican or Catholic Church ever considered the hypocrisy that is evident throughout their argument to criticize pro-choice decisions? Would they rather people vote for a man and/or woman who believes that the war that is taking place is what God wanted, Palin in particular? Would they rather people choose a presidential candidate that would rather men and women die during a war that they have failed to call an end to? I agree with the Jen's statement, "The separation of Church and Stateis something that I truly believe in for many reasons. One reason is because favoring a religious stance in government would be effectively discriminating against those who are atheist or of another religious creed." The two should remain separate and that means that the Catholic Church should not deny a person the ability to practice their religion or receive communion because they voted for President-elect Obama. Giving the Catholic Church this much power would be in direct conflict with that person on persons First Amendment rights. The Catholic Church is in no way, shape or form, the decider of the fate of America's citizens.  America was and continues to be built upon its diversity.  Obama represents that! I just wish that Americans could begin to live up to the promises that were supposedly allotted to every citizen since its origination. Living in the land of the free should equate to being able to make responsible decisions before, during, and after pregnancy.    Those who are in disagreement, I would just like to ask are YOU willing to adopt or take care of a child if a family or single-parent cannot afford to do themselves? 

Posted by Nicole Carter on 11/17/2008 @ 01:29PM PST

I truly believe that there should be seperation amongst the church and state. Meaning, Catholic Bishops or any other religion should not be creating a ruling of its own. We all are not Catholic, I surely am not and I contest to plead pro-choice. I agree that there are far too many young parents these days, and even older parents that can't take care of their children, so they are giving them up and most remain in foster care or end up in family abuse for the rest of theire lives. We all have a choice and catholics surely don't give a choice but to keep them seperated from state.

Posted by M S on 11/17/2008 @ 03:29PM PST

As far as the Catholic church goes and it's views on abortion, maybe that is one of the reasons many catholics leave the church to go to another one.  The Catholic church (I am catholic by the way) has had to change a lot of its thoughts over the years, i.e. eating meat on Fridays then changing and if a person is not married in the Catholic church, the marriage is not recogized, yet there have been many instances where those same people were able to be buried from a Catholic church.......I see a lot of hypocrisy in the church and if I wasnt as old as I am I would change to Episcopal most likely.  When you are brought up in the Catholic faith it is not easy to just change over, but that does not change the fact that there are a lot of things in the Catholic religion that I dont agree with, and I know there are many more like me.

Posted by Doris Sachetti on 11/17/2008 @ 07:53PM PST

If an informed Catholic voted for Obama....it was a sin. (that is...if they knew he supported abortion.) Obama is a radical pro-abortion politician. He favors all forms of abortion..including killing babies who survive abortions. You can youtube Obama and the Infants Born Alive Act and hear HIM speaking in IL about it. McCain is pro-life. It's very simple. I'd really like to know how many of these "so-called" Catholics commenting here, as well as the author of that article, go to Mass every week? Of the weekly mass attending Catholics....the % who voted for MCain is 57%. Those who care enough about their faith to attend mass every week, tend to care about issues such as murdering kids through abortion. Oh goodness...does that sound too harsh? Really? Well, if abortion is not murdering little kids..then I guess the woman is not really pregnant.

Do you guys understand why separation of church and state was instituted?  It was too make sure states did NOT make their our State Church and require their citizens to attend. (Like in England!!) It was NEVER meant for people to say...Oh golly, you can't make a comment because geez, that's a religious argument. Come on people!  The Catholic Bishops absolutley have an obligation to speak to their flock on matters relating to morality and our country!  

Posted by L. S. on 11/18/2008 @ 11:02AM PST

To Liz Strang.........I will respond again to the issue of voting for Obama and being Catholic.  Let us not forget that the Pope, Cardinal, Bishop or Priest does not have any authority or any involvement with our government and politics.  If a person is Catholic and they dont agree with the Catholic religions thinking on abortion, (remember there are many abortions, which by the way is Obama's way of thinking) that are necessary and Im sure you do not live in the dark ages, but it is better in these abortions that they are done in a hospital by a qualified Dr rather than having it done somewhere where there is great risks involved as well as the possibility of death. And the doctor being penalized.  Secondly, I hate to hear someone preach as to what a sin it is to vote for Pro-Choice when the Catholic religion now has a much larger cross to carry with all the much publicized Priest pedophiles and how far back that has been happening.  They have settled on many lawsuits but it doesnt seem to stop it from happening.  I think it is like the pot calling the kettle black when you have a religion telling people if they voted for Obama they cant receive Communion.  Were the priests involved in all those scandals involving young boys able to give communion??  Something to think about and also the main thing to remember is there is a separation between church and government and there always will be so I think it is time for the Catholic Religion to accept where their position should be and not try to impose their thoughts in our goverment.

Posted by Doris Sachetti on 11/18/2008 @ 01:26PM PST

With the election of Obama we face the signing of FOCA into law. The Freedom of Choice Act will lift any and all limits on abortion. It will allow persons who are not licensed physicians to perform abortions. (How does that protect the life and health of the mother?) It will eliminate any parental notification or involvement when a minor choose to have an abortion. In short, it will be all abortion, all the time, for any (or no) reason. Is that what we truly want for this country? See
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/16236/ 

If you voted for Obama and plan to "protest" his signing of FOCA, you are too late. He is beholden to the pro-abort community. We will see Planned Parenthood (in some form) as "health care providers" in our public schools. We will pay for abortions around the world through our tax dollars. Pray, pray, pray.

Posted by Kay O. on 11/19/2008 @ 09:32AM PST

Once more, I will say keep the Bishops, Cardinals and whomever else in religion out of politics.  If they want to offer their thoughts to their parishioners so be it, but they should have absolutely no say as to what is going on in our government.  They can do what they want in their home, but do not think you can make your rules universal.

Posted by Doris Sachetti on 11/19/2008 @ 07:13PM PST

The Bishops do not tell Catholics for whom they must cast their ballot. They do, however, have an obligation to explain to the congregation how faith relates to issues. That is ALL they do.

Posted by Kay O. on 11/20/2008 @ 12:49PM PST

Catholics have a right to vote according to their conscience. I do not have to vote to allow abortion because someone "wants" it. Life begins at conception. When life begins and ends is up to God, not up to me -- or you. I vote accordingly.

Posted by Kay O. on 11/20/2008 @ 12:51PM PST

Yes you certainly do have the right to vote the way you want, our Constitution allows that, but I dont believe that the Catholic church should tell their parishioners if they voted for Barack Obama they cannot receive communion....to me that sounds like a religious blackmail and not even worthy of consideration.  Everyone has their own thoughts on the issue, I dont believe in abortion as far as abortion goes, but I do believe that I, as a woman should have the right if something happened that I be in a position of a pregnancy of extreme malformation (missing chromosomes etc.) or rape or incest, be able to make my own decision without it being illegal.

Posted by Doris Sachetti on 11/20/2008 @ 07:22PM PST

The reason I don't think voting for Obama is anti-Catholic is that we are called to look at all the issues not just this one issue. Which candidate stands for a respect for life and a culture of life? For me this was Obama. Obama opposed an irresponsible, unecessary war that has cost many American, Iraqi and other lives.  Obama is also for stricter gun control.  Obama's proposal were more in line with caring for the least of these, the working poor who are struggling everyday to make a living and support their families.  Obama also has showed a true respect for other people and other cultures which the Church supports, for education, and healthcare. All of which show the kindness, love of neighbor and respect for family and life that we are called to as Catholics and Christians. There are other ways to decrease the numbe of abortions as well that don't include the government making them illegal. Education programs, adoption and support programs and creating a culture that more strongly value life would all help with decreasing abortion rates and are all things the church and our communities can be doing.

Posted by Evelyn Coleman on 11/21/2008 @ 02:19PM PST

"But that's not the only issue, and there are other evils that affect life at stake as well. Things like health care, poverty, war, and so on are all inherent moral evils."

So then in the voting booth, people have to decide which "moral evils" they are going to ignore in order to cast a vote, ANY vote, in an election.  Do you vote against war or against abortion?  It's six of one half dozen of the other.

""Thou Shall Not Commit Murder." So you do the math. Pro-choice = abortion = murder....hmmmm.....breaking a commandment is breaking God's law in any religion"

Paying taxes = funding war = murder 

"Pro Choice does not mean that one is pro abortion ( in spite of what the  pro-life pundits say)it means that you do not want the government regulating what a woman does or does not do with her body."

Thank you, Cliff, it's important that men actually say this outloud.  :)


I was raised Catholic, but left the church because we do not live in the 5th Century.  The Vatican is isolated & doesn't seem to know how to function in modern society.  They sit in their island and cling to ancient beliefs relating to women & birth control, without seeing how this affects people trying to survive in the real world.  Birth control is necessary if they want to prevent people from having abortions.  Not all people "choosing to have sex" are unmarried teenagers, some of us are married who actually enjoy a healthy relationship with our spouses even though we may not want any more children.

Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 11/21/2008 @ 07:52PM PST

As a Catholic woman, I feel more alienated by the Catholic church than any other "force" in my life. As a teen, I got pregnant and decided to keep my child. My Catholic high school threatened to kick me out and my church told my parents I dont qualify to receive the sacraments. I was shunned by my Catholic community and ostresized by people I loved and considered friends. Not only is this decidedly contrary to all the Christian teachings it was hurtful and very emotionally trying for me.  Throughout it all, I could not help the feeling that if I had just aborted the pregnancy, I would suffer in private but not have to deal with the drama and unfair treatment. I was very close to going that route.

4 and 1/2 years later, I look back at that experience and still cannot comprehend how a Catholic could act in such a manner. I was not kicked out of school thanks to a lawyer and people in the community found something else to gossip about after my son was born but the scars remain still.

If you are pro life or pro choice, I beg of you to find a way to reach out to young , unwed mothers (the highest percentage of abortions occur to this demographic) and be a support, counselor, mentor or simply a shoulder to lean on. I was contacted several months ago by a counselor at my old high school who informed me that a young lady at the school is pregnant and wanted to know if I could spend some time w/ her. I was more than happy to do so and she and I have developed quite a bond since then. She did not have an abortion , rather chose a  couple to give her daughter up in adoption to. We worked with Catholic Charities. This young lady will graduate this year from high school and plans on going to Gonzaga University. She is beatiful and has contact with her daughter through the open adoption and feels she made the best decision for herself and her daughter.

Please find a way to be useful -Voting against a pro choicer is not a substantive way at fixing the problem.

Posted by Sophia Brugato on 11/21/2008 @ 10:14PM PST

Blessed be God.The pope advised Bush not to go to war after the attack on America. The catholic church instructed by the word of God-"the bible" and the holy spirit, "the unborn (person) have rights, civil rights." The rights every one in the US deserve. Why people do not have tolerance for the unborn, I do not understand. I think abotion is a moral decision.  How does that separate church and state? I want to go to heaven and stand before Jesus and have me enter heaven as is faithful servant. My suggest is for all people to read the bible, then comment on civil rights.

Posted by vicky w-o sullivan on 11/21/2008 @ 11:20PM PST

Sophia--what an inspiration you are! Your son will forever be thankful to you for his precious life! The situation you went through was horrible, and completely against Church teaching.

No where in the Bible or Catechism does it say to treat un-wed mothers in this manner (or anyone!). It's a shame that your church told you and your parents such ridiculous false information. Something to think about that may help you is that your suffering, during that time, can be compared to what Christ suffered for us during the cruxification.

Praise Be to God, that more and more priests are not afraid to stand up for the Truth and for the un-born & their mothers today. Members of the Catholic Church & other Christian churches are really doing some amazing things to help end abortion and protect women. Such as:
 
Voting for pro-life political candidates, volunteering/donating at crisis pregnacy centers, BirthRight, Nativity Inn-- a Catholic parish outreach which aims to provide a sanctuary for new mothers who might otherwise have chosen to abort their children, Rachel's Vineyard--offers weekend retreats held across the United States for any woman or man who has struggled with the emotional and spiritual pain of an abortion, praying the rosary in front of abortion clinics and talking with women, writing letters to the editor, and much more.

Posted by L. S. on 11/22/2008 @ 06:29AM PST

to gary nardo: since 1973 750,000,000 (thats million also)unwanted kids have been born. how many are living in your house?    gary dubrall

Posted by gary dubrall on 11/22/2008 @ 02:52PM PST

To Dubrall---

There are unwanted pregnancies, but there is no such thing as an unwanted child. While certain people may not want them, not only does God want them, but other people desperately want them.

Nearly 1.3 million American families want to adopt, some so badly that the scarcity of adoptable babies is a source of major depression. There’s such a demand for babies that a black market has developed where babies are sold for as much as $50,000. Not just “normal” babies are wanted; many people request special-needs babies, including those with Down syndrome and spina bifida.

One of the most misleading aspects of pro-choice argumentation is making it appear that abortion is in the best interests of the baby. This is so absurd as to be laughable, were it not so tragic. A little person is torn limb from limb, for her benefit? Similarly, slave owners argued that slavery was in the best interest of the Africans. http://www.epm.org/artman2/publish/from_randys_blog/Planned_Parenthoods_Self-Description_and_Unwanted_Children.shtml

Posted by L. S. on 11/22/2008 @ 03:32PM PST

Interesting article here: http://www.catholicregister.org/content/view/2468/852/

Posted by D Robertson on 11/22/2008 @ 08:19PM PST

Though I call myself a Liberal, I think it is in the best interest of the country that the 9 judges of the Supreme Court represent the widest spectrum of ideaology as is possible. 

>> there is no such thing as an unwanted child.

I need to share this story: 2 days ago I was stopped at a traffic light in the city - I watched a mother push her boy to the ground - he appeared to be all of 2 years old.  He started crying & she yanked him up by his arm "SHUT UP!"  she yelled.  She continued to pull him, yank on his arm, thrust him around, just manhandle this poor crying baby.

I could see in my mirrors that other drivers at the stop light were watching her and yet she felt totally comfortable battering this child in front of a group of strangers.  I drove away crying - this little boy can't possibly have a good life.

Perhaps better incentives to put children up for adoption are in order.  It just seems like pregnant women, trapped in whatever situation they're in, don't see the benefit of giving up their unwatned "pregnancy" to another family who will give them a better life.

I personally would never have an abortion, that's beside the point, but I would, if I had the financial means, adopt a child like that little toddler who needed a good home.

Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 11/22/2008 @ 09:55PM PST

I think abortion it is not only catholic issue. Many people that do not have this background also opposes the killing of the most vulnerable.

Jen I do not fully understand the point of Planned Parenthood. I do oppose abortion but I do agree with the three items exposed there:we need to avoid unwanted pregnancies (but not through abortion), the state needs to be respectful with privacy and finally more sexual education, to love with our full body.

@Sophia, thank you for sharing your story. It was really inspiring

Posted by Elena Acin on 11/23/2008 @ 07:25PM PST

I used the services of Planned Parenthood 12 years ago.  NOT for an abortion, but because I was 22 years old & didn't have health insurance.  It was scary being there - the security was intense & the speed in which you are processed was dizzying.   But everyone there was kind & patient, and I was taken care of.  Within that year, I had insurance again, but my memory of walking through the doors of PP, standing in the windowless "security check vestibule" is something I'll never forget.

Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 11/24/2008 @ 08:15AM PST

My question to all Catholics:
If abortion is wrong, is sex before marriage okay in your religion?
If it is not then yall should be campaigning against that.

Posted by Believer in the Unseen on 11/30/2008 @ 04:44AM PST

Believer....In answer to your question: sex before marriage is not ok in Catholocism.  Unfortunately, in MY experience, there was hardly any talk about sex at all except in the context of married couples making babies.   It was almost like if you don't acknowledge that it's happening, then it doesn't exist. 

Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 12/01/2008 @ 07:41AM PST

I think that is what needs to change.  The church seems to shun all sexual knowledge before marriage, but when these kids feel the natural urges (one would imagine these were put there by god in order to fulfil the creed of fruitfulness) they don't know how to respond.  All life should be thought of in this issue.  That of the young who should be taught what sex is, its proper place, and its consequences, and that of the child once it exists, that includes more of the programs like those mentioned by L.S.  I have heard of no programs like these in my area. 
Planned parenthood provides much of these services however.  They provide contraceptives to prevent the pregnancies, information to prevent the sex or pregnancies (if the person still chooses to have sex) and information on adoption and help organizations to prevent the abortions, as well as the legal recourse to an abortion for those who still choose it.  That's a three to four pro-life record (in terms of attempting to prevent unwanted pregnancies, one way or another)  The problem is that the debate over whether abortion is right or wrong has stigmatized the organization meant to prevent them in the first place, leading young people to shy away from the very place that could educate where the church has thus far chosen not to.
There was one state in the main post that confused me though:
"Aggressively pro-abortion policies, legislation and executive orders will permanently alienate tens of millions of Americans, and would be seen by many as an attack on the free exercise of their religion."I don't understand this statement at all.  If it is your religious beleif that life begins at conception, and the medical community cannot back it up (many in the field are still trying) then it is still just a belief and our laws based upon a secular structure are not supposed to be dictated by a single faith, but what is best for all.  It is the belief of some, that abortion is evil, and of some that it is the woman's body still, and therefore a personal matter.  So, (playing devil's advocate here) why should our laws be made to conform to the belief of one faith?  and how, if it were to be kept legal or expanded would it be "an attack on the free exercise of their religion"?  Just because it is legal, doesn't mean its required.  A catholic can still choose to follow her pro-life belief and carry any child despite that abortion is available.

Posted by Erin Ferguson on 12/06/2008 @ 01:44AM PST

sorry, i know i'm long winded, but one more point, and that more towards the direct topic of the original post. That is: "Is voting pro-choice anti-catholic?" and i think it is not.  Joe Biden said it well when he mentioned his choice of belief vs him choosing for others.  His belief says its wrong, and he would not advocate for someone to have the proceedure.  But he also knows that others may not have the same beliefs and shouldn't be required to. 
I think being Ant-catholic would be attempting to diseminate or undermine the church.  But as it stands, no legal entity can (and i don't think our society would allow them to) stop the church from telling its parishioners what their faith entails.  and faith is proven by acting wisely in your desicions rooted in your faith, instead of being forced to comply, does it not?

Posted by Erin Ferguson on 12/06/2008 @ 01:53AM PST

>> there is no such thing as an unwanted child.

I need to share this story: 2 days ago I was stopped at a traffic light in the city - I watched a mother push her boy to the ground - he appeared to be all of 2 years old.  He started crying & she yanked him up by his arm "SHUT UP!"  she yelled.  She continued to pull him, yank on his arm, thrust him around, just manhandle this poor crying baby.

I could see in my mirrors that other drivers at the stop light were watching her and yet she felt totally comfortable battering this child in front of a group of strangers.  I drove away crying - this little boy can't possibly have a good life.

Perhaps better incentives to put children up for adoption are in order.  It just seems like pregnant women, trapped in whatever situation they're in, don't see the benefit of giving up their unwatned "pregnancy" to another family who will give them a better life.

I personally would never have an abortion, that's beside the point, but I would, if I had the financial means, adopt a child like that little toddler who needed a good home..Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk

Just because that woman was abusing the child doesnt mean she didnt want the child, it could all sorts of reasons like alot of stress and not knowing how to deal with it. It also could be that she was abused herself and hasnt learned a better way to treat her children. My dad abused us mentally and physically until he went into counciling through Catholic Charities. He wanted us but he was treated that way as a child and he had alot of stress through worrying about financing and he was dying. He learned parenting skills and had anger management. He stopped abusing us physically and calling us names, then he died a year later. People can change if they want to, not all abused children are unwanted, just have parents that need to learn parenting and anger management.
Next time if possible you see something like that get license and call the police. It could save that childs life.

Posted by Roo ForLife on 12/10/2008 @ 02:31PM PST

My point was that there are alternatives to keeping a child in an abusive situation.  I don't know any more than you what her situation was, but *if* she or any other person is forced to keep a child they didn't or don't want, it is because the options weren't spelled out to them. 

I work in a school - I see kids that suffer a lot of abuse.  Who was "wanted" and who "wasn't" isn't the point.  It's who is suffering now and how can their lives be improved.

Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 12/10/2008 @ 07:45PM PST

My point was that there are alternatives to keeping a child in an abusive situation.  I don't know any more than you what her situation was, but *if* she or any other person is forced to keep a child they didn't or don't want, it is because the options weren't spelled out to them. 

I work in a school - I see kids that suffer a lot of abuse.  Who was "wanted" and who "wasn't" isn't the point.  It's who is suffering now and how can their lives be improved.

Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 12/10/2008 @ 07:46PM PST

My point was that there are alternatives to keeping a child in an abusive situation.  I don't know any more than you what her situation was, but *if* she or any other person is forced to keep a child they didn't or don't want, it is because the options weren't spelled out to them. 

I work in a school - I see kids that suffer a lot of abuse.  Who was "wanted" and who "wasn't" isn't the point.  It's who is suffering now and how can their lives be improved.Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk...

You definitely right the point you made "Who was "wanted" and who "wasn't" isn't the point." Because that lame excuse for abortion hasnt stopped child abuse, if anything child abuse has went up alot. You write that's its who is suffering now and how can their lives be improved. What have you done to help these children that you see suffer from alot of abuse? Have you reported the abuse?  I wasnt giving an excuse for the lady before but the usual excuse that I get for abortion is that children are being abused and that must mean they're not wanted. Most the time thats not true. Thats what people need to understand, I think all parents should receive parenting classes and if they have anger issues that they take angermanagement. Nobody was born with the knowledge to parent.

Posted by Roo ForLife on 12/11/2008 @ 11:51AM PST

My point was that there are alternatives to keeping a child in an abusive situation.  I don't know any more than you what her situation was, but *if* she or any other person is forced to keep a child they didn't or don't want, it is because the options weren't spelled out to them. 

I work in a school - I see kids that suffer a lot of abuse.  Who was "wanted" and who "wasn't" isn't the point.  It's who is suffering now and how can their lives be improved.Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk...

You definitely right the point you made "Who was "wanted" and who "wasn't" isn't the point." Because that lame excuse for abortion hasnt stopped child abuse, if anything child abuse has went up alot. You write that's its who is suffering now and how can their lives be improved. What have you done to help these children that you see suffer from alot of abuse? Have you reported the abuse?  I wasnt giving an excuse for the lady before but the usual excuse that I get for abortion is that children are being abused and that must mean they're not wanted. Most the time thats not true. Thats what people need to understand, I think all parents should receive parenting classes and if they have anger issues that they take angermanagement. Nobody was born with the knowledge to parent.

Posted by Roo ForLife on 12/11/2008 @ 11:52AM PST

"What have you done to help these children that you see suffer from alot of abuse? Have you reported the abuse?"

I'm not sure I appreciate how you attack ME here.  Didn't I just say I work in a school?  We are required, by law, to report any outward signs of abuse.  I also work in a school because I care about children and show them the respect that they deserve to get from adults.  By playing this role in their lives, even for just a few hours a day, I am giving them a positive role model.

So then I have to ask: what have YOU done to help children in this same situation?

Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 12/11/2008 @ 04:28PM PST

If you are really a Catholic, Jen, then you should take seriously the mission that Christ gave the Church, which is to build the Kingdom of God on earth.  Do you really think that Jesus would approve of abortion?  Come on, even you can't possibly believe that? 

As far as the separation of church and state goes, I don't think that most of the people in this forum even know what that is anymore.  Enforcing secularism on a Catholic is just as oppressive as forcing religion on an atheist.  Can you not see that?  What you are endorsing is not the separation of church and state, but rather the abolition of religion from public life.  

I don't think that you realize that religion is the basis for law.  We have to assume that God exists in order for any moral norms to have any meaning at all.  If government takes an official stance of atheism, then on what grounds do we say that murder, rape, or anything else should be illegal?  If God doesn't have a place in the laws of our nation, then neither does morality - and if morality has no place in our laws, then it is perfectly okay to murder and rape.  Don't you see the conflict?   

Posted by R M on 12/14/2008 @ 08:48PM PST

R M, I know you weren't addressing me, but I can't help but comment.  Please don't confuse the pro-choice people with being pro-abortion.  You'd be hard pressed to find anyone that is "FOR" killing babies.  Pro-choice is about a separation of my beliefs from that of someone else.  In other words, what I choose to do may be completely different from someone else, so why is what *I* choose right or what they choose wrong?  The line is blurry here, because we don't all have the same religious beliefs AND we can't be inside every single person's head or situation.

Separation of church & state is essential to guaranteeing that we won't all have to follow a state sanctioned religion. I hope most people understand that religious laws are the basis for state laws (no killing, etc. etc.) and a strong religious background is what keeps many people acting in a moral fashion.  My religion may not be the same as someone else's, but "thou shalt not kill" is universal.  I can believe it's wrong to kill while still following a religion different from the person standing next to me.  Doesn't make my "version" of the law better or worse, but it does ensure that I have a freedom to believe what I do.

Only on the internet, in typed words, are we all "required" by the critics to seem inflexible and stuffed into stereotypes.  I have faith that most people here do believe that freedom of religion is part of separation of church & state and proof that they enjoy this right is demonstrated every time they argue any side of this issue.

God bless America (not just those who tell us they are religious)

Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 12/14/2008 @ 09:20PM PST

Lisa,I appreciate your comments.  However, it seems like you are advocating a position of moral relativism.  "Thou shalt not kill," for example, may be a universal law - but how did it get to be universal?  On what grounds do we claim the moral authority to tell other people that they cannot kill, maim, and steal?  Ultimately, the reason must be connected to a law that is greater than man-made law, and an authority greater than any human authority.  Otherwise, your opinion about murder has no more weight than anyone else's, and even your claims to "freedom of choice" have no firm foundation.    For instance, on what authoity does anyone claim the right to have an abortion?  We can't just pick rights out of the ether.  They have to be grounded on something more than just subjective opinion.  The separation of church and state does not mean that people of faith cannot pass laws based on their religious/moral conscience.  The First Amendment states only that the U.S. Congress shall not establish a national religion similar to the Church of England, where people are rewarded or punished based on their membership status in the church.  It simply means that there will be no "Church of the United States."  It does not mean in any way that we are forbidden from building a nation founded on Christian principles.  In fact, the First Amendment says just the opposite in the "free exercise clause."  It says that Congress shall pass no law restricting the free exercise of religion.  However, many of those who advocate the straw-man version of church-state separation are demanding that all forms of religiously formed opinions be banned from public debate and the legislative process.  This is exactly what the Constituion was meant to guard against.  It was meant to protect people from anti-religious thugs who would forbid them from participating in their government based on their religion.America has always been a Christian country, and that has been our strength.  Look at the countries where religion was oppressed, and you'll see countries like the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Tibet, and Burma (Myanmar).  It always starts the same way.  If the radicals identify the agenda, then it won't be long before religious people will be jailed or otherwise punished for their beliefs.  If you don't think so, then just listen to the leadership of the pro-choice movement, and remember that it started the same way in the places mentioned above.  You may not be familiar with the history of totalitarianism, but it always starts with intollerance and disdain for religion.  The attitude is, "Get rid of all those who say we can't."  

I have never seen so much hatred as when I see a radical pro-choice activist.  A woman praying her rosary beads on the sidewalk outside an abortion clinic becomes a target for these people.  They use ridicule, hateful words, and sometimes violence to stop such people.  I don't know how you feel about such people, but I would ask you to examine your own feelings.  What is the first thing you feel when you think of someone praying their rosary outside an abortion clinic?  If anger is the first thing you feel, then you have been conditioned by the radicals. 

If you want to know more about pro-life people or Christians in general, then you (or anyone) should read or view material published by pro-life sources, rather than listening to the propaganda ABOUT pro-lifers that comes from pro-choice sources.  Everyone knows that most people are not in favor of killing babies, as you said.  Nevertheless, what good does it do to say you are against the killing of babies if you don't in fact do something to stop it from happening?  When will we have the moral courage to see this for what it really is.  Abortion kills human beings.  If your mother had aborted you, then you would not exist today.  She would have stolen your future.  Abortion not only kills, but it steals the entire future of those in the womb.  Every aborted fetus is an individual person who will never have the chance to be born again.  I don't know how people cannot see this, except that they willfully block the truth from their minds.    

Posted by R M on 12/15/2008 @ 07:11AM PST

R M - you just substantiated everything I was trying to say in my post.  It's all relative.

Like I said, it's also hard to know anyone by reading a few typed words on a screen. 

"If you want to know more about pro-life people or Christians in general, then you (or anyone) should read or view material published by pro-life sources, rather than listening to the propaganda ABOUT pro-lifers that comes from pro-choice sources."
-Likewise, you should learn about Pro-Choice people from actual Pro-Choice people rather than propaganda put forth by Pro-Life about us.  I have plenty of Pro-Life friends, we have NEVER come to blows and in fact we have NEVER even come to harsh words. And being Catholic, I think I know a little something about Christianity already.  

Again, words on a screen do nothing to actual promote a real discussion here.

Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 12/15/2008 @ 11:42AM PST

The Catholic Church does not claim that its recognition that abortion is always morally evil is a belief based on faith. The Church claims that every human being regardless of faith can and should recognize that it is always wrong to kill an innocent person.

The Church sees this as a moral (and even political) issue, not as a religious one. If political society does not recognize the right of each person to live, then what is its foundation?

Posted by Dylan Schrader on 12/16/2008 @ 08:18AM PST

Dylan is right. We don't need divine revelation to tell us that abortion is a moral evil.

If you go to a doctor, or have ever believed in the medical profession, know this: since 1871, the American Medical Association has said that human life begins at conception.

Posted by Steph Mirach on 12/16/2008 @ 10:56AM PST

What have you done to help these children that you see suffer from alot of abuse? Have you reported the abuse?"

I'm not sure I appreciate how you attack ME here.  Didn't I just say I work in a school?  We are required, by law, to report any outward signs of abuse.  I also work in a school because I care about children and show them the respect that they deserve to get from adults.  By playing this role in their lives, even for just a few hours a day, I am giving them a positive role model.

So then I have to ask: what have YOU done to help children in this same situation? Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk...

I apologize I didnt mean it as an attack, as a question. I have not seen any abuse or thought a child was being abused by their parent. About 15 years ago my older brother was beating my younger brothers face in and I grabbed my younger brother away from the older, we called the police. Considering that they are around 16 years apart it was an adult abusing a child. My older brother went to prison, when he got out he got sober and clean and has been ever since.

Posted by Roo ForLife on 12/19/2008 @ 11:45AM PST

you can separate the church from the state for good or bad.I guess its okay for the government to intervene in the churches business telling them to support abortion in their hospital but its not okay when the church voices its opinion. Quad du pro.

Posted by laura Gonzalez on 12/22/2008 @ 09:14AM PST

you can separate the church from the state for good or bad.I guess its okay for the government to intervene in the churches business telling them to support abortion in their hospital but its not okay when the church voices its opinion. Quad du pro.

Posted by laura Gonzalez on 12/22/2008 @ 09:14AM PST