Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
History and Religion
Leftist Pro-Lifers vs.[?] Abortion-Restricting Laws

Leftist Pro-Lifers vs.[?] Abortion-Restricting Laws

Last updated on: January 26, 2021 at 3:24 pm by Dave Armstrong

Leftist Pro-Lifers vs.[?] Abortion-Restricting Laws 2021-01-26T15:24:40-04:00 Dave Armstrong

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

+ Five Additional Pro-Life Articles: Formerly Only on Facebook

***

Love Towards Preborn Babies Evident Once Again from the Pro-Abort Crowd (6-1-17)

In a combox at Patheos, I made reference to “childkilling” (i.e., abortion), but misspelled the word. “Statistics Palin” then replied: “What is “chilkilling”? Is it like “covfefe”? It’s difficult to keep up with you Trumpanzees and your nonsense.”

I replied:

It’s precious that you would be more concerned about a typo than with what the word describes: the (legal, and highly encouraged) grotesque, merciless dismemberment of a human being before he or she even has a chance to experience the light of day.

Just recently we were treated to the video of Planned Parenthood employees actually joking about this: making light of an eyeball of a poor murdered child that rolled onto someone’s lap, etc. Really funny stuff, that. We’ve long since surpassed the Nazis in supremely evil acts being sanctioned by law and societal consensus. This is the sick society we live in.

We can’t sensibly, conscientiously talk about the rights of one group of people, while being utterly oblivious to the right of human beings in their mother’s wombs to be allowed to live, and to not be subjected to torture and killing, because of the tortured-logic games we play about rights and the definition of a person, which would seem to have long since advanced beyond argument, due to modern science (especially genetics).

But no, we wicked, evil Christians are the ones who are supposedly against the rights of people and against science. We’re the intolerant ones (i.e., regarded as a total group, or policy). I guess that’s why we are now being slaughtered all over the world, because we are so evil and wicked, and deserve it.

*****

Pregnancies Conceived in Rape from the Baby’s Perspective (9-20-17)

I you or I were the child conceived in rape and here comes the vacuum cleaner to brutally suck us away (in pieces), or forceps to crush our skull, or saline solution to scald us to death, I think we would feel a lot differently than the abstract arguments of many in favor of these “exceptions” would have it.

I think that is all preborn babies’ perspectives. They all want to live and all have a right to live. And they have every much right to be protected as any of us.

It’s easy to make an argument if we simply forget all about the baby’s perspective and only talk about the mother. But it’s not just the mother involved.

Rape is extraordinarily horrific and pregnancy as a result, traumatic and excruciating. But the baby remains what it is: a human being and a person who had no say in how he or she came into existence. And the baby is as much the mother’s child (not just “half” her child) as any other children are, since every child has only half of its DNA from either parent.

*****

Straight Talk on Genocide (ISIS and our Own Childkillers (8-14-14)

Pretty soon these ISIS monsters may remotely approach the level of unmitigated evil that we have in the United States, with our 3,500 or so tortures and murders of innocent preborn children day in and day out. They have a long ways to go yet, but they’re starting to get it. Beheading children? The abortionists have done that legally in America for over thirty years (along with tearing children limb from limb, burning them to death with saline solution, sucking them into vacuum cleaners . . .). We barely managed to make illegal sucking the brains out of a full-term child and crushing his or her skull. Obama and many liberals opposed even that . . .

ISIS doesn’t want Christians around, and so they murder them and burn their churches in order to attain their goal. We don’t want “unwanted children” around (as millions eagerly wait to adopt any child) so we burn and murder them to get them out of the way. I see no moral difference whatsoever. Do you? At least ISIS kicks some Christians out rather than kill them on the spot. But the abortionist will have none of that. His aim is to slaughter and mercilessly kill any “unwanted child” (for a fee, of course) before he or she sees the light of day. Being a human being in your mother’s womb in America is far more dangerous even than being a Christian in Mosul or other areas overrun by these bloodthirsty murderers.

All of these horrors are occurring every day in the good ol’ US of A. And it will continue as long as conservatives or non-Democrats (call them what you will) divide among themselves and play the libertarian or independent or third-party or “I ain’t gonna vote anymore” games (or are actually clueless enough to vote Democrat), so that the rabidly pro-abort Democrats can win elections again and again, thus assuring that the abortion genocide continues unabated.

[note from 1-26-21: President Trump — starting two years and five months after I wrote the above — wiped ISIS off the face of the earth. Now Biden will likely enable them to grow and thrive again]

*****

Murder of Full-Term Babies Has Been Legal in America Since 1973 (1-29-19)

It seems that many people are under the illusion that abortion up to nine months was not legal before now (in New York). It’s been that way ever since 22 January 1973. On the same day Roe v. Wade was issued, there was also Doe v. Bolton. This in effect made abortion legal for all nine months (since legal loopholes were provided that were large enough for a Mack truck to drive through). Here are the exact words:

[T]he medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors – physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age – relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

It’s been that way ever since. The Supreme Court (with no help of Justice Ginsburg, who wrote the dissent) prohibited partial-birth abortion a few years ago, but that’s not the only way to murder a full-term baby.

Also, many states have restricted abortion, since this was allowed by the Supreme Court after 1989. Apart from that, if no state restrictions were present, abortion was legal all the way up to birth.

This is one of the things that made me instantly change my mind about abortion in 1982. Up till then I was dumber than a doornail and thought abortion was about “clumps of cells” that were scarcely human. There are many people who are this ignorant about abortion today, and also many who know exactly what is going on, and favor it anyway.

May God have mercy on the souls of the latter on Judgment Day. If they don’t have the excuse of ignorance I don’t think it will go well for them unless they have repented. There are particularly gruesome places in hell reserved for such unspeakable sins.

No one need go to them or to hell itself. God’s forgiveness is always available to those who ask for it and who truly repent.

*****

Democrat / “New” Liberal / Leftist Pro-Lifers Never Seem to Meet an Abortion-Restricting Law That They Like (1-22-20)

I’ve long noted this. Here’s a classic example, from Rebecca Hamilton, writing at Patheos today:

I’ve been queasy about some of the more outlandish “pro life” bills that have been passed in various legislatures around the country. In the first place, those bills create laws that damage and attack women more than they are aimed at saving the lives of the unborn. They expose the misogynist core in the hearts of some pretend pro lifers.

In the second place, these laws are so radical and crazy that they might tip the Court — this court which we have all but destroyed our democracy to gain — into “finding” a right to abortion in the Constitution. That would be much worse than Roe, which did not find such a right. Roe “found” a right to privacy, which is something else entirely.

I am aware that this distinction seems almost nonsensical to people who aren’t used to dealing with lawmaking. But believe me, it is not.

Granted, she qualified with “some . . . bills” yet it remains true that she is bashing a great many of them and not mentioning a single one that she actually applauds and is grateful for.

People like this are little more than useful idiots for the pro-abortion cause, even though they truly and sincerely are pro-life (which I would never deny, as they routinely do with us non-liberal pro-lifers: as evidenced by some of the derogatory quotation marks above).

The whole essence of the useful idiot is that they oppose a position, yet in the way they act and vote they in effect are doing all they (unwittingly and unwillingly) can to further it.

Believe me: the pro-aborts absolutely love pro-lifers who write and reason in this fashion. Nothing could make them happier. They have unpaid secret agents infiltrating the pro-life movement: folks who actually sincerely believe the nonsense that they are communicating.

No one is denying that leftist / liberal pro-lifers exist. It’s how they reason, how they vote, and how they too often view pro-lifers who aren’t as politically liberal, that is our concern.

If they would simply hold their view and let us hold ours, a lot less harm would be done, but it seems to be in the nature of liberalism to look down noses at the non-liberal, and many liberals in fact do that. Surely, some conservatives do that as well (humans being humans), and all movements have their fringe wackos, but I don’t think it’s nearly as widespread.

*****

“New” and “Old” Pro-Life Positions: Never the Twain Shall Meet? (8-27-20)

Rebecca Bratten Weiss, channel manager at Patheos Catholic, whom I consider a friend (we have met in person), just wrote a post explicating key opinions of the strain of pro-life opinion of which she is a major proponent (new pro-life, as she calls it; basically leftist pro-life). I tried to respond to a similar post by Michelle Arnold in the last few days, to no avail. Here is my reply to Rebecca today, under her article:

Once again, as always, there is no dialogue between so-called “old” and “new” pro-lifers. I put up two posts yesterday that directly attack key assumptions in the new pro-life outlook. No one has dared make a direct reply to them. I drew analogies (which I’m very fond of) which I think apply to the arguments commonly used. I challenged Michelle Arnold, who wrote a post similar to yours.

I wish that for just one time, “new pro-lifers” would respond to our critiques of them. I’ve critiqued the new pro-life views over and over (the articles are on my blog), so I need not do so again. But I’d love to see one o’ y’all extend the same courtesy back, and actually engage in a back-and-forth, real, authentic dialogue.

Recently (as you know) there was talk of folks here at Patheos actually talking to each other across the usual dividing lines: cutting through the crap and the acrimony (which I receive my fair share of, as do you) and trying to find common ground. It came to nothing, which was a huge disappointment to me. I have little hope of it ever happening, but I keep trying, despite myself (being the eternal, hopeless idealist).

Pro-life is one area where I think we can find that common ground. But we have to talk to each other and make a mutual attempt to understand in order for that to happen. It won’t if we simply write competing posts that adherents of each “side” read and cheerlead on; “ships passing in the night” and “never the twain shall meet.”

Further comments in my Facebook combox:

New pro-lifers seem to have never met a pro-abort criticism of pro-lifers that they don’t agree with. This is one of my criticisms of them. They “trust” the judgment of childkilling advocates over their own fellow pro-lifers’. It just looks from this end like they are being used as “useful idiots” by the pro-abortionists.

I think they are considered by the pro-aborts as allies: useful idiots. Why oppose them if they are making so many of the pro-abort arguments, right within the pro-life movement: even advocating the exact same candidates that Planned Parenthood love?

I’d love to have some good, deep discussions with new pro-lifers, but they have no interest. And the more they have no interest, the more suspicious I am of their agenda. I don’t want to be, but their silence and deliberate shunning of camaraderie almost forces me to be.

***

(originally posted at Facebook on 8-14-14, 6-1-17, 9-20-17, 1-29-19, 1-22-20, 8-27-20)

Photo credit: (7-8-15) [Wikimedia Commons / public domain]

***

new pro-life movement

new pro-lifers

partial birth abortion

Vote for Pro-Abortionists

Previous Post

January 25, 2021

St. Augustine’s Communion (Standing, in the Hand)

Next Post

January 26, 2021 Recommended Catholic Books (Six Lists)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category & Last Things About Me Anti-Catholicism Atheism & Agnosticism Baptism and Sacramentalism Bible and Tradition Blessed Virgin Mary Books by Dave Armstrong C. S. Lewis Calvinism & General Protestantism Catholic Apologetics Catholic Apologists Catholic conversion Catholic converts Christmas Church (Ecclesiology) Church History Conversion and Converts Development of Doctrine Eastern Orthodoxy Ecumenism & Christian Unity Eucharist & Liturgy Fathers of the Church French Translations G. K. Chesterton Hell Hell & Satan Hell & Satan & Last Things Heresies & Comparative Religion Holistic Health Inquisition & Crusades & Scandals James White Jews & Judaism & Old Testament John Calvin John Henry Newman Liberal / Modernist Theology Life Issues Literary Resume Lutheranism Mariology Martin Luther Music Orthodoxy Papacy & Infallibility Personal Page Philosophy & Science Political & Ethical & Moral Issues Protestant Persecution & Intolerance Protestantism Purgatory Purgatory & Penance Romantic & Imaginative Theology Saints & Purgatory & Penance Salvation Salvation & Justification Satan & Last Things Sexuality and Gender Issues Spanish Translations Traditionalism vs. Radical Catholic Reactionaries Traducciones al español / tradução para português Trinitarianism & Christology Uncategorized Videos

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 April 2010 March 2010 December 2009 October 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 March 2009 February 2009 October 2008 September 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 May 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 October 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 July 2004 May 2004 April 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz