How pro-life/pro-choice are you?

[wheresthemind]

I'm not as cemented in my pro-choice views as I have been and I know I'm not the only one who leans that way on this board. I do not think Roe vs Wade should be overturned, but... This is such a tough moral issue, and I think we all grapple with it.

I'd like to see where we stand as a whole on this, and in the poll people can put them-selves where they think they are without being flamed.

I also know the language of "Pro-Life" is deceptive, but I really didn't know how else to put it in making this poll.

So vote away... and flamers stay away!

and reply if you have something to say to keep it bumped! : )

[Terwilliger]

1. kicking this poll

[wheresthemind]

2. blegh

theres the problem with polls, its hard to keep them kicked!

[wheresthemind]

67. just wanna keep those votes rolling in

woo

[GreenArrow]

3. Pro-choice is the real

pro life position.

[Woodstock]

4. Enough of the "agony of abortion" nonsense - and polls like this

1) Roe v. Wade already has restrictions on abortion, and the majority of Americans support Roe v. Wade as is - thus there is no need for twisted poll questions that prove nothing

2) NOBODY is "pro-abortion"

3) "pro-life" is right wing propaganda (they aren't pro-mothers' lives, or pro-poor people's lives (hence the free pass to polluters, the cuts in medical services, etc.), or pro-soldiers' lives, or ...

4) the Democratic party platform is pro-choice, and with polls showing the gender gap (more women support the Democratic candidate than men in contests vs. Bush) is alive and well, it's going to stay pro-choice (not to mention that most men are pro-choice, too) - party leaders are well aware most women named Gore's pro-choice position as the number one reason they voted for Gore rather than Bush

5) don't we have better things to talk about? young American men and women are getting their arms and legs shot off in Iraq for Halliburton, Republicans are dismantling the Constitution and bankrupting the treasury in the name of big business, the White House is trading our national secrets for votes - not to mention other deplorable acts, such as outing a CIA agent and endangering her contacts' lives, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan - the real terrorist threats - are being ignored, ...

6) and haven't we heard enough about how a small minority of men on DU feel about abortion? The day you are a woman faced with John Ashcroft deciding if you will live or die, then I want to hear all your "agony of abortion" nonsense, until then, NO.

[wheresthemind]

9. I don't get it?

Nobody here said anyone is "pro-abortion", so I don't know who you are quoting when you say that.

I said that I knew "pro-life" was deceptive in my post.

Democrats struggle with this issue, even Gore had a pro-life record if I recall correctly? This is an issue I've struggled with and simply wanted to get a feel for this communities feelings, which I hold in a very high regard.

[Woodstock]

12. If you still "don't get it" you need to re-read my post

and pay particular attention to #6 - try to put yourself in the shoes of most women on DU, and imagine them having to face multiple "agony of abortion" threads on DU daily, when they know their very lives are at stake (I'm not kidding when I say John Ashcroft now has life or death power over American women) because of a Republican campaign saying the exact same things these threads on DU say in order to shake support for Roe v. Wade - it's playing into their hands, and I'm sure you don't realize it, but that doesn't mean it isn't happening. Ask yourself how important it was that you took front and center stage on DU with your agonizing about abortion in a thread that completely misses the point. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, many women will die.

Gore the VP/presidential candidate (free of Congressional constituent obligations) was pro-choice.

"One poll taken after the 2000 election showed that abortion was still a defining issue for many women. Stanley Greenberg, who served as Gore's pollster, asked over two thousand respondents to identify three reasons (out of eighteen choices) why they voted, or considered voting, for Gore and three reasons (out of thirteen choices) why they had doubts about voting for George Bush. Among all women voters, Bush's "opposition to a woman's right to choose" was the single biggest reason for opposing him... "

From "The Emerging Democratic Majority" by John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira, Scribner, 2002.

[wheresthemind]

18. You refering to the partial birth ban?

Because if so, I said below that I thought the ban was ridcoulous! I may have my doubts about the morality of abotion, but I cannot understand a law that bans the the procedure even if it means saving the mother's life.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find a DUer that thinks that banning the abortion, even if it means the mothers death, is a good idea! People can agonise over the issue of abortion without thinking that this ban is a good idea. So I don't know why the women of DU would be upset at seeing a thread about someone doubtfull of abortion. I CAN see them upset if someone posted a thread praising Ashcrofts ban on abortions.

Personally I think I'm morally opposed to abortion, yet I'd never EVER say that no one should be allowed to have an abortion, or an abortion cannot be had even to save the mothers life... Is it wrong to think that?

[Woodstock]

20. You put up a thread with smiley faces and "flamers keep away"

and then when someone tries to explain to you how many of us feel (I know because we've talked about it lots), I get the feeling you didn't even stop for a moment to reflect on it. You feel this is a tough moral issue and want to talk about it? Fine, you've got your spotlight on DU, one of the twice daily "agonizing about abortion" threads, where a very small minority of men on DU get to express their angst about the choices pregnant women make. But if you'd only for a moment consider the REAL agony of women reading yet another thread that advocates (whether you realize it or not) handing Ashcroft a little more power over their lives, maybe you'd have thought twice before posting it. If only you'd stop and think about those women, maybe you'd realize for us, this isn't a nice little chat on DU - this is OUR LIVES.

[wheresthemind]

41. I have thought about the women...

I was just trying to defend myself when your quotations made it sounds like I had said things I had not.

I just want to know how I am advocating giving Ashcroft power over women's right to choose when I have said that I do not think it should be up to anyone, but the parents? That sounds very contradictory to say that I am trying to give Ashcroft more power when I say no one else should have the power. The only time my personal feelings on abortion could ever come into play is if I was responsible for putting someone in a position of having an abortion. Then it would be between me and the women.

I didn't want a "spotlight" I wanted to know how others felt... I've never participated in an abortion thread before because I have not completely sorted out my own feelings about the issue. When I replied to your post, I replied to the parts of it that I felt were going after me, I never attacked your position or a women's right to choose.

I'm not attacking a women's right to choose. I could be a staunchly anti-abortion, and still fight till the end to protect a women's right to choose. There are two issues, someone's personal view on the morality of abortion, and someone's personal view of wether a women should have the right to do what they want with their own bodies.

[snoochie]

22. The ban has an exception for the life of the mother. (n/t)

[Woodstock]

24. It doesn't protect the health of the mother & is written in a way

that would not protect the life of the mother, either (and by the way, health and life are intertwined - just ask any doctor - or better yet, just ask Ashcroft, because now he's the one who gets to decide.)

Please read the actual ban before you defend it.

[snoochie]

25. Just pointing out the fact that it does have that exception. (n/t)

[Woodstock]

26. Actually, it's double talk - you need to read the actual ban

The language of the bill is written such that it doesn't really protect the woman's life. The "exception" is double talk. I urge you to read the ban in its entiretly before you post in various places that it protects womens' lives.

[snoochie]

28. Why so angry?

You don't need to shout.

I haven't even voted in this poll. Don't know where my position would fall.

[Woodstock]

30. I'm not angry, but if you'd like for me to be, I suppose I can arrange it

Read what I said above. We were posting at the same time - I added to my explanation for clarity.

[snoochie]

33. You changed that post

It was in all caps, before: "LOUD AND CLEAR"... that, to me, indicates anger (if you interpret the all caps as shouting, that is).

Anyway... bills are enormous and written in legalese. If you're already familiar with the ban's unclear portion, please post it, or be so kind as to let me know which section it's in, at least.

[Woodstock]

35. As I said, we posted the same time

I said I read you ... and thought that didn't say enough. Caps do not express anger by the way - SEE? I'm not angry, but you seem to want me to be. Sorry.

I think the impetus is on you regarding the ban.

[snoochie]

39. You may think it is, but I disagree.

We both recognize that there is an exception for the life. If you didn't know this was the case, I would be the one citing a reference for that fact.

However we don't both recognize that there are ambiguous parts of the bill. Since you're already familiar with these parts, the impetus, IMO, is on you, to share such unclear parts.

[Woodstock]

42. No, the "exception" is nullified by the language of the rest of the bill

If you haven't read the bill, we don't have anything to talk about.

[snoochie]

44. This doesn't make sense.

When I needed to know if it provided the exception, I looked it up. Simple.

But in defending your point that you claim knowledge of, you refuse to provide the information you say exists.

Whatever. :shrug:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

55. According to this legal expert you are not correct

The Two Glaring Flaws in the New Congressional Anti-"Partial Birth" Abortion Law


First, as Justice O'Connor pointed out, Nebraska's prohibition on partial birth abortions did not provide a "health of the mother" exception -- that is, an exception allowing the banned procedure if it is the best method for ensuring the health of the mother.

In Justice O'Connor's view, and that of a majority of the Court, such an exception constitutionally must exist even for a relatively late-term abortion. But the federal law includes no such exception.


Second, as Justice O'Connor also pointed out, Nebraska's law did not provide a sufficiently precise definition of what procedure, exactly, it was banning. The state legislature claimed to be targeting an uncommon and especially gruesome procedure known as "D & X" -- dilation and extraction. But in fact, according to Justice O'Connor (who was picking up on the complaints of physicians) that statute appeared to affect not only D&X's, but also a broad range of other abortion procedures.

Justice O'Connor and the majority made clear that this vagueness placed abortion providers in an impossible position. As a result, it also places an unconstitutional burden on a woman's right to choose.


Like the Nebraska law the Court struck down in Stenberg, the federal law also appears to sweep broadly in the procedures it bans. It displays the very same vagueness problem. And thus, it is unconstitutional for the very same reason.

The Court must be wondering: Will Congress ever learn?

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/lazarus/20031030.html

[Melinda]

11. Thank you Woodstock - I feel *exactly* the same way.

You said it all. :hug:

*on edit: Well, almost all. I just want to add one more personal observation...

I think the term "pro-life" is a misnomer -- "anti-choice" is more like it.

[Woodstock]

14. :-) I heard Dean say this in Baltimore last Monday

he ALWAYS makes a point to talk about women and their right to choose! And he really believes it.

[stimbox]

5. U.S. out of her uterus

10 Pro-Choice - Absolutely NO restrictions or Gov. role
:kick:

[pasadenaboy]

6. I think abortion

is always the wrong choice unless the life of the mother is involved. However, I believe it should be legal in the first trimester for any reason. After that, I would put life of the mother as the only reason to legally abort.

I think we should have a social policy that promotes birth control to prevent the number of abortions. I believe that making abortion illegal only makes abortion more dangerous to the mother.

[snoochie]

16. This is my position as well.

Is the poll not working, or do most have no text description of the position? Only three show a position... where would this one be?

[Zynx]

7. I'm a five. I don't like it, but its going to happen anyway so protect it.

[MariaS]

8. Pro Choice and Why

I am pro-choice because my body belongs to me and to me alone. There is no man on this earth who will tell me what I can and can not do with my body. Why would I allow a bunch of suits in Washington to tell me what to do when I for the most part have no respect for their opinions and choices on even the most trival issues much less an issue that affects my life, family, and health. What do you think the reaction would be of these same men who scream from their pulpit of rightousness if I were to walk into their homes and tell them what to do with their guns? Just look at the reaction whenever any gun regulation is suggested. But I am suppose to just accept and go along with their dictates as to my body. I think NOT.

Now that the Repugs think they have a victory in their ineptly named partial birth abortion law no woman of childbearing age is safe. I desperately want to be a grandmother and have been bugging my daughter and her husband to hurry up and have a baby. I have changed my mind and never want my daughters to have kids because if this law does ever go totally into effect and either of my girls have complications from a pregnacy and need to have a medically necessary procedure to save their lives, this administration is telling me that my daughter's lives are disposable and the life of the child comes first. This is total crap. I would love my grandchildren with all my heart but my heart first belongs to my own child.

[wheresthemind]

10. I aggree...

The partial birth abortion bill is just ridiculous! I shocked some of my Catholic school friends when I told them that the law would not even permit an abortion if it meant saving the mothers life. This is why I think there can be a middle ground on this issue. Nothing is black and white.

[snoochie]

17. Actually this law does

It does have an exception for the life of the mother. It doesn't have an exception for the health of the mother, but it does for her life.

[Woodstock]

27. Actually, no it doesn't - you need to read the ban

and you will see that it doesn't really protect the life of the mother, even if at one point it says so - please read the ban before you defend it. The language is such that women will die - plain and simple.

[snoochie]

29. I see that you're very defensive on this point.

Why don't you post the part where it's unclear to make your point, instead of just asserting it?

[Woodstock]

32. I see you're very offensive on this point

The entire ban is full of doubletalk. It's very long - I'm not going to post it all here. I urge you to read the whole thing before you misrepresent it.

[snoochie]

37. I didn't ask you to post it all.

I'm not going to read the whole thing, either. It's going to be overturned anyway.

You indicate that you're already aware that there are portions of the bill which are ambiguous as to the exception to the life of the mother. If you're already familiar with said language, why not just cite it?

[Woodstock]

40. You're "not going to read the whole thing" but you are going to defend it?

You have said many times on this thread that it protects the woman's life, BUT YOU NEVER READ IT???

Again, let me remind you caps do not = anger, even though you seem to want this to be the case - they are used for emphasis here.

[snoochie]

46. No I haven't read the whole thing.

When I wanted to know if the exception was there, I checked for it, and it is there.

thomas.loc.gov is down for some reason, and I have to take my kids to the library... but I suppose since you refuse to share the information you already have, I guess when I get back I'll go ahead and read the whole thing.

But I really fail to see why someone who already knew something to be true wouldn't just cite a reference for the information they already had. :shrug:

[Lindacooks]

36. No it doesn't

Quit repeating this right wing lie. You've said this four times now, and you're WRONG.

[Jane Roe]

73. What will you do if you get drafted?

(and I mean drafted for a just war like WWII). Will you surrender control of your body in those circumstances, the way men traditionally have in the US?

[Nikia]

13. Morally against, but legal

I think that pro lifers should really concntrate their efforts on making adoption easier on both ends, making birth control more widely available, and educating people on both of these things. They should also stop being judgemental when they see a pregnant teen or other woman who they know is unmarried. This attitude only makes it more difficult for the young woman who is attempting to do "the right thing". It is also why some of them may preach against abortion but encourage or even force their own daughters to get abortions.
When I say morally against, I do not mean when a woman's health in endangered beyond the health dangers of normal healthy pregnancy. In fact, I think it is immoral to make a woman carry a baby to term when it might mean that she will die from the pregnancy or not being treated for a condition, such as cancer, because of her pregnancy. I mean in cases where the mother is healthy and where the baby would most likely be carried to term and adopted. Even then, I wouldn't equate it with murder.

[displacedtexan]

15. Respect The Body That Bore You!

If boys and men had to live in a world where every birth was a woman's choice (and not a man's perceived idea of her only role in life), we'd have a lot less abuse. (my 2 cents)

[Walt Starr]

19. Absolutely NO interference by the government

100% pro-choice. No compromises, no governement involvement whatsover.

And no Democrat who is anti-choice will ever get my vote. I refuse to compromise one inch on this issue.

[wheresthemind]

43. curious...

So if it was between a pro-choice Bush and a pro-life Gore you'd vote based on that one issue?

[Walt Starr]

50. Absolutely

No compromise whatsoever on this issue ever. Pro-Choice over party affiliation and any other stance on any other issue. It is the single issue that defines everything else for me.

This issue is why I am not a Kucinich supporter. On every issue besides abortion, he is closer to me than anybody else in the race, but his past on this issue keeps me from even considering him in the primaries.

[Dr Satan]

21. where is the vote

for "I dont give a fuck because there are more important problems."

[TahitiNut]

23. "pro/anti-life" and "pro/anti-choice" are NOT congruent spectra

A person's position on one is not locked to their position on the other. There's nothing to say that someone's position regarding government jurisdiction over termination of a pregnancy must infer some corresponding position on whether or not a pregnancy should be terminated. This is, imho, the pervasive fallacy that pollutes this whole public discussion.

"Anti-choice" was (and is) a common characteristic of Fascism -- "racial purity" and elimination of 'undesirables' -- eugenics. It's echoed in some of those who'd take the position of prohibiting abortion (due to the claim of "taking an innocent life") but allow it in cases of rape or incest (where the 'life' cannot be reasonably regarded as any less 'innocent' except by a very few who'd claim inheritance of guilt). This is NOT to say that there aren't those who'd condone such a choice who, while 'pro-choice,' are also 'pro-life.' There are many who adopt both a "pro-life" and "pro-choice" position -- firmly believing that, while the jurisdiction is within the woman's sole sovereign authority, the moral choice is most often the preservation of that 'life'.

[bicentennial_baby]

31. Where are the 2 fuckwits

who voted for option #1?

[snoochie]

34. That's unnecessary.

I feel just as strongly about people who would say that you should be able to 'terminate' a 'pregnancy' up until the baby is born, but I wouldn't go so far as to insult them with labels like the one you chose.

[Woodstock]

38. Yes, women should be told when things are necessary

or not. :eyes:

[snoochie]

47. I consider the 'termination' of a second trimester 'pregnancy'

to be akin to murder.

When is murder necessary?

[bicentennial_baby]

49. Nope

Anyone who is going to click "Yes, I'm for repealing Roe vs Wade" but does'nt have the cojones to speak up is a fuckwit, and a cowardly one at that.


KMA

[DemVet]

79. You're wrong to ask this.

This board is supposedly for Democrats of all persuasions, even those that are firmly opposed to abortion. I'm a Democrat and opposed to abortion in almost every situation except rape and incest. I don't consider saving the life and health of the mother an abortion issue. That's the wrong term, I feel, for something that HAS to be done. The woman's health always reigns supreme in these cases.

You're assuming the positions on this issue are cut and dried for all Democrats and Republicans. It ain't so. I even have a few Republican family members that are pro-choice. Amazing how that works, huh?

I don't follow the party line on all issues......I voted for 3 myself.

[Bucky]

45. I'm probably more of an 8, but 6 looked lonely w/o any votes. So I shared

[Padraig18]

48. Anti-abortion, pro-choice.

As a matter of personal belief and conscience, I believe aboprtion is murder, plain and simple; that said, this is a secular nation where the rule of law prevails, and Roe v. Wade is the law.

[DoNotRefill]

51. I think abortion is a terrible thing, and wish that nobody had to...

have them. That does not mean that I'm not "pro-choice". I support 100% a woman's right to choose. It's none of my business, much less the Government's business.

The Government should keep it's nose out of people's bedrooms, and CERTAINLY out of a woman's body.

I support things like social programs that are voluntary to the participants. I support public funding for them. The Government should offer a helping hand, but not force it on people if they don't want it. But the Government shouldn't be telling people what they can and cannot do, provided that they don't hurt anybody else doing it. That makes me pro-choice, pro-gun ownership, anti-war on drugs, pro legalized prostitution, et cetera. It's called "freedom"....

[janx]

52. ONE QUESTION--and it's an important one.

Who on this planet is actually "pro-abortion"?

Can you name one person you know who is "pro-abortion"? I cannot.


The political language so often gets out of control and we accept these terminolggies without questioning them.

[wheresthemind]

54. I don't think there are any...

Thats why I don't think anyone uses the term...

[janx]

68. Yes, some people do. They say, "Are you for abortion?"

It's ridiculous. They sometimes refer to people as being "pro-abortion."

[wheresthemind]

69. sorry...

I meant to say that there was no one here on DU... : )

[janx]

76. Oh, that's true, yep. Thank goodness.

You're right.

[uhhuh]

53. 100% pro-liberty

I cannot put myself in a position that I will never have to face, and presume to make a decision for people have to make that decision. I am a man. I will never have to carry a baby. If I was in the position of being pregnant, I don't know if I wouldn't feel incapable of supporting a baby, or unsure if I wanted to be tied to a particular person for life that had a part in its inception, or feel that my heath could be affected, up to and including death or permanent disability. I might also feel that I would have to sacrifice anything I was working to achieve by being forced to forgo that by raising a child instead.
At that point, I know a lot of people would say that people who are irresponsible enough to have sex when they weren't prepared for the consequences, shouldn't have sex. I don't think that looking at children as a punishment is much of an argument. People will have sex regardless, and to pretend otherwise is foolish. Most people will take precautions, but those don't always work. If someone chooses to skydive, and their well prepared chute fails to open, are we to feel sad and a sense of loss for their families, or say they got what they deserved for doing it in the first place?
I can't decide for an individual woman what the right decision is for her to make regarding her pregnancy. Since I will never be in that position, I do not feel it is right to take that decision away from them. They are the ones who have to live with the consequences either way.

[sujan]

56. hmm

I dont believe abortion is murder, much like masturbation is not an act of genocide.

It's a woman's choice and I support her right to have one or not have one.

[durutti]

57. Abortion Shouldn't Be Encouraged

But it shouldn't be discouraged, either. I chose 9.

[ellie]

58. Abortion on demand, no apologies n/t

[jsw_81]

59. 8

Pro-choice, but there should definitely be restrictions on late term abortion. It should only be allowed when the mother's life or health is threatened.

[uhhuh]

63. Don't agree

That would put someone in the position of deciding whether their health or life are threatned. I don't think that takes into consideration anything more than their medical situation.
If you say that their physical health is fine, should we be able to disregard as trivial their emotional or psychological health. If so, how about their financial or career health. At what point, due to situations changing in their lives, or other unforseen tragedies or setbacks, or changes in their view of the world and people aroung them, should others be able to step in and say that they are no longer in charge of their own lives?

[wheresthemind]

60. kick

kick

[grannylib]

61. IMHO 'pro life' should be referred to as 'antiabortion' or at least 'pro

fetal life' if we are going to be really accurate

[sujan]

62. spot on

[annak110]

64. This isn't a "tough moral issue" it is a PRIVATE issue.

It is not up to the pope or the catholic bishops (you know, the ones who like to hide pedophiles and who banned condoms when the A.I.D.S. epidemic started, etc.) to tell people in this country that they should be baby factories or else. They should not be able to say "we demand that baby factories produce cannon fodder for our conquest of the world". Who the hell cares whether the right-wing pope or any other pope is "infallable". He does not run this country nor should he. I keep saying this and will always say this: "If you don't mind if half the population is bereft of rights to their own reproductive choices lets have a mandatory vasectomy law, three vials of sperm to the nearest sperm bank, use two when possible and use the third only in case of emergencies. This will come closer to stopping abortions than anything ever has. Making abortions illegal does not, cannot, and will not stop abortions, in fact it leads to more deaths.

Why not provide birth control methods? Why not have readily available contraceptives?

Passage of these "fetus rights" bills are an insult to people who have only been able to vote in this country for the past 83 years. So, if a fetus is female when does that female lose her right to run her own life according to her own belief system?

[wheresthemind]

65. I think a lot of the DUers who are anti-abortion...

do it because of moral objections, not religious ones.

And as a non-religious person I'd like to stick up for the Catholic Church alittle.

If every practicing catholic embraced Catholic Social Teaching we'd have a much better world:

1.Dignity of the Human Person

Belief in the inherent dignity of the human person is the foundation of all Catholic social teaching. Human life is sacred, and the dignity of the human person is the starting point for a moral vision for society. This principle is grounded in the idea that the person is made in the image of God. The person is the clearest reflection of God among us.  See selected quotations.

2.Common Good and Community

The human person is both sacred and social. We realize our dignity and rights in relationship with others, in community. Human beings grow and achieve fulfillment in community. Human dignity can only be realized and protected in the context of relationships with the wider society.

How we organize our society -- in economics and politics, in law and policy -- directly affects human dignity and the capacity of individuals to grow in community. The obligation to "love our neighbor" has an individual dimension, but it also requires a broader social commitment. Everyone has a responsibility to contribute to the good of the whole society, to the common good. See selected quotations.

3.Option for the Poor

The moral test of a society is how it treats its most vulnerable members. The poor have the most urgent moral claim on the conscience of the nation. We are called to look at public policy decisions in terms of how they affect the poor. The "option for the poor," is not an adversarial slogan that pits one group or class against another. Rather it states that the deprivation and powerlessness of the poor wounds the whole community. 

The option for the poor is an essential part of society's effort to achieve the common good. A healthy community can be achieved only if its members give special attention to those with special needs, to those who are poor and on the margins of society.  See selected quotations.

4.Rights and Responsibilities

Human dignity can be protected and a healthy community can be achieved only if human rights are protected and responsibilities are met. Every person has a fundamental right to life and a right to those things required for human decency – starting with food, shelter and clothing, employment, health care, and education. Corresponding to these rights are duties and responsibilities -- to one another, to our families, and to the larger society. 
See selected quotations.

5.Role of Government and Subsidiarity

The state has a positive moral function. It is an instrument to promote human dignity, protect human rights, and build the common good. All people have a right and a responsibility to participate in political institutions so that government can achieve its proper goals. 

The principle of subsidiarity holds that the functions of government should be performed at the lowest level possible, as long as they can be performed adequately. When the needs in question cannot adequately be met at the lower level, then it is not only necessary, but imperative that higher levels of government intervene.  See selected quotations on the role of government and subsidiarity.

6.Economic Justice 

The economy must serve people, not the other way around. All workers have a right to productive work, to decent and fair wages, and to safe working conditions. They also have a fundamental right to organize and join unions. People have a right to economic initiative and private property, but these rights have limits. No one is allowed to amass excessive wealth when others lack the basic necessities of life.

Catholic teaching opposes collectivist and statist economic approaches. But it also rejects the notion that a free market automatically produces justice. Distributive justice, for example, cannot be achieved by relying entirely on free market forces. Competition and free markets are useful elements of economic systems. However, markets must be kept within limits, because there are many needs and goods that cannot be satisfied by the market system. It is the task of the state and of all society to intervene and ensure that these needs are met. See selected quotations on markets, workers rights, and labor vs. capital. 

7.Stewardship of God's Creation

The goods of the earth are gifts from God, and they are intended by God for the benefit of everyone. There is a "social mortgage" that guides our use of the world's goods, and we have a responsibility to care for these goods as stewards and trustees, not as mere consumers and users. How we treat the environment is a measure of our stewardship, a sign of our respect for the Creator.  See selected quotations.

8.Promotion of Peace and Disarmament

Catholic teaching promotes peace as a positive, action-oriented concept. In the words of Pope John Paul II, "Peace is not just the absence of war. It involves mutual respect and confidence between peoples and nations. It involves collaboration and binding agreements.” There is a close relationship in Catholic teaching between peace and justice. Peace is the fruit of justice and is dependent upon right order among human beings.

9.Participation 

All people have a right to participate in the economic, political, and cultural life of society. It is a fundamental demand of justice and a requirement for human dignity that all people be assured a minimum level of participation in the community. It is wrong for a person or a group to be excluded unfairly or to be unable to participate in society. See selected quotations.

10. Global Solidarity and Development

We are one human family. Our responsibilities to each other cross national, racial, economic and ideological differences. We are called to work globally for justice. Authentic development must be full human development. It must respect and promote personal, social, economic, and political rights, including the rights of nations and of peoples It must avoid the extremists of underdevelopment on the one hand, and "superdevelopment" on the other. Accumulating material goods, and technical resources will be unsatisfactory and debasing if there is no respect for the moral, cultural, and spiritual dimensions of the person. See selected quotations.

[annak110]

70. There are Catholics who do actually believe in humans

and their individual rights and dignity. Catholics for a Free Choice, Witnesses for Peace, people who have been supportive of the victims of pedophile priests, people who followed John XXIII and Vatican II. None of these support the excesses of the hiererarchy which continues its tradition of attacking and killing all who disagree with it wherever it can get away with outright murder. The totally irresponsible behavior of the Bishops in banning condoms worldwide condemed thousands of women to death throughout Aisia and Africa. Now, in their recent meeting they are calling for help for these same regions, because of A.I.D.S. They've said they've killed non-believers (such as Native Americans) "for their own good". They want to make divorce impossible here in the midst of the long running epidemic of "spousal" abuse, also a deadly situation for women. Historically they burned people at the stake to "purify their souls" or tortured them to death for "heresy". They kept Europe in a state of constant war for centuries basically to keep power and wealth for themselves. Martin Luther, among others, noticed the rampant corruption of the Church. Many attempted to break away from the stranglehold of their feudal existance and the memory of that struggle remained in people who settled here. When their decendants spoke out against Papal intervention of any sort the Church played "the bigotry card" as Rosemary Radford Reuther, herself a Catholic Theologian calls it. They play that card still. We helped kill lots of people in Central America because they were followers of Liberation Theology, which you may remember was supportive of rights of the poor and full of loving people. The hierarchy supports itself as a country "The Holy See" and takes a place in the U.N. where it does not belong. From that seat it has blocked rights for women world wide. We have an unconstitutionally appointed ambassador to the Vatican. (brought back for the second time by Ronnie Raygun's keepers and lasting to the present).

In 1975 (just after Roe v Wade) the Bishops started the latest campaign to make abortion illegal once again here in the U.S. The Pope and his Opus Dei Curia have publically demanded that elected politicians follow papal dictates. Those who do obey the Pope rather than following the U.S. Constitution should be tried for treason as they are following the dictates of the leader of a foreign state.

Humanists are far more supportive of individual rights and human dignity and of ethical and decent behavior than are the Catholic hierarchy and their fundamentalists followers. Humanists/FreeThinkers have no hidden agenda or made-up mandate to follow or to try to force others to follow. Humanists hold that people should be free to believe as they as individuals wish and not as a powerful hierarchy demands.

Remember Lord Acton's words, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

[AntiCoup2K4]

66. Best word to describe my position : realistic

I would like to eliminate abortions from the face of the earth, but I know that will never happen simply by making them illegal.

If the so called "pro lifers" really wanted to reduce abortions, they wouldn't be so opposed to birth control & sex education, nor would they encourage misogynistic attitudes towards women which encourage rape.

And if you eliminated rape and unplanned pregnancies, what do you think would happen to the abortion rate in this country?

Somebody pose that question to Bush Jr and lets watch his pea-brain meltdown on live TV :crazy:

[DemBones DemBones]

71. I'm a pro-life progressive and I strongly support sex education and

availability of contraceptives, and was fighting for women's rights forty years ago. I think the movement that convinced women they have the "right" to kill their unborn child has been as tragic for women as sexism has. Reasonable people should work to decrease demand (women's need) for abortions. It's unreasonable to attempt to prohibit abortions but it's also unreasonable to pretend that widespread use of abortion has no negative effects on society.

To DUers who are too young to remember, those who lobbied for legalized abortion in the U.S. at first only wanted to liberalize laws to make it easier to get an abortion when there was a legitimate medical reason. Later, they argued that the freedom to abort unwanted pregnancies would save marriages and result in fewer divorces, lower the incidence of illegitimate births and births to teenage mothers, and decrease both spousal abuse and child abuse. As we have seen, the reverse has actually occurred. In general, Americans today are more mean-spirited and selfish as well and I think the legalization of abortion is certainly a part of that.

We know much more about prenatal development today than we did in the early seventies. Yet, many people hold on to old ideas about a fetus being just "a few cells," and thus nothing to be concerned about. The truth is that a new human being begins life at the instant of fertilization. You had your full genetic inheritance when you were only a zygote and those genes shaped your development. We don't really know when consciousness begins, of course. However, I don't think consciousness is a good marker to use in making decisions as to when we can and when we can't kill another human being. It leads too easily to arguments that it is ethical and permissible to kill the mentally handicapped and the mentally ill as well as the comatose, the elderly, and even the very young. Some of you are no doubt aware of "Peter Singer, an alleged ethicist and now a professor at Harvard, who has "determined" that it is ethically permissible to kill a child up to the age of about two years. Of course he also argues for the "ethics" of killing the disabled and the elderly.

Life Is Beautiful. A fine sentiment and a fine film. Remember who the killers were. Remember that they had convinced themselves that they were acting in an ethical manner, with a goal of improving their society. We should learn from their mistake.

[mdguss]

72. I'm Pro-Life:

And I mostly agree with the post above. It's more than a bunch of cells, it is a being that is developing into a living, breathing person.

[noonwitch]

74. No government restrictions should be in place on abortion

How can they possibly be enforced? And who decides which woman is "worthy" of having an abortion? I live in a border city and am middle class-I can always go to Windsor to pay cash for an abortion if I couldn't get one here. What about everyone else, though?

The anti-abortion side is free to say it's wrong, to try to talk women out of having the procedure done, and to offer alternatives, particularly to poor women who want their babies, but feel that they can't afford them. Choice includes choosing to have a baby or have it and give it up for adoption.

[Blue_Chill]

75. Question to the "no restrictions" crowd

Would you be cool with a person that decided the day before she was to give birth that she didn't want it aborting the fetus?

Just want to see how far the "not a human until born" feeling goes.

[cally]

77. The mistake with this question

is that noone makes that choice. I cannot conceive of all the reasons someone might choose this because I am not a clergy, psychologist, or doctor. I prefer to deal with reality rather than hypotheticals. I know that late term abortions have saved women's lives and health. I know that abortion is a difficult decision. I know that abortion has, and continues, to be used to terminate pregnancy. I don't support infanticide which is used in many societies which don't have access to safe abortion.

[Blue_Chill]

80. There is no mistake at all with the question

At the moment such things are not considered or at least not out in the open because of social pressures. However if the majority of the nation had the attitude of many DUers (no human until born) then women would have no reason not to seriously consider such choices.

Humans are social creautres, what is taught to be acceptable and not sway us everyday of our lives.

So I am asking what you think about this. If it helps take it back a week or two. If for no medical reason a mother decided to abort a viable fetus days or a few weeks from birth would you be ok with that.

[diamondsoul]

78. Um. I think I'd have serious questions

about her sanity. Aside from that it still isn't the government's or my decision to make. It's HER body suffering the affects of being pregnant.

Something else, I just don't see that happening anyway because I can't fathom any physician willing to kill a healthy viable fetus on a whim. Now that's not to say I'm stupid enough to believe there isn't one, just that I believe it's so that we'll likely never find them.

[redqueen]

81. I'm not pro-choice

I know that's tantamount to saying you like to burn live kittens on DU, but dammit that's my opinion.

Go to a neonatal ICU and check out those 30 week old 'fetuses'.

I am pro-birth control, pro-sex ed, but not pro-'choice'.

We need to reduce the necessity for abortions. IMO standing up for the right to abort a baby 'on demand' 'no questions asked' is barbaric.