Pope and abortion

Pope Pius IX in 1869 extended punishment of excommunication for the
abortion of an embryo at any age. In 1951, Pius XII restated the
principle, saying: “Every human being, even the child in the mother’s
womb, receives its right to life directly from God, not from its
parents.” Speaking in Kenya in 1985, John Paul II bluntly declared:
“Actions such as contraception and abortion are wrong.”

Many Catholics today, however, maintain that such an attitude is out of
date and must be revised. As a result, Roman Catholics are divided over
the issue.

The serious problems is that these religious fanatics would like to change
the law and
FORCE this on everyone else.

Before birth, and certainly before the third trimester, the fetus is not yet
a functioning human.
It is a part of, and totally dependent on, the women's body. All decisions
on abortion belong to the women
not some religious bigot or legislature.

"Cracklin'" wrote in message
...
Pope Pius IX in 1869 extended punishment of excommunication for the
abortion of an embryo at any age. In 1951, Pius XII restated the
principle, saying: “Every human being, even the child in the mother’s
womb, receives its right to life directly from God, not from its parents.”
Speaking in Kenya in 1985, John Paul II bluntly declared: “Actions such as
contraception and abortion are wrong.”

Many Catholics today, however, maintain that such an attitude is out of
date and must be revised. As a result, Roman Catholics are divided over
the issue.

"Bill" wrote in message
...
The serious problems is that these religious fanatics would like to change
the law and
FORCE this on everyone else.

What part of Pro-Choice is NOT forced on the nation?

Before birth, and certainly before the third trimester, the fetus is not
yet a functioning human.

A total lie.

It is a part of,

Sure doesn't seem that way.

and totally dependent on, the women's body.

It has no body of its own?

All decisions on abortion belong to the women
not some religious bigot or legislature.

BULL****!
WIthout representative government there is no democracy.

Johnny wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
...
The serious problems is that these religious fanatics would like to change
the law and
FORCE this on everyone else.

What part of Pro-Choice is NOT forced on the nation?

But by forcing choice on people, you are not only allowing
them to have abortions if they want them - you are also
allowing them not to have abortions if they don't want them.
Everybody gets to do what their conscience dictates. Whereas
the "pro life" side want to force their conscience on
everybody.

"Graham Kennedy" wrote in message
...
Johnny wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
...
The serious problems is that these religious fanatics would like to
change the law and
FORCE this on everyone else.

What part of Pro-Choice is NOT forced on the nation?

But by forcing choice on people, you are not only allowing
them to have abortions if they want them - you are also
allowing them not to have abortions if they don't want them.

Which is an unequal measure policy.

Everybody gets to do what their conscience dictates. Whereas
the "pro life" side want to force their conscience on
everybody.

People want a rule that everyone agrees with instead of a choice agenda that
does nothing to ensure that the consciences of some are not violated and
that others are not saddled with burdens beyond others because they chose
not to have an abortion while others did and escaped their created
responsibilities that others chose not to escape via abortion.
Choice is not a common agenda in the USA.

Johnny wrote:
"Graham Kennedy" wrote in message
...
Johnny wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message
...
The serious problems is that these religious fanatics would like to
change the law and
FORCE this on everyone else.
What part of Pro-Choice is NOT forced on the nation?
But by forcing choice on people, you are not only allowing
them to have abortions if they want them - you are also
allowing them not to have abortions if they don't want them.

Which is an unequal measure policy.

Not sure what you mean by that phrase. In what
way is it unequal?

Everybody gets to do what their conscience dictates. Whereas
the "pro life" side want to force their conscience on
everybody.

People want a rule that everyone agrees with

Then they are out of luck, and always will be. There is
no such thing as a rule that everybody agrees with,
never has been such a thing and never will be so long
as Humans retain the power of thought.

instead of a choice agenda that
does nothing to ensure that the consciences of some are not violated and
that others are not saddled with burdens beyond others because they chose
not to have an abortion while others did and escaped their created
responsibilities that others chose not to escape via abortion.

If people choose to "saddle" themselves with the "burden"
of an abortion, that is their choice and their problem.


Choice is not a common agenda in the USA.

It certainly seems to be going out of fashion.

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:40:46 +0100, Graham Kennedy wrote:

But by forcing choice on people, you are not only allowing
them to have abortions if they want them - you are also
allowing them not to have abortions if they don't want them.

Not to worry about their conscience. God has them booked to go regardless of
their conscience.

And dat be da way it tis.

duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

duke wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:40:46 +0100, Graham Kennedy wrote:

But by forcing choice on people, you are not only allowing
them to have abortions if they want them - you are also
allowing them not to have abortions if they don't want them.

Not to worry about their conscience. God has them booked to go regardless of
their conscience.

Which diety are you talking about? Hades? Pluto? Ares? There are
hundreds of thousands to choose from, if not millions. Care to
objectively prove that your diety exists?

Mark Sebree


And dat be da way it tis.

duke

duke wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:40:46 +0100, Graham Kennedy wrote:

But by forcing choice on people, you are not only allowing
them to have abortions if they want them - you are also
allowing them not to have abortions if they don't want them.

Not to worry about their conscience. God has them booked to go regardless of
their conscience.

And dat be da way it tis.

Conscience matters to them. As for what god may think
about things if he does exist, frankly my dear, I don't
give a damn. I can't think of one single reason why
I should think of him as the boss of me.

"Johnny" wrote in
:


"Bill" wrote in message
...
The serious problems is that these religious fanatics would like to
change the law and
FORCE this on everyone else.

What part of Pro-Choice is NOT forced on the nation?

The freedom of bodily autonomy, idiot.

Before birth, and certainly before the third trimester, the fetus is
not yet a functioning human.

A total lie.

Yes, yours.

It is a part of,

Sure doesn't seem that way.

and totally dependent on, the women's body.

It has no body of its own?

Then you would have no objection if the woman just removes it from her
body, right?


All decisions on abortion belong to the women
not some religious bigot or legislature.

BULL****!
WIthout representative government there is no democracy.


"Representative" government doesn't mean the "totalitarian" government you
and your anti-choice ilk are trying to impose.

to·tal·i·tar·i·an (t½-t²l”¹-târ“¶-…n) adj.
1. Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the
political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all
aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing
political and cultural expression is suppressed.

--to·tal·i·tar·i·an n.

A practitioner or supporter of such a government. --to·tal”i·tar“i·an·ism
n.