Monday, May 08, 2006

I'm Ba-ack!

I have been using my little sabbatical to do some gardening (good for the soul), reading, reflecting and celebrating various family milestones.

I have also been checking out other blogs, and even ventured over to the dark side at Calgary Grit, where I became entangled in a free-for-all against your truly. Actually, CG is a terrific site, but it does attract some strange characters. Well, they probably think that about me too.

Anyway, I have emerged from the lion's den unscathed and stronger for the experience.

One of the discussion topics that came up was abortion. This resulted from my voicing frustration that abortions are fully funded on demand, in Ontario, but not eye exams.

In the ultimate Liberal abdication of personal responsibility, I get this response:

“Abortions are not a predictable expense…It's common sense that most unplanned, accidental pregnancies should be terminated and delayed until later”.

I replied, “I think I can predict how to avoid needing one.”

RGM also chimed in:

“How do you reckon it is "common sense" that people shouldn't have to be held accountable and responsible for their actions?”

Our liberal society sees every unplanned pregnancy as a medical emergency that is somehow threatening to the mother. I guess she may not be able to afford that extra trip south if she has one more kid. It is handled with the same level of public funding and social reaction as a cancerous tumour.

The Conservative government can’t even mention this issue, because the feminists will be screaming from sea to sea to sea. We have bought into this lie and we are funding it to the exclusion of other important medical needs.

God bless Canada indeed.

128 comments:

Derik Foulem said...

Joanne, this statement: "I guess she may not be able to afford that extra trip south if she has one more kid." reminds me alot of the Liberal's "Beer and Popcorn" statement.

Sure I'm sure you find the situation of people using abortion because of those kind of trivial cost worries(trip down south), just like some parents will spend that child care money on beer and popcorn, but what about the 16 year old who gets pregnant? Or a pregnancy due to rape? What if the single mother can't afford to feed herself and has no support network? What do we do then?

Lord Omar said...

A total of 103,768 abortions were performed in 2003, down 1% from 105,154 in 2002. The abortion rate edged down from 15.4 abortions per 1,000 women in 2002 to 15.2 in 2003.

Hardly an epidemic of biblical proportions in a nation of 33million souls.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Derik -

I said: Every UPLANNED pregnancy!!! We have literally thrown out the baby with the bathwater.

I have compassion for rape victims. My personal standard of ethics would face a dilemma in that situation. However, a woman who wants an abortion done because it's 'inconvenient' is a whole different matter.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Omar, so glad you followed me back from my little journey...

I see from CG that you consider it to be a "moot point" that you might have been one of those "insignificant statistics" had your mother chosen otherwise.

Too bad we'll never here from the tiny souls that don't have a voice in this.

Anonymous said...

Unplanned pregnancies can be life threatening to the mother. Pregnancy is a very dangerous experience for a woman. As well, I highly doubt that it's the women who are flying south regularly for vaction that are the ones worried about losing publically funded abortions. It is more likely the ones who could not afford an abortion or the child a lack of funded abortion would produce. It's all fine and dandy to suggest birth control(another expense) or abstinence(the only 100% effective method of birth control) however this does not help any woman who has been raped.

If you want to get on an unemotional strictly political/economic debate about this, publically funded abortion could actually be seen as the best option. Pregnancy involves a woman leaving the workforce while recieving maternity pay or EI. Who pays those bills? Then after the baby is born that woman or family has less disposible income to spend on frivolous things that boost our economy. The family also receives tax cuts etc..

I'm truly just playing devil's advocate with that last bit but think about the whole story before you make comparisions between abortions and eye exams. If I skip my next eye exam it definately won't kill me, it's not going to dramatically change my life... I may just need to squint when I read. If I get pregnant it could kill me. I have a uterus that is not positioned properly and a pregnacy could drastically effect my organ functions to the point of organ failure. Think about that.

Lord Omar said...

"Liberals Work For Solutions; Conservatives Pray The Problem Will Go Away"

Ideologies, not political parties.

Jo said...

Pregnancy due to Rape is Unplanned!
I would be interested in knowing how many abortions are actually performed due to inconvience. I'm willing to bet very few.

Derik Foulem said...

If you can barely feed yourself I wouldn't qualify having to feed another person as "inconvenient".

Also do you really want children to be raised in an enviroment where parents resent having had them?

I'm sure you would agree that a child needs love, attention, caring and nurturing. Now if a expected mother is not going to give that child all of the above what would you suggest we do? Isn't giving her an out an acceptable solution?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

"Now if a expected mother is not going to give that child all of the above what would you suggest we do?"

Derik, we have a wonderful invention called adoption.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Omar, I see from your site that you call Cheryl Gallant a "fetus-lover".

So what in your mind is the point where the "fetus" becomes a "baby" or whatever name you wish to attach to the organism that suddenly acquires all human rights in a nanosecond?

kelly said...

Wow, people. Not once have I heard the adoption option. No woman has to raise a child. But once she is pregnant there is life there! Let's put aside the rape and legitimate health of the mother (ie, she will DIE if she carries a pregancy to term)for a moment and focus on the majority of abortions being performed today. They are not life and death issues. They are convenience - not ready yet, too young, don't want another one, bad timing, forgot to use birth control, etc. Whatever the case may be - these abortions are destroying the life of another human being. We need to understand and acknowledge that fact! There are so many wonderful families that are on adoption lists all over this country that would be eternally grateful for the opportunity to raise the child.
We are so stuck on a "women's right to choose" that we completely dismiss the humanity of an unborn human being. Legally, this country has decreed that a baby is not a person until it is fully emerged from it's mother's womb. Then, mircaiously, it becomes a human being!!!! What changed? It's residence. And Omar, in my books, 103,768 deaths of children is unacceptable. If the rate is going down, I thank God for that - but that is over one hundred thousand human beings that never got to see the light of day! Nothing changed from conception to birth - it was all there - science has proven that.
Sorry joanne that this is so long! Ps: A thank you to my deceased grandmother for carrying my mother to term or none of my family would be here today.

Lord Omar said...

I believe it was "fetus protector"....partial birth abortions are rather grim, did I read somewhere that in those cases the skull must be crushed? Yikes! For better or worse, we are just another species of animal on this rock and often times animals behave, well like animals. More often than not we behave far worse than those that walk on all fours. As repulsive as I am sure it will sound to you, I believe abortions are part of life. No more, no less.

That will be all for me today on this particular subject. Cheers...

Joe B said...

It is always wrong to intentionally kill an innocent human. Every abortion intentionally kills an innocent human. Therefore, every abortion is wrong.

The only possible exception is when continuing the pregnancy threatens the *life* of the mother, which is extremely rare.

It is a national disgrace that our country provides unbridled and publicly funded abortions on demand.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Omar - Sorry if I misquoted you. I am glad though that you acknowledge the horrendous and appalling human tragedy surrounding partial-birth abortion. Thanks for your input.

Kelly - Thank you for presenting the adoption option in such an eloquent fashion. Well said.

Joe - I agree with you. This is a national disgrace. We are focussing on all the massacres in other countries, and yet we have this going on right under our noses. And we fund it! Incredible.

Anonymous said...

omar..re: your numbers..if that was 100,000 teens or toddlers or infants killed by choice would you still thin that the number is insignificant?
Stuational ethics abound, and the human condition deteriorates. I agree that the problem won't be solved thru politics..it is a problem of the human heart. If you like 'numbers...the incident of pregnancy due to rape is very low. The sad fact is that abortion is being used for birth control and it does become political because our health care system funds it. Another fact: there are no laws in Canada right now regarding abortions.If you are repulsed by partial birth abortions, realize that there is nothing stopping the horrible procedure.There are ways to prevent pregnany, and that is not the responsibility of 'government'.

Mary said...

It seems to me men get off scot-free on this issue. Women have been talked into easy free relationships, sleeping with guys till a pregnancy occurs then she is told to get an abortion, so that it doesn’t inconvenience or affect any of their pocketbooks or lifestyles in any way. But it is always the woman who is left with the contents off her uterus to be dealt with. So she does the convenient thing and obliges and gets the contents removed through an abortion. Then over time she has to think about what she has done on the altar of convenience. Often times the lover has moved on to a new love with the future contents of her uterus to be dealt with. Later, perhaps in the change of life, depression descends and the thing done for convenience becomes an inconvenient weight in life. I find the most outspoken are the modern men, they like not having to be responsible for the fruit of their loins and only think of the pleasure it provides. They like moving on from girl to girl. The sad, sad thing is that we as a nation are aborting ourselves out of existence and what will come and take over are the people who value their offspring as they will be in the majority as the people who will take over and be the Canada of the future. Europe is in the throws of realizing that they are aborting themselves out of existence and are offering benefits to Mom’s who will have more children so that the European’s don’t die out. There are always long term consequences in the choices we make individually and as a nation. I pray that we all come to realize that the choices we make now have big long term consequences.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Anonymous and Mary - Thanks to both of you for those perspectives.

BTW, there is an old on-line petition still circulating if anyone cares to sign: http://www.petitiononline.com/lapoint1/

Anonymous said...

Everyone seems to ASSUME abortion is being used for convenience. What are the actual statistics as to the reasons women are having abortions? Where are there any facts in this debate? It is purely emotional, what everyone thinks other people are doing.
To whoever it was that suggested it is extremely rare that pregnancy can result in death of the mother you are wrong and misleading the debate. It was until recent years one of the leading causes of death for women. The reasons that was reduced was women have less children and because Doctors can identify and terminate a pregnancy that will potentially kill the mother. As it is with lowered mortality rates due to the use of abortions and medicare in Canada 6 women in every 100,000 still die giving birth.

Mary said...

I just added my name to this petition. Thanks for making me aware of this Jo.

http://www.petitiononline.com/lapoint1/.

Lord Omar said...

I just added my name to this petition. Thanks for making me aware of this Jo.

Well, I hate to say it, but you can thank me...

PGP said...

Having been through the " Healthcare Mill" over Cataract surgery ( which ended up costing me out of pocket ) I can attest that the fallout of this kind of funding management is a BIG problem.
I'm not against abortion!
I would like to see that the purchasers of abortion services be required to PAY the cost of that service though. Maybe all those morally righteous feminatzis would care to chip into a fund to help out their precious little "victims" ?

Zac said...

Joanne, I think you stumbled on the same thing that you were involved in over at CG.

I won't get started though, I could go on forever and to be honest I'm tired of debating abortion. It's too bad that we will never find concensus on this issue. Its also too bad that the bigots in South Dakota have decided that its time to ban abortion because their God told them too.

Either way its never ending....

Zac said...

Joanne, when you said you were taking a break I assumed it was for a few months or something. Glad to have you back earlier.

Soccermom said...

Isn't it interesting how someone with an opposing view than Zac's seems to be always called a bigot. Quite sad, actually. I'm pro-life so I'm a bigot as well? Liberals are always quick to play the racist/fascist/bigot card. Not trying to pick a fight with you, just pointing this out.

Soccermom said...

In fact, it seems "liberals" have nothing but intolerance for dissenting views.

Zac said...

Not trying to pick a fight with me there soccermom? By calling someone intolerant, you have a funny way to prove it.

Soccermom said...

Justing stating the fact that name-calling seems to be what liberals resort to when trying to defend their position. Just something to think about...otherwise, Zac, I have enjoyed reading your posts...

Lord Omar said...

Liberals are always quick to play the racist/fascist/bigot card.

Perhaps we are quick to lay the label at your feet because it is our collective experiences of having to deal, on a day-to-day basis, with conservative minded people that are racist and bigoted. Fascist is a bit of a stretch. Read any books on that particular ideology soccermom?

Soccermom said...

See, there you go again! LOL! Now who's trying to pick a fight! Relax!

Soccermom said...

Sorry, Omar, assumed it was my old pal Zac.

Zac said...

soccermom,

I use the label because it fits most neo-cons on this subject. Perhaps, I was too quick to apply the label to you...for that I apologize.

When I encounter people who oppose abortion they use very tired, very lame, and very narrow minded ideology to defend thier position.

They will defend thier positions on any number of these areas:

1) My God tells me that it's wrong
2) Abortion is murder
3) How would you have felt if you were aborted?
4) It's just a bunch of "feminazi's" who push thier activist agenda
5) Or, they bring out dubious picutres of "aborted" fetuses and say "look, look at what your doing"

If you can break the mold from these tired, small minded arguments and present something with some substance, I would love to hear it. You'll pardon me if I don't think that its possible, as I've heard the arguments of many pro-lifers and they all fit into the mold that I mentioned above.

Soccermom said...

If a picture of an aborted fetus doesn't make a pro-abortion advocate think twice about their position, then there's absolutely nothing I can say to change their minds! But I believe in your right to have your opinion and I will not call you names for that. Thank you for your apology, Zac. We will have to just agree to disagree and leave it at that!

With that, I'll have to bid you adieu for now and do some Soccermom stuff. Have a good day!

Zac said...

Most of the pictures that are brought up are dubious at best...

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Omar - "Well, I hate to say it, but you can thank me..."

*lol*! Yeah, that wasn't actually your intent, was it...

PGP - Yeah, that was I was thinking. I would like to see a sort of "opt-out" clause regarding the funding of abortion through health insurance, on the basis of Freedom of Religion. Maybe we have a Human Rights case here.

Zac - I think I brought the discussion with me! I hope CG isn't annoyed. Thanks for the comments. I could never stay away for a few months. Yikes! Who would I rant to?

Soccermom - Thanks for your input. I appreciate you holding the fort here.

Zac - I think you are presenting your own form of bigotry when you talk about anyone who opposes abortion belonging to your little sorting-box paradigm. However, I would be more than happy to debate you on this if you like.

Zac said...

Joanne, I was just saying that those are the only comments that I get. I have considered them but always find them weak.

If you can present me with an argument which breaks the mold (hey, if anyone can actually) I'll be more than happy to address it.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

O.K. Zac, for starters, why do you say "dubious" pictures of aborted fetuses?

Also, I need to know at what point you feel that human life begins? Are you perfectly fine with humans being aborted in the last trimester, and in fact up til the moment of birth? I know it isn't done as often as in the first trimester, but there is nothing illegal about it. Are you o.k. with that?

I'm not presenting this as an argument. It is a starting point for the discussion.

Red Tory said...

Having read all the thoughtful comments posted here on this controversial issue, I’ve come to the conclusion that the healthcare system should cover the expense of eye exams.

Anonymous said...

RT -Are you yanking my chain, or do you really agree?

Joe Calgary said...

I agree Red... how am I supposed to avoid protesters in front of abortion clinics, if I can't see them?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Joe Calgary - That's funny. On the serious side, I think not funding eye exams could be deadly if drivers are not encouraged to get their vision checked regularly. Glaucoma is also a silent disease that could become entrenched if not detected early enough.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

That's weird, that last anonymous comment was mine to RT, but it came up as anonymous. Strange.

kelly said...

Zac, I would also like to know when you think human life begins. Is it the moment of conception or the act of being born? or at some point in between? I would also like to know why you think photographs of aborted babies are "dubious". Also, have you ever looked at photos of the baby in utero? There are some amazing books out there (not by pro-lifers I might add), that are simply stunning in showing the fetus in development. When I look at these photos, I see a human being.

Zac said...

Not too sure about 'trimesters', don't really understand those, so I will go with weeks.

Let's start off with 18 weeks, whatever trimester that might be in.

Gerry said...

Joanne,

Reading many of your contributors comments, we continue to fight a losing battle against abortion. There’s no question that once a fetus has developed its heart, that it’s totally wrong to destroy this tiny functioning being – yet so many self-serving people think only of themselves, and with no conscience flush these soon to be infants down the toilet like an appalling desecrate.

All we can do is pray for the destroyed fetus and ask forgiveness for the ignorant – forgive them Lord for they not what they do….

Zac said...

"All we can do is pray for the destroyed fetus and ask forgiveness for the ignorant – forgive them Lord for they not what they do…"

Read above my friend...religion is not a valid argument for pro-lifers.

But in the mean time, yes, pray to your God.

Seems odd to me that the same people who oppose abortion in God's name, can beat and drag homosexuals behind thier trucks in his name too.

Where's your God then?

Lord Omar said...

All we can do is pray for the destroyed fetus and ask forgiveness for the ignorant – forgive them Lord for they not what they do…

"Liberals Work For Solutions; Conservatives Pray The Problem Will Go Away"

Ladies and gentlemen, I rest my case.

Zac said...

Well said Omar...

Red Tory said...

RT -Are you yanking my chain, or do you really agree?

Without proper spectacles, how on earth can one be expected to count the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin? Or zygotes, for that matter…

liberal supporter said...

When does life begin? Is it the moment the sperm penetrates the egg? Or when the chromosomes start to combine in the egg nucleus? Or when they finish combining? Spermatozoa in test tubes swim about, they look alive as well. Is one fertilized egg a human just like you and me? What about after it has divided once, showing it can do so? After the cells differentiate to form prototypes of organs? After there is a nervous system? After it is possible for the fetus to be a premature live birth? Since it is theoretically possible to clone a person from any cell in their body, is each cell a potential human?

The point of the above is there is no magic line crossed between "is not a human" and "is a human". It is a gradual process of maturation.

I have no problem setting birth as the arbitrary point at which legal protections exist for a person. We have specific points of development for other things, voting etc. I would rather have been killed before I was born if my parents did not want me.

That said, there are all kinds of problems with outlawing abortion. If you believe abortion should never be allowed, even in cases of rape, incest, severe deformity, or certainty that the mother will die, then I have more respect for that view, though I completely disagree with it.

Any situation where abortion is "sometimes" allowed faces the problem that the pregnancy is not usually known for the first month, and will end in a birth after 9 months. You have probably seen the little classified ads that some young women answer, purportedly to help them, which are fronts for right-to-life organizations. By various means, they attempt to delay and misinform until the pregnancy is advanced as far as possible. They consider it a success if they can obfuscate the situation long enough that the baby is born. They don't seem to do much after that, they just claim another victory and move on to their next target.

When abortion is sometimes allowed, every situation is made to fit it. So the boyfriend is charged with rape. But can she get the abortion right away? After all the rape must be proven first, no? Suppose there is insufficient evidence to have him jailed, then the girl is forced to complete the pregnancy? What about the notoriously slow court system? Every right to lifer will try to claim intervenor status, delaying the trial, and of course the pregnancy becomes more advanced and more complicated to abort.

Much of the anti-abortion view talks about "abortion of convenience". This is dangerous, in that a test is to be performed, presumably by the government and/or courts, regarding the intent of the pregnant woman. I find it hypocritical that it is ok to kill an unborn child because the mother was raped, but not ok if she got pregnant but did not intend to. What if they used birth control but it failed? Who will be the judge of these things? Who decides the mother's health is in danger by continuiing the pregnancy? Who decides that a 30% chance she will die is acceptable to force her to continue the pregnancy, but 60% chance she will die is enough to allow killing the baby?

While I support any hearts and minds campaign, strong promotion of abstinence and education on birth control, any outlawing of abortion will not stop abortions. It will reduce your precious abortion statistics, and you can claim it is effective. It will have a temporary bump in the birth rate. But mostly, it will simply provide more gory pictures, this time of back street coathanger abortions gone wrong, suicides of girls who won't charge their boyfriends with rape, and feel that since it is their "fault" they got pregnant that they would rather die than become mothers in their circumstances.

The right to life starts at birth.

Mary said...

It always amazes me when a big time star like Paul McCartney and his wife get all emotional over baby seals. Or other stars taking up the cause of brown spotted owls etc. The McCartney’s were out on the ice in sympathy for those cute little pups, which shortly were to be clubbed to death, in the great seal hunt. But there is another great tragedy taking place each and every day in the abortion clinics all over the country. Little human pups are slated for death and there are no great stars to sympathize with them. Clubbing to death or being torn from limb to limb into the great sucking machine inserted into every young mother’s womb, who is there to get a problem solved. Or how about late term abortions whereby the doctor inserts a pair of scissors into the back of the head to end the infant’s life seconds before it leaves the birth canal. Or how about crushing the skull seconds before it leaves the birth canal, is this not cruel and painful torture? Does not the infant feel pain just as the baby seal feels pain in being clubbed to death? Clubs, scissors, or using instruments to crush the skulls of the most helpless is a silent war, that the only screams to be heard are inside the womb when the great sucking machine gets turned on. If the McCartney’s used the same measuring stick of sympathy for human pups that they use for baby seals, they would have a great humanitarian cause. As it is, it seems as if the world’s values are upside down. The more advanced we get the more out of balance our values seem to get.
Thank God my Mother chose to let me live instead of submitting me to the great sucking machine.

Zac said...

Well said liberal supporter...why don't you have your own blog?

If a jackass like me can have one, an intelligent person like yourself certainly can.

kelly said...

Zac, Are you saying that at 18 weeks the fetus becomes a person? Just want to clarify. If that is your thinking, what changed from 17weeks to 18?
Why do you paint all people who oppose abortion and are Christians as zealots who would drag homosexuals behind a vehicle? I know lots of Christians, and am one myself and have never known anyone who has done such a thing. Seems to me that general statements like that do nothing to further discussion, dialogue and debate. You seem like a rational guy from the posts I have read, so I'm a little disappointed to read those kind of inflammatory remarks.

Zac said...

"Why do you paint all people who oppose abortion and are Christians as zealots who would drag homosexuals behind a vehicle?"

My point there Kelly refers to a 1998 incident in Montana where a young male, who was gay, was approached by two men who began beating him. He was then attached to the bumper of thier truck and dragged behind it until he was dead.

When the men were arrested they said that they were doing "God's work". The day before, they had visited thier church and thier pastor had agreed to transport them out of the state so the police couldn't get them. Thankfully, the police did. At the trial, they claimed once again that they had performed the will of god and quoted scripture from Exodus. The judge apparently agreed by sentencing them to 18 months in prison. They currently walk the streets.

kelly said...

Zac, I had not heard of that, but I still say that you are painting all of us Christians with the same brush. That pastor was wrong as were the men who did that. True Christianity does not condone violence at all. My point was and is, please don't assume that is how I think and behave or that I condone that kind of attiude.
Back to the 18 weeks....what changed?

Red Tory said...

Thank God my Mother chose to let me live instead of submitting me to the great sucking machine.

I find it more than a little interesting that people like Mary seem to take a perverse, almost wickedly gleeful delight in describing the medieval sounding "horrors" of abortion in exquisitely gruesome detail.

Zac said...

"True Christianity does not condone violence at all"

Really?

Book of Romans describing gays and lesbians:

"They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed, and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,slanderers, God haters,insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil, they disobey their parents , they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless...Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death..."

Or how about exodus:

"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.They must be put to death.Their blood will be on their own heads."

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Red Tory - "...seem to take a perverse, almost wickedly gleeful delight in describing the medieval sounding "horrors" of abortion in exquisitely gruesome detail."

No more so than the McCartneys and others did during the seal hunt protests. So what's your point?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Omar -"Ladies and gentlemen, I rest my case." No generalization there.

Lord Omar said...

zac,
The passage you quote is Romans 1:32, and I agree it is one evil mofo of a biblical passage. I had this particular rap with a couple of zealots on my blog a month or so ago and will reprint their interpretation of the passage:

Omar,
Did you read the very next verse? Context and substance, you know.


Romans 2:1 "You may think you can condemn such people, but you are just as bad, and you have no excuse."

All that's being pointed out is what justice gets you.There is a better way.

And I said:

So what exactly are you interpreting here? To me all you are saying is that 'man' cannot act as god, but god? Well, it of course is right and of course it is the truth, so the death sentence remains. I stand by what I wrote about Romans 1:32

Reply: chirp, chirp, chirp...

The bible has been spun so many times and in so many different directions it just is not a credible document, let alone being historical. It always amazes me that people buy into it. But then, they have been indoctrinated, so there you go.

Gerry said...

Zac, reference to my comments about prayer and how because of our faith we hate gay's and drag them behind our trucks???

Christians pray for gay folks too, and accept them as having a problem but we still love them (at least with them we don't have to worry about abortions)...

And Omar "Liberals dither and Conservatives decide". Had the Liberals stayed in power much longer, all we would have left was prayer...

Lord Omar said...

And Omar "Liberals dither and Conservatives decide". Had the Liberals stayed in power much longer, all we would have left was prayer...

This is from an American's blog, but I think it is just as valid here in Canada.

"Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty. Liberals ended segregation. Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act. Liberals created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act. What did Conservatives do? They opposed them on every one of those things – every one. So when you try to hurl that label at my feet, ‘Liberal,’ as if it were something to be ashamed of, something dirty, something to run away from, it won’t work, Senator, because I will pick up that label and I will wear it as a badge of honor."

Conservatism is nothing short of a bad joke.

Debi said...

Liberal supporter: You struck a cord with me...... I found you had some very interesting and intelligent thoughts on the subject. My view is that you can’t be partially pro life with exceptions. There is no gray area….you either appose abortion or support it…. The fact that a woman was raped or her life is in jeopardy should not impact your decision if you are pro life. If you believe it is murder then nothing makes it the right decision.
On the other hand, if you are pro abortion it is now a matter of when the fertilized egg becomes a viable human. I think that will always be a matter of personal opinion and this is one of the toughest debates that will never be resolved to the majorities satisfaction.
You say you have no problem setting birth as the arbitrary point at which legal protections exist? Then we have to define birth…..if an attempted abortion occurs at 6 or 7 months and the baby survives, it is entitled to protection? If another abortion occurs at the same state of development and the baby dies, then it is allowable under the law? This makes no sense to me.

Jake said...

Omar&Zac
I appreciate your theological debate that I have read here. If I might add to it with some clarification. The passage in Romans that was quoted is quiet clear on God's view of homosexuality. Simply that it is sin just as lying and stealing and murder are sins. Later in Romans 6:23 the message is clear that the punishment for any sin is death(not at the hands of man but from God) and in Romans 3:23 we can read that all mankind is guilty of sin. god does not view any sin as worse then any other sin. Unfortunatly over the years we Christians have become a very poor representative of Christ and some people have done horrible acts in the name of God. This does not however excuse anyone from their responsibilty before God. The rest of Romans 6:23 does tell us that Jesus Christ has provided us the way out from under the judgement of God. God does wish that anyone should suffer eternal death He wants all to come to Him and repent of their sin 2 Peter 3:9. Omar you are very quick to brush off the Bible as not historical i challenge you to actual research that statement.
This debate started over the issue of abortion and I believe that both sides can argue for the next 100 years and still have no clear decision. It comes down to 1 thing Genesis 1:27 it is either true or it isn't.
Zac I know that you are eager to hear facts and figures about abortion who is using the service and why (BTW you still haven't explained why the pictures are dubious), but great physists have been arguing about light for years is it a particle or a wave; facts and observation support both.

Christianity is not a religion to make you feel happy it is about understanding your relationship to the Creator of the universe and having that relationship on His terms because He is God and we are his creation.

Zac said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Zac said...

I see that I've been censored...thanks Joanne.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

O.K. guys. Things are getting a bit heated, and I had to enable comments moderation, which I really don't like doing. It slows down the discussion.

I think it would be good for everyone to just take a deep breath, have a good night's sleep, and maybe we can look at this with fresh eyes tomorrow.

Thanks to all for the amazing participation! I appreciate the feedback. Lots to think about.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Well, Zac, if you could rephrase that comment, I would publish it.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

BTW, the word is "their"; not thier. FYI.

Lord Omar said...

Lets look at one of the basics of the Bible, The 10 Commandments, which are 25% applicable to our basic laws today.

1. Have no other gods. – No correlation to law.

2. Do not make idols. – No correlation to law.

3. Do not take the lord’s name in vain. – No correlation to law.

4. Keep the Sabbath day. – No correlation to law.

5. Honor your parents. – No correlation to law.

6. Do not kill. – Yes, we have a man on base!

7. Do not commit adultery. – No correlation to law.

8. Do not steal. – He’s made it to second!

9. Do not falsely accuse. – Only half-right. This applies when people are under oath.

10. Do not covet. – Our economy depends upon people being covetous.

Hardly impressive. And absolutely no bearing on our secular society today. And if I've said it to one believer, I've said it to a thousand. If your little story that y'all have been conned into believing is true, than let god come back and do something about it. 2000 years and waiting.

Lord Omar said...

Censorship? The grim tool of the fascist. It's interesting, but not surprising, how zac got censored and jake didn't. Hhhmmm...

Red Tory said...

No more so than the McCartneys and others did during the seal hunt protests. So what's your point?

Well, I thought Sir McCartney and his celebrity pals’ protestations were fairly asinine and their bleating about the imagined suffering of seal pups ridiculous anthropomorphism. And while it’s silly to compare the outrage of some dilettante celebrities over the unfortunate fate of some seal pups with that of the likewise imagined pain and suffering of fetuses aborted in the womb, funnily enough this is precisely how this tangent got started. As you may recall, the frequently amazed Mary decried the lack of celebrity support for the unborn and said, “Little human pups are slated for death and there are no great stars to sympathize with them.” What poppycock.

But to answer your question, I wasn’t really making a point, just more of an observation.

Zac said...

I don't think that I will reprint my comment. It was pretty tame already.

I'm disappointed that you've decided to censor dissenting voices, but hey, its your place you can do what you want.

Personally, nothing gets me angrier than people who show clear hatred towards homosexuals, which is why I wrote what I wrote.

There's no point in writing anything else, some people can't be swayed.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

RT - I happen to agree with Mary about the pityful fact that seal pups have more celebrity champions than unborn babies. In fact, I had made that comparison myself when the McCartneys were hogging the spotlight.

Why you found that to be "poppycock" is beyond me.
-------------------------------
Zac's comments were deleted due to a personal attack on another blogger.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Red Tory - McCartney and his wife were bemoaning the fact that the seal pups were killed before they even had "their first swim". *sob*

Seems to me that murdered babies miss out on a lot too.

kelly said...

Seems to me there is something to be gleaned from Dr. Suess's book, Horton Hears A Who, in which the statement is made, "A person's a person no matter how small."

And Zac, I went through the comments here on this blog and fail to see where you see that anyone said they "hated" homosexuals. Saying that you think gay people have a problem and that you pray for them is not hate.

Mary said...

Mary to Red Tory:
The truth makes one wince, doesn't it?

Zac said...

Kelly, homosexuality is not a "problem".

Is being black a "problem"? Is being "jewish" a problem?

Being gay is who you are, there's nothing wrong with that.

To imply that someone who is gay has a problem, like a disease, is hate. Plain and simple.

Would I be right in saying that because your all Conservatives, that you have a "problem"? No. It's what you believe, its what you think, it's who you are.

BTW, I didn't launch a personal attack against another blogger, I said that I was disappointed that in this day and age people still harbour such an offensive view that homosexuality is a "problem".

For this I get deleted. I guess I stepped on some toes.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

No, Zac, your comment was deleted because of the tone of the last line (in that particular comment).

You have a perfect right to say what you believe, as long as it is in a way which doesn't attack others.

Now, if you are feeling attacked because some people look at homosexuality as a problem, and feel compassion for that problem, well, I guess you could liken it to being a Conservative, which is a choice, so you just defeated your own argument.

Zac said...

Homosexuality isn't a choice, nor a problem. It's who you are. To say otherwise is hatred, pure and utter hatred.

Zac said...

BTW Joanne, I don't see how my last line was in any ways mean. I toned that down a lot before I posted it.

When I see something like that, it makes me hit the roof. I almost ripped my computer out of the wall, so there were plenty of things that I wanted to say, but decided to be civil about the matter.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Glad you restrained yourself there, Zac.

Mmmm... You wouldn't be gay, by any chance, would you? It would help to know where you're coming from.

Zac said...

I'm not gay but I will tell you where I'm coming from.

This is a suicide note from a young man named Hamed Nostoh, 14. He jumped off of a bridge in Vancouver. Here is an excerpt from his note:

"Dear Mom and Dad

The first thing is, I love you Mom and Dad. There was so much going on, and I tried to cope with it, but I couldn't take it anymore....It was horrible. Every day, I was teased and teased, everyone calling me gay,fag,queer, and I would always act like it didn't bug me...But I was crying inside me...

I know that you are going to miss me, and that you will never forgive me, but you will never understand.You weren't living my life. I hate myself for doing this to you. I really hate myself. But there is no other way out for me...

"Mom after my death, please, please go to schools and talk to kids that bullying and teasing has big consequences. Please visit my grave often so I am not lonely..."

Joanne, when people say that homosexuality is a problem, they add to the culture of shame that surrounds gays in this country. Young men and women kill themselves because they hate themselves, because other's tell them that they are a "problem".

So, yeah...thats where I'm coming from.

Can 'ya dig it?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I hear you Zac. First of all, YOU were the one who brought the homosexual agenda into the conversation!

I am very sorry that the young man you speak of felt compelled to commit suicide. Clearly, he was dealing with a "problem", that he felt he couldn't overcome on his own.

However, if Christians choose to view homosexuality as a problem, that is their choice, or is Freedom of Thought now illegal?

Zac said...

Joanne, those "views" are contributing to deaths.

These are the collarteral damage in god's holy war.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Zac, you can legislate gay marriage but you can't force anyone to adopt a particular world view.

For example, homosexuality is a sin or evil in the Muslim world. Are you telling me that any Muslim in Canada who thinks that being homosexual is wrong, should be thinking otherwise? If so, I'd like to see you take out an ad in the newspaper to that effect.

Zac said...

I'm in no ways trying to legislate the way that people think.

You want to think that way, cool..go nuts, just keep in mind that it is tantamount to calling someone a racial slur. Would you do that? I think not.

In civilized society, we don't demean others because we find thier "lifestyles" offensive. We accept them as they are.

You can harbour all sorts of views. I know people who use the "n" word to describe blacks, does it make it wrong? Yes. I correct them, as I am correcting your friend.

Homophobia is alive and kicking and until we can show people that it isn't wrong to be gay, the intolerance, hate, senseless violence, and suicide will continue.

I'm not forcing you to change your mind Joanne, I'm asking you.

Mary said...

I think that Zac has tried to take this from a discussion on abortion to one on homosexuality. I don’t buy it. Zac believes what he believes with his whole heart and we Christians believe what we believe with our whole heart. That is where the whole thing stands right now. This is as true about abortion as with any kind of thinking. We believe with our whole heart that destroying infants is wrong and that God’s word to us is clear on the subject. So as Christians & followers of Christ we will not renounce the bible in order to pacify. There is a clear dividing line here. We can say in sympathy to any person trapped in whatever kind of lifestyle, that we used to call it sin, the person is not the problem but what they are doing is the problem. Jesus dealt with the sin problem at the cross and each of us can choose for ourselves what we will believe or not believe. Renouncing what the bible clearly says on any given lifestyle, just to make others feel more comfortable is not an option for us, for we cannot go against what we truly believe in our hearts. But we can tread lightly which is what I think we have been trying to do on this blog.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Well Zac, here are my thoughts on the matter. Love the sinner; hate the sin.

I know you're going to go ballistic on me now! Sorry if you can't stand my guts as I type this "narrow-minded crap."

Zac said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Joanne (True Blue) said...

Mary - Well said. Yes, you're right. We have to take care not to hurt people's feelings yet we can't betray our own beliefs. It is a delicate balance for sure.

Another problem is that people often cite things in the Bible which were written in the context of the times, and viewed in today's society seem to hold little relevance. If you have any insight on that issue, please feel free to contribute.

Omar especially seems to cling to that old argument of finding things in the Bible to criticize, and then by extension deduce that the whole Bible is therefore to be discredited.

Zac said...

Know what, I deleted my last comment not because I went "ballistic" on you, but because it would have reopened debate, which I feel is pretty much exhausted at this point.

You feel your way, I feel my way - just keep in mind the damage that is being done.

Obviously, I have problems with those that would hate others and that includes god, which is why he and I parted ways many years ago, so to say.

I reject organized religion for many different reasons, this being one of them.

So, I guess we can't see eye to eye on this issue, because we don't see eye to eye on the religious front.

Debate when there is no common premise will not work.

So, with that I sign off...

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Yes, you're right Zac. We are not going to change the other's mind. Sorry you and your god parted ways. I think you said you are Jewish? So that would mean in a cultural context I guess.

As I said before, you're the one who brought up the gay issue. But the fact remains, and this might surprise you, that people may accept the law of the land, but hearts and minds can't be legislated to change.

It's been an interesting discussion though. Thanks.

kelly said...

Zac, One last thought from me. (and then you guys can move back onto politics :)
I think it is narrow minded and perhaps bigotted of you to assume that because someone thinks homosexuality is wrong that they "hate" another human being. I also think that it is wrong but do not hate people in this lifestlye. I have a friend who is gay and clearly don't hate him. What needs to be taken out of any discussion is the anger.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Wow, great point, Kelly!

That was niggling around there at the back of my mind, and you just crystalized it! I am not hating homosexuals; I am not beating them up and killing them. I am simply not condoning the lifestyle. In my view, it is morally wrong. Thank you for that.

Zac said...

Sigh...

I never implied that any of you guys beat homosexuals or anything like that. I thought that I made that clear earlier on.

My point is that by saying that their "lifestyle" is wrong, you are contributing to the culture of shame that surrounds thier lives. Homosexuals are born gay, they don't choose to become gay. By that logic, someone chooses to the asian, or chooses to be white. Why label someone as deviant who did not have a choice in the matter in the first place.

Just because you don't kill and beat in the lords name, doesn't mean that others don't. As long as the Church refuses to accept gays, they will continue to be subjected to those atrocities by the small minority of Christians who decide to take such actions.

BTW, Joanne...yes, I am Jewish, but I have news for you. Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc, its the same god your speaking to, your all just speaking to him in different ways. Ask a theologian, he'll tell you. Or just go ahead and read some St. Augustine.

Oh, and just because my parents are jewish, doesn't mean that I am...I'm fairly agnostic.

Zac said...

"I think it is narrow minded and perhaps bigotted of you to assume that because someone thinks homosexuality is wrong that they "hate" another human being."

Kelly, think long and hard about this statement. Scratch your head for a few hours and really consider what your saying to me through this statement.

kelly said...

Zac, Maybe you'll have to enlighten me. All I was saying is that I feel your anger and hatred towards those who don't agree with your way of thinking. You can't have it both ways. I don't hate people who are gay.

Soccermom said...

Good post, Kelly.

My, my, I see the Liberal sharks have been circling...

I just wonder how most lefties can get so bent out of shape over ANIMAL rights and the seal hunt, etc., but talk about saving the lives of a defenseless unborn HUMAN baby and that's the worst thing in the world! How do you guys feel about what the Chinese have been doing for years, which is aborting female babies just because they are female? Do you support their right to do that? Does that sound reasonable to you? How about some compassion? How about more promotion of adoption? How about more counselling for these women considering abortion? How about a cultural change to a respect for human life? That does not sound so ridiculous, does it?

I am so sick of this topic. I am proudly pro-life and I will not apologize for that. Period. Fini.

I'm not looking to argue with you guys. Just respect my right to have my own opinion. Don't bother attacking me. Just as you have decided on principal that you won't change your minds on this, I promise I will not either.

Zac said...

"Zac, Maybe you'll have to enlighten me"

That wasn't "long and hard" my friend. Keep trying.

I'm not saying that you hate homosexuals, but you premise is flawed, I think you should reconsider what your saying.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Soccermom! Bravo!!

That is it exactly. I have seen traditional marriage redefined without my consent. Please don't tell me that you want me to buy into it. Won't happen. You can control what's going on around me, but you can't control my mind.

Zac said...

Jo, no one is trying to change your mind about abortion or ssm.

You can sleep at night, I promise.

Soccermom said...

Thanks, Joanne!

Liberals would have us believe that their view is the correct one. Says who? When we don't agree, we are called bigots and rascists. WRONG!

Zac said...

soccermom,

see above.

I'm not asking you to change your views, I'm certainly not going to change very easily.

All I ask is that you consider a different way of thinking.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Zac - Could you consider a different way of thinking?

Soccermom said...

Hi, Zac! My fave Liberal! And I hope you have considered my side as well!

Like I said, we'll have to agree to disagree...

Now let's all shake hands and be friends again!

ravinghomo said...

I wish I could get pregnant so I could have an abortion!!!

Zac said...

"Zac - Could you consider a different way of thinking?"

Everyone is able to. Perhaps in 10 years time I will be siding with God, and you will be telling me that I am wrong. Anything's possible, but I have my doubts. God's in my bad books for now.

Zac said...

I think that we should leave it at that for now, though. This could go on all night and I think that we have dug ourselves into our positions pretty deep.

TangoJuliette said...

Zac: Most of your facts are wrong. As well, you're still taking text out of context and voicing pretext. Tricky thing to do with 'holy books,' ask any muslim. The kid in Montana was left tied to a fence. Exodus is a book of judaism as well as a christian document. If one's intolerance is clearly evident, being identified as an 'intolerant' individual is nothing more than a statement of fact.You know...walk, talk, smell,look, waddle and/or moult like a duck, you'll be called a duck. You seem to enjoy tossing out apparently emotionally charged and somewhat pejorative labels. Can you back them up? What's a neo-con? Is it something more than someone who is not a liberal? And remeber, it seems that the 21st century christians are no longer the ones who were fed to the lions in the old roman coloseums. These folks today ain't too willing to turn the other cheek and get another rap on the noggin. Hell's bells. They are downright uppity. Don't seem to know their place in a democracy any more.

As for Omar, i think it was, who quoted what he felt was an accurate account of the great strides our society has made, thanks to 'liberalism'--u.s. style democrats I guess...2 things: Civil rights? Bull Connor! Big white guy with killer dogs let loose on black marchers in the deep south. Most southern u.s. klansmen were baptists AND democrats. Bull Connor was a bigshot in the national democratic party machinery. Democratic Convention Chicago 68. You are all invited to try to get beyond selective amnesia and pathological partizanship and try to contribute to making this country liveable--for everyone.

I suspect that the planet we call home could be a little calmer and easier to take, if ONLY WOMEN were ever going to be involved in the whole abortion debate/question/issue/hassle/discussion.

l.h.&k.

TangoJuliette

Zac said...

"The kid in Montana was left tied to a fence."

Differnt case Tango.

Lord Omar said...

TangoJuliette, you are going to offer up Bull Connor as your argument against what Liberalism has produced for America? Wow...that's deep. If anyone is subscribing to the medical condition of "selective amnesia" it is you my friend. Med time, TJ.

and joanne? How did somebody calling themselves "ravinghomo" and proclaiming wanting to get pregnant and having an abortion get past your censoring eye? I am sure that that statement is much more offensive than anything zac had to say last night.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Omar - I actually thought that comment was pretty funny..

Zac said...

"raving homo" is something to laugh at?

TangoJuliette said...

No Omar. No arguments from me. Merely an observation. Your white knights in shining armour really are just as flawed as those heroes other people honour and you denigrate.

My own meds program is being followed meticulously, with tremendous effect. How's yours working for you?

Get caught trying to steal second and you go into some low-level put-down on pharmacology and those who might benefit from same?

That's some Really Big Tent you might claim to be part of. When does the rest of the BigTent Carnival side-show come lumbering into town?

And Zac? You're still equivocating. But you're certainly getting a little smoother at it. Way to go champ!

Joanne (True Blue) said...

If anyone IS offended by ravinghomo's remark, let me know and I'll delete it. I let it stand because it wasn't singling out a particular person.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Omar, congratulations on your letter to the editor about Freedom of the Press (the Record). It was very well written.

RGM said...

Excellent debate by all parties here; I wish I hadn't come into it so late, but suffice to say that I'll agree with the folks who are saying that abortion is a no-no.

I've never been able to understand how easily the "pro-choice" crowd discards the adoption option as part of their criteria for choice. It very easily remedies the problem of an unplanned pregnancy, the problem of financial hardship, and does so without having to prevent life. Plus, if at a later stage in life, the parent wants to meet their child, they have that option.

Mary makes an excellent observation too about how men utilize their own sense of entitlement to demand that a woman have an abortion so that *they* don't have to deal with the responsibility of being a father. This is one of the many problems that real feminists blast the patriarchal system for with a legitimate ferocity. Men make women pregnant, but then have the audacity to demand that they become unpregnant?

My view has always centred around responsibility, and to be engaging in sexual activities without full knowledge of the consequences or failing to take the required precautions demonstrates an awful level of irresponsibility. 16-year old girls are too young to be having babies, but they are constantly bombarded with sexual imagery and the notion that having sex is cool (by male advertisers) without receiving the appropriate information about how to prevent unwanted pregnancies. There's a real problem going on here; for anybody who is interested, I would recommend reading Ariel Levy's Female Chauvinist Pigs, which focuses on a lot of the ideas that I'm talking about here and what we can do to move beyond the sexualization of everything.

Zac said...

"I've never been able to understand how easily the "pro-choice" crowd discards the adoption option as part of their criteria for choice."

I've never been able to understand how the pro lifers can so quickly dismiss same sex adoption.

That would seem to solve many a problem.

Kang and Kodus said...

"Abortions for none"

"Booooo"

"Abortions for all"

"Booooo"

"Fine, abortions for some, miniture American flags for others"

"Yeah!!!!"

RGM said...

Zac,
I guess there's mysteries for all of us eh? I personally have no problem whatsoever with the idea of same-sex adoption. I see no reason why two people with the same parts can't raise a child any better or worse than two people with different parts.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

"Omar, congratulations on your letter to the editor about Freedom of the Press (the Record). It was very well written."

My apologies! That was meant for Tango. I shouldn't be blogging when I'm tired.

I can't really keep up with all the comments, so please don't feel bad if I don't respond to each and every one. You probably don't want me to anyway. I enjoy reading the discussions though. Thanks.

kelly said...

Zac, adoption is available already to sam sex couples. I have a friend who works for the CAS and has personally placed children with these couples. I'm don't think this is going to decrease the abortion rate though.

Zac said...

Hey Joanne, if you don't mind could you post my reply to Kelly when you get around to it.

I don't want her to think that I left her hanging over here...hate to be rude.

Zac said...

Hmmm...that wasn't the one. Is there not another post, one that addresses the adoption issue?

This comment moderation is screwing me on up. I'm not sure whether I responded to someone or not.

kelly said...

Thanks Zac. It was posted elsewhere but I saw it and I think I responded! Too many posts to keep track of! I'll have to go look now!

Mary said...

Zac:
There is a book out there that answers all your questions. It is called:

Is the Bible Intolerant?
Sexist?
Oppressive?
Homophobic?
Outdated?
Irrelevant?
By Amy Orr-Ewing

With a forward written by Ravi Zacharias, who has spoken on many university campus on these subjects.

Zac said...

Mary,

I don't necessarily have many questions. To be perfectly honest, my problems with christianity rest with two of the more weighty philosophical issues.

1) God's concept of suffering
2) The concept of justice in the here and now

I will pick the book at the library and give it a read though. I thank you for your suggestion. I'm always looking for new material on religion, especially something that might be geared more towards my age group and ideology.

P. Kelly said...

It is obvious that Omar and Zac are lovers... Repeating the same old lies at different web sites does not change the fact that they are lies. You boys are a good fit in the Lieberal paarty, sobered up yet from celebrating April 20th, your hero's birthday?