home
RSS
October 30th, 2010
08:00 AM ET

My take: Abortion reduction and the election

Editor's note: Aaron Mercer serves as director of the National Association of Evangelical’s sanctity of life efforts. Prior to joining the NAE, Mercer spent over seven years in the office of Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), where he was a leading voice among congressional staff for finding creative avenues to honor the sanctity of all human life, particularly in its most vulnerable stages, and to promote the development of healthy families.

By, Aaron Mercer, Special to CNN

With less than four days before Election Day, political campaigns are in full swing and their messages are all around us. One subject campaigns either passionately desire to engage or eagerly seek to avoid is abortion. The very word stirs deep feelings in many.

What is too often missed is that abortion is not only an idea; it is a very real, everyday problem in our communities. The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy reports that approximately half of all pregnancies are unplanned, and more than 40 percent of these 3 million annual unplanned pregnancies are aborted.

This accounts for the vast majority of America’s million-plus abortions every year. And it’s not just a teen problem. According to the Guttmacher Institute, over 80 percent of women having abortions are adults.

True, Americans continue to be divided on whether or not abortion should be legal. (Full disclosure: I am a longtime member of the pro-life “camp,” as is my employer, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE)).

However, most are troubled by its prevalence in this nation. A recent Gallup poll commissioned by the NAE found that nearly 9 out of every 10 evangelicals believe abortion is a serious problem in our country and that it should be an important priority for our nation to work together to reduce the number of abortions.

This survey showed significant majorities supporting a wide range of possible approaches to decreasing the abortion rate – from parental consent and waiting periods before abortions to efforts at making adoption, pre- and post-natal care, and contraceptive services more accessible. (Incidentally, in this poll and in another survey of evangelical leaders, approximately 90 percent of respondents approved of artificial contraceptive methods for adults. The vast majority also believed that sex only rightfully belongs in marriage).

The NAE, which represents over 40 denominations, scores of evangelical organizations and millions of American evangelicals, recently launched a new initiative, the NAE Generation Forum, to encourage discussion on this subject and to explore practical approaches for curtailing the high abortion rate.

Our goal is to bridge the divide between longtime opponents in the debate over the legality of abortion and to work together to dramatically reduce the incidence of abortion in the United States. We believe this can be done without compromising our core convictions by working to create dialogue over shared concerns for human dignity, protecting children and promoting healthy families and communities.

In light of this goal, we are faced with difficult questions: Why is abortion so prevalent and what can we practically be doing about it? How can we reach out to women with unplanned pregnancies in relevant and respectful ways? How we can we help them avoid such a potentially distressing situation in the first place? How do we honor and uphold the value of human life in more than challenging circumstances?

The Generation Forum is developing resources and hosting events across the country particularly focused on helping local churches grapple with how to lower the number of abortions in their congregations and communities.

For example, understanding the inherent link between respect for God’s gifts of sex and human life, the Generation Forum designed a publication, “Theology of Sex,” to help church leaders create healthy dialogue about God’s intentions for sex.

Abortion is a real course chosen over a million times a year. Churches and communities need to actively wrestle with this challenge up to and beyond November 2. Through the Generation Forum the NAE wants to creatively engage this problem and encourage a culture that celebrates and supports all human lives.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Aaron Mercer.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Abortion • Christianity • Church • Culture wars • Opinion

soundoff (85 Responses)
  1. nancy

    This is how i see it: If you do not believe in abortion, then simply do not get one! I myself do not know if I could ever go through with it but I do not believe that right should be taken away from someone else. I am a Catholic myself and believe in in God and Jesus, HOWEVER, I do not believe imposing my beliefs on anyone else. Someone's beliefs are sacred to them and no amount of arguing with someone or trying to "make" them believe what you do is going to change someone's mind. In my opinion, some Christians are the most hateful people on the planet because they don't RESPECT other people's beliefs or decisions. They go against what Christianity is all about and hate everyone who is not like them or who is going against their beliefs. God is the one who will judge you in the end so it is pretty much a waste of time to go around judging everyone else or telling them what they SHOULD and SHOULDN'T do!

    November 10, 2010 at 11:45 am |
  2. Iqbal khan

    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVQ1BWqjTjs&w=640&h=360]

    November 2, 2010 at 8:43 pm |
  3. Doc Vestibule

    A Candid Conversation between Two Species

    The Man: I am the predilect object of Creation, the centre of all that exists…
    The Tapeworm: You are exalting yourself a little. If you consider yourself the lord of Creation, what can I be, who feed upon you and am ruler in your entrails?
    The Man: You lack reason and an immortal soul.
    The Tapeworm: And since it is an established fact that the concentration and complexity of the nervous system appear in the animal scale as an uninterrupted series of graduations, where are we cut off? How many neurons must be possessed in order to have a soul and a little rationality?
    – Santiago Ramon y Cajal, Recollections of My Life

    So does an embryo have consciousness? Does it feel? How about a foetus? And where is the line between the two stages of development?
    Does an acorn have the same intrinsic value as an oak tree?
    These are matters of degree and not principle.
    Is abortion murder? It is the termination of the process of life – so yes.
    But since when has that stopped humans? The religions of Jesus, meek and mild, have spawned a great deal of murder during their histories... so religious arguments contra abortion reek of insincerity – or at least a double standard when it comes to the value of life.
    Catholics especially cannot appeal to the bleeding heart concept of protecting the innocence of life since they believe that babies are born tainted with sin and are therefore NOT innocent.
    The fact is that man has no predator save for himself.
    A species left to grow unchecked will eventually drown in it's own effluence.
    We need predators like abortion clinics. We need plague like the pill.
    These things take the place of death by wooly mammoth or bubonic plague etc.
    This planet has 7 billion humans burning their way through it. There are too many of us!
    Medical science has, in the 1st world anyways, cut infant mortality rates from 50% to 2%. We also live a lot longer than we did even a few generations ago.
    It is nigh genocidal to encourage people to keep spitting out as many cr0tch critters as they can (looking at you Catholics and Quiverfull cults!). It is foolish not to provide an 'out' for those who conceived accidentally and haven't the means or the desire to care for a child.
    Of course the ideal would be to educate people about their options pre-conception and to provide safe, easy accessible and societally condoned contraception so that abortion is not needed – but cold hard reality shows that foolish people will still breed accidentally.
    I'll not even get into the idiocy of denying abortion to victims of r.ape/incest. How could any mother help but see that child as a daily reminder of the trauma they endured? Such resentment, whether overt or subconscious, is not healthy for either parent or child.
    Unwanted pregnancies can be tragic – but unwanted CHILDREN are much worse.

    November 1, 2010 at 2:41 pm |
    • David Johnson

      From a tapeworm's perspective, man was created by God, for the tapeworm's benefit.

      November 1, 2010 at 3:16 pm |
    • Reality

      There is always the adoption option.

      November 1, 2010 at 5:12 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @Doc Vestibule

      Humans can be attacked and eaten by a large number of other predators. So we have predators, but tend to outsmart them or overpower them. Yet people are still attacked by predators. We are not invulnerable as you seem to imply. 😛

      November 1, 2010 at 10:41 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Sum Dude
      Oh there certainly are humans occasionally attacked by animals, but the occurances are statistically insignificant.
      And outsmarting threats is our primary evolutionary advantage! From a physical standpoint, we're terribly vulnerable. Our hide is thin and squidgy, we've no in-built protection from the evironment or offensive tools like horns or claws. We're certainly keen with our tools though.

      November 2, 2010 at 8:04 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Reality
      There are around a half million kids in foster care in the U.S.
      100% of relinquishing mothers who later aborted said they chose abortion to avoid the pain of lifelong uncertainty over the child's fate if relinquished to secret adoption.
      -Americans For Open Records (AmFOR) 1997 Survey of
      1,000 Relinquishing Mothers Who Later Aborted.

      Fully 1/4 of adopted kids between the ages of 12 and 17 will be returned to orphanages by the adoptive parents.
      3 times the cost of foster care, and 10 times the cost of welfare, is the cost to operate an orphanage.
      50% of street kids in the US are runaways from foster homes.
      40% of adoptees wind up in schools for disturbed children.
      Over 65% of inmates in California were foster kids.
      That's what I mean when I say that unwanted children are worse than unborn children.

      November 2, 2010 at 8:40 am |
  4. Bob

    Our goal is to bridge the divide between longtime opponents in the debate over the legality of abortion and to work together to dramatically reduce the incidence of abortion in the United States.

    There is no debate. It's legal.

    November 1, 2010 at 7:28 am |
    • Reality

      Slavery also was once legal!!!

      November 1, 2010 at 8:31 am |
    • CatholicMom

      Bob,
      Acknowledging that abortion needs to be dramatically reduced is acknowledging that it is wrong! Why reduce something that is right or just?

      November 1, 2010 at 1:47 pm |
    • Ralph

      Reality, you are not even beginning to deal with reality. Please try again. Catholic mom, shut up you walking breeder. You are part of the problem. Your lack of education is obvious with a name like Catholic Mom and should not have a voice. You speak for the minority that do no believe in the fables you do. Get over your silly stories then talk to us. There are no gods.

      November 1, 2010 at 10:00 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @CatholicMom

      Why have an abortion if you could have just avoided the whole thing in the first place using contraception? Your religion is not going to get past that contradiction. Or would you just say that everyone must be perfect and have total self-control and always get married before even having a single se-xual desire / thought?
      If you insist on contradictory "rules" that are also unrealistic, is it any wonder that you see abortions happening in the first place?

      November 1, 2010 at 10:00 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      Sum Dude,

      You do not have to use contraception to avoid abortion.

      You can have s3xual desires and thoughts before getting married and this is not sinful. In fact, those are parts of growing and bonding with a person….to draw you to marriage.

      Why would you want to lose your self-control?

      God’s plan for man is not unrealistic.

      I wonder how many STD’s could have been avoided, if man used virtue in his daily living…not to mention all the lives that could have been saved…

      November 2, 2010 at 10:50 am |
    • CatholicMom

      Ralph,

      You obviously hate women! No? Oh, you hate women who get pregnant! No? Oh, I get it now, it is women who get pregnant and do not have an abortion that you hate!

      Do you honor your mother with the ti-tle of ‘walking breeder’? No? Oh, did she try to abort you but you lived through the ordeal?

      Today an aborted baby that lives through the attempt on its life doesn’t get any help to survive but is left on the tray to succu-mb to its injuries and is even helped along by placing it to drown in its own body fluids; if the baby is still alive and not found in the dumpster, it is left in the dumpster to die and is considered nothing more than trash…unless it has some cells someone wants …after the harvesting is over, the baby is then tossed out like a dirty rag.

      November 2, 2010 at 11:49 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Catholic Mom
      Per the Vatican, is sin not defined as "Any thought, word, or deed against the Law of God" – thus meaning that s3xual desires and thoughts before getting married are indeed sinful.
      I think that if God's plan includes censoring your innermost desires so as to avoid divine punishment for thought crime, the His plan for man is indeed unrealistic.

      November 2, 2010 at 12:15 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      Doc Vestibule,

      Your question is reasonable; ‘is sin not defined as "Any thought, word, or deed against the Law of God" ? No, sin is defined as a ‘DELIBERATE’ thought, word, deed, or omission contrary to the eternal Law of God…..

      No thought is sinful if one does not dwell on it, should it be one that is lustful or otherwise virtueless that could lead one into sin. If satan can get you to bring these thoughts to mind [and you know which ones they are, otherwise you would not think they are sinful]…then his next step is to get you to act on those thoughts. If you banish these thoughts from your mind…you win. Just pull a deflection on satan!

      If you speak a word that is sinful, the word not only came into your mind, and instead of banishing it from your mind, you used it…poor choice…

      Likewise, if the evil action is taken instead of banishing the thought from your mind, you suffer the consequences ….

      If the thought entered your mind to do a good and necessary thing and you decide to not do it, that is, remaining slothful…not good….

      Good thoughts are proddings put in your mind to urge you to think, say, and do good.

      Once we are Baptized we are compelled to think, say, and do good because now it is Jesus Christ working through us. WWJD!

      November 2, 2010 at 3:26 pm |
  5. Reality

    o It is obvious that inte-rcourse and other se-xual activities are out of control with over one million abortions and 19 million cases of S-TDs per year in the USA alone.

    from the CDC-2006

    "Se-xually transmitted diseases (S-TDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of S-TDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with S-TDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

    How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the s-ex drive would be a good start. (Andy Rooney of 60 Minutes, 4/18/2010 described them as anti-desire pills). And teenagers and young adults must be constantly reminded of the dangers of se-xual activity and that oral s-ex, birth control pills, co-ndoms and chast-ity belts are no protection against S-TDs. Might a list of those having a S-TD posted on the Internet help?-Said names would remain until the S-TD has been eliminated with verification by a doctor. Lists of s-exual predators are on-line. Is there a difference between these individuals and those having a ST-D having s-exual relations while infected???

    And then there is this:

    Hmmm, so a growing baby is considered by some to be nothing more than an infection? Talk about having no respect for human life!!!!!

    And Nature or Nature's God is the #1 taker of everyone's life. That gives some rationale for killing the unborn or those suffering from de-mentia, mental disease or Alzheimer's or anyone who might inconvenience your life???

    We constantly battle the forces of nature. We do not succ-umb to these forces by eliminating defenseless children!!!!!

    October 31, 2010 at 5:56 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      2000 years ago lepers had to move about by calling out, ‘unclean’. It seems we are far less clean than the lepers.....

      October 31, 2010 at 6:48 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @CatholicMom

      Instead of changing water into wine, or healing individual lepers, why couldn't Jesus have gotten rid of the disease? For an all powerful god, his miracles were pretty cheesy.

      October 31, 2010 at 10:11 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      David Johnson,

      Jesus could have done anything He wanted since we are all His creation. He created as He wanted...not as we think He ought to have done...though many of us are pleased with life as He has given it.

      If you were God you could have the mind of God and thus know why He decided as He has done. We are on a journey, David, and how we live out our journey is our choice.

      We know that there is merit in suffering if we wish to follow in Jesus Christ's path...for He suffered greatly but not for Himself but for us; if we live with Him now and live as close to life as He did, listen to His Words on how to live life...we shall die with Him into eternal life with Him. It is the life of a Christian.

      Pick up your cross and follow Him. Isn't that why you call us sheep? He is the Good Shepherd and knows His sheep and His sheep know Him. He will go into the desert for one lost sheep because all are His unless some wish not to be a part of His flock. But He will make every effort not to lose one. He does not abandon one who is suffering. Suffering allows us a time inwhich we become very cared for, believe it or not. There is nothing a sick person can do... but has all the time in the world to become close to Jesus...this is the cross...and the cross brings us closer to Him. A Christian understands this.

      November 1, 2010 at 12:56 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @CatholicMom

      You cannot give humanity "free-will" and then turn around and hold it against them regardless of their actions.
      To do so makes no sense. If God is so evil as to not only visit the judgements against others upon the innocent, but to do so in violation of all the rules of logic and common sense prove that your religion's ideas about God are false, misleading, and insane.

      Or has "sin" acquired a new definition lately? Did the Pope issue a new proclamation again? I do not keep up on these things.

      November 1, 2010 at 9:52 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      Sum Dude,

      If you have children do you like to see them exercise their free will? Do they sometimes go against what is good and right according to you? Do you believe discipline is love?

      We are all children of God.

      November 2, 2010 at 11:57 am |
  6. Hearmeroar!

    I am a woman, and I want the right to choose, and I believe in this right. But I am not opposed to someone who wants to foster choices other than abortion. All of my important rights are choices; from the right to choose contraception and who I mate with to the right to make important decisions during pregnancy. By making careful choices in all of those areas I have easily avoided having to make that ultimate choice. I do not denounce as lunatics, therefore, people of faith, and even those without, who want to focus on ways that contribute to the overall goal of less babies being aborted. I'm not sure why that is so objectionable.

    October 31, 2010 at 2:29 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @Hearmeroar

      I loved your post. You said one thing, that I wish you would reconsider: "I do not denounce as lunatics, therefore, people of faith,"

      October 31, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
  7. Iqbal khan

    Check this

    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6M4JOBiiHI&w=640&h=360]

    October 31, 2010 at 12:40 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      The soul enters the body at the moment of conception according to the Church. Some atheists say they have no soul….is that kind of 'thinking' so they do not have to recognize the covenant God has with man in the bringing forth of new life into the world, do you suppose?

      October 31, 2010 at 1:39 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @CatholicMom

      Why on earth, do you believe there is a soul? Certainly there is no proof for it.

      October 31, 2010 at 1:48 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      David Johnson,

      Do you not see that man is set apart from all other beings in the world? Why would you call 911 if you found someone in the middle of the road, barely alive? Would you do the same for a turtle or squirrel or deer?

      Is suicide natural and okay with you?

      Do people have a dignity beyond any honor you give any other living thing or do you loathe people as parasites?

      Do you honor your mother or treat her like the neighbor’s dog?

      Does your conscience ever help you make decisions towards the good and just for your neighbor….does it bother you when he gets a new car and you have to walk?

      If a monkey could communicate answers to these questions do you think it would show an interest in his neighbor’s well-being before his own well-being or would it naturally do what would be considered an action of ‘survival of the fittest’?

      Do you think you are more like man or monkey?

      If you can love someone who hates you, you will realize it is your very soul that enables you to do so.

      October 31, 2010 at 3:14 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @CatholicMom

      All that we are, is contained in our brain. Our brain is material. Therefore our mind is material. The soul/mind is not a separate, immaterial essence from the physical brain. If this were not true, then drugs or injury or disease to the brain, would not effect our thinking to a large degree. Our thinking mind would be separate and unaffected.

      When we die, what makes a person the person that they are: their life experiences, memories, education, as well as innate or created personality traits all cease to exist. We simply are no more. There is no soul to go to an afterlife.

      You suggest that a soul is included in humans, that has a built in set of morals.

      Morality and laws have evolved as our intellect and culture evolved. We are social animals evolved by natural selection, so the great majority of us will naturally desire the health of our families and the peace of our communities. Evolution has programmed us socially and biologically for morality and cooperation. Our morality comes out of our humanity. It has to do with survival of our species.

      I watched a YouTube video of a school of piranha attacking a dead animal. They were ferocious in their feeding frenzy. The cool part, was that none of the piranha was bitten by his fellow piranha. Why? 'cause this action would endanger the survival of the species. It is a survival mechanism that evolved.

      Our morality and religion is taught to us by our parents. Society puts its stamp on each of us. People living in the U.S. have many Christian values, whether they are religious or not. People living in Iran have Muslim values. If there was a one true god giving this set of morals, why wouldn't they be all the same?

      You asked, "If a monkey could communicate answers to these questions do you think it would show an interest in his neighbor’s well-being before his own well-being or would it naturally do what would be considered an action of ‘survival of the fittest’?"

      New York Times 2007
      Some animals are surprisingly sensitive to the plight of others. Chimpanzees, who cannot swim, have drowned in zoo moats trying to save others. Given the chance to get food by pulling a chain that would also deliver an electric shock to a companion, rhesus monkeys will starve themselves for several days.

      The Beginnings of Morality? Biologists argue that these and other social behaviors are the precursors of human morality. They further believe that if morality grew out of behavioral rules shaped by evolution, it is for biologists, not philosophers or theologians, to say what these rules are.

      October 31, 2010 at 6:15 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      @CatholicMom

      You are confusing having a conscience and conforming to societal norms or laws with having a soul. One does not need a soul to answer your questions in the way that you would like so that you could claim them as evidence of a soul. A soul is just mumbo-jumbo to support your tribe's life-after-death myth.

      As always, you are either deluded, or off your medication.

      October 31, 2010 at 6:15 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      HotAirAce,

      What I should have condensed my post down to is one sentence: ‘Man has been instilled with a ‘knowing’ about what is right or wrong by God which is a conscientiousness that is not learned.’

      October 31, 2010 at 7:10 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      @CatholicMom

      And I will boil my response down to "Bullcrap!"

      October 31, 2010 at 7:56 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @CatholicMom

      You said, "What I should have condensed my post down to is one sentence: ‘Man has been instilled with a ‘knowing’ about what is right or wrong by God which is a conscientiousness that is not learned."

      WoW, I just spent 8 minutes posting to you, why your comment is wrong. You just want to preach. You don't want to exchange ideas or defend what was obviously from a Catholic tract or website.

      So, you say god gives us morals. Hmmm...

      How can a moral god behave immorally? We find many stories about what God has done or had His followers do. These murders and bouts of insecurity are contrary to basic moral principles. At the same time, you say God is the source of morality, the moral law giver. How can this be, CatholicMom?

      Jesus had this to say:
      Matthew 7:17 Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.

      Luke 6:43 "No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit.

      A good god can't do evil things! So, god could be evil or he could not exist.

      Either way, God is not the giver of objective morals.

      October 31, 2010 at 10:07 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      David Johnson,

      I thought you would prefer concise answers where possible. I did not copy and paste my sentence though it may appear to say something 'very much sounding like from a Catholic site' because I do have many that I have enjoyed reading from over the years.

      God is Goodness and does not behave immorally as you suggest. We are given a freewill to either do good or bad acts….God gave us this freewill…do you feel He was too generous? Would you prefer to be a robot?

      He is the giver of life….He uses a tree to show that we are 'like a tree'. He gives the tree the ability to produce good fruit but we can use our gift of freewill to produce bad fruit in our lives or no fruit; it is our choice. God is not responsible for our bad fruit just because He made us with a freewill. We KNOW when we are producing bad fruit and when we are producing good fruit. We get to choose the fruit or no fruit, if we want.

      Just ask your Mother, David Johnson!

      November 1, 2010 at 12:40 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      HotAirAce,
      Yes, I have to agree with you about your comment….it does stink!

      November 1, 2010 at 1:51 pm |
    • David Johnson

      @CatholicMom

      You said, "God is Goodness and does not behave immorally as you suggest."

      God directly, or through his followers, murdered men, women and children – including babies. You don't find that to be wrong, immoral, evil?

      God led a man and his son to believe the son was to be sacrificed to Him. Can you imagine how traumatic that would be for a father and son? God put them through this, in an effort to determine if Abraham loved him. Is that a moral thing for an all powerful god to do? How would this not be wrong? How would this not be evil?

      Job loved god. God, made a bet with the devil, that Job would still love Him, even if Job's possessions were take, his children killed and Job himself be tortured.

      God won the bet! How was this not an act of insecurity? How was this not wrong? God cared nothing for the lives of Job's children. How was this not evil?

      Are you going to say, that since it was god doing this, that it was not immoral, or evil, or wrong? Does god get a pass, because he is god?

      God is moral, only if he acts in a moral manner.

      Again I say to you:

      Jesus had this to say:
      Matthew 7:17 Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.

      Luke 6:43 "No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit.

      A good god can't do evil things! So, god could be evil or he could not exist.

      Either way, God is not the giver of objective morals.

      November 1, 2010 at 3:05 pm |
  8. There are no gods.

    What I find odd about religios people are that most of them are republican and some of those are even tea party followers. Both of these groups are for smaller government, yet are also for laws that allow government to take more freedoms from people. Also, I find it disturbing that most christians fight against muslims and their sharia law, yet are trying to implement gods law into our society which is pretty much the exact same thing. I think muslims and chiristians, hell all religious types should go get on a big boat and sink their selves so the rest of us that understand that there are no gods can live in peace. My life is to short to be troubled by you silly fables.

    October 31, 2010 at 11:41 am |
    • HotAirAce

      @CatholicMom

      You are confusing having a conscience and conforming to societal norms or laws with having a soul. One does not need a soul to answer your questions in the way that you would like so that you could claim them as evidence of a soul. A soul is just mumbo-jumbo to support your tribe's life-after-death myth.

      As always, you are either deluded, or off your medication.

      October 31, 2010 at 6:12 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      Ooooops!

      My post above was meant as a reply to CatholicMom, under yet-another-stupid-post from Iqbal kahn!

      October 31, 2010 at 6:14 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      @CatholicMom

      Re: my previous response, and your oh-so-witty reply, my response may not have had the smell of a rose, but it is far better than the stench wafting off the rcc as they continue to fail to deal with the lying criminals and charlatans, led of course by pope-a-dope, aka chief-pedophile-protector. Again, please get mental health and stay on your medications.

      November 1, 2010 at 9:57 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      HotAirAce,
      Some would recognize your post as total deflection but to me it is reflection....reflecting your hatred for the Church.

      November 2, 2010 at 9:40 am |
    • HotAirAce

      @CatholicMom

      You finally got something right – sort if! I don't hate just The Church, 'cause there is nothing unique about the rcc other than pope-a-dope's priestly child ab-use cover up. I hate all religion, but try to keep it to "hate the sin (religion), love sinner (believer)."

      November 2, 2010 at 7:35 pm |
  9. CatholicMom

    Is this a vicious circle?…..

    It used to be understood in society…s3x outside marriage was wrong…why? S3x and babies go together. Babies need moms and dads. So it was preached by parents and the Church to remain chaste until marriage. Of course, individuals can fall; but not a whole society fell at once….not until contraception came on the scene.

    Contraception was introduced by companies to make money. People now could practice any kind of s3xual behavior within or without of marriage. A whole society fell for the idea. This opened the door to ‘living together without marriage,’ condoning fornication. But in the event that the contraception failed…and it did…this opened the door to another evil…the killing of the baby in the womb. All the side effects should not be overlooked…mental and physical destruction to the persons involved.

    This abortion syndrome escalated to the point that it is now considered ‘health care’ by parts of society…to be able to dispose of human life because the choice was made to have illicit s3x outside marriage or in the case of married folk to have s3x but not be open to life which is the most important part of the covenant between a man, his wife and God.

    The evil of contraception helps the spread of all kinds of STD’s….people think they are safe so become more s3xually active and with more partners. Chast!ty is considered by only parts of society.

    Another part of this vicious circle is now gay persons want to be married, and why? If a man and his wife no longer see God as part of the marriage covenant…..that is….it is not necessary to considered His part in the marriage [creating new life]….why would two men or two women have to consider His part in their marriage either?

    Most people have a conscience and do not want it bothered ….so man has devised his own laws saying that if man’s law says ‘it’ is ‘good and right’ then my conscience should not be bothered by anything that used to bother it; we do not have to think about natural law…only ‘man made law’.

    But the vicious circle has produced more divorce than one could ever imagine possible. It has produced a ‘no need for marriage’ in the minds of many; the woman has no esteemed role in life [of bringing life into the world] but she is told she should get an abortion if she gets pregnant for any reason and during any time throughout the pregnancy. It falls on HER decision…her choice;….that way the man doesn’t have to bother his conscience…but she has been made to believe that it is what she must do. There are some men who feel the pangs of abortion but many say, it is HER choice, after being told ‘it is the only way’….

    Will the circle finally become ‘full circle’ to where man will come back to living a life in the Light of Truth…or is it not a circle… but a long…. darkening…. path to societal destruction?

    October 31, 2010 at 8:41 am |
    • Reality

      A more realistic view (see the statistics and calculations noted previously):

      Bottom Line: The failures of the widely used birth "control" methods i.e. the pill and male condom have led to the large rate of abortions ( one million/yr) and STDs (19 million/yr) in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the pill or condoms properly and/or use other methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and STDs.

      October 31, 2010 at 10:51 am |
    • There are no gods

      Crazy catholics and there narrow view should not be allowed to express their ancient viewpoints in a modern world. We live in 2010 welcome! There are no gods, no virgin births no trinity bull mess. There is only real people and real situations that these people live in. Abortion is none of your business unless you are the one trying to decide about it. You are a very rude dinosaur that thinks her opinion on other peoples life should matter. That is the backwards old way of church thinking that makes you believe. Keep to yourself. No one going through abortions wants to hear your opinions on abortion. They are going to happen and the woman that has one is going to deal with it in her own way. You are not a doctor, not a psychologist, you are a disillusioned religious moron. Get a grip. There are no gods.

      October 31, 2010 at 10:53 am |
    • Sum Dude

      @CatholicMom

      If we had contraception, there would be no embryos or fetuses in danger at any time.

      You cannot have it both ways. And this country has freedoms and rights – this is not a Catholic country run by the Vatican.

      If you want to protect life, you need to make sure that life only gets started where it can continue in a safe manner.

      If you hate abortion, you MUST allow contraception.

      Threaten excommunication if you must, but know that your religion only has authority within the walls of your church.
      Use your opinions THERE instead of trying to foist more contradictory and ineffective laws upon this country.

      Keep it within your religion and realize that there are other people who do not believe as you do.

      Societal destruction is almost sure to come from religion and not the lack of it. Religion does not admit of error.
      Intolerance is how violence often starts. Religious intolerance often doesn't even make sense.

      You can't keep insisting on having everything in this country run according to your religious beliefs.
      You MUST understand that. Especially when the laws you would make are patently unenforceable or unworkable.

      We have rights and freedoms in this country.
      Would you prefer that everyone be sterilized as soon as they hit puberty?
      Shall we have kidnapping parties to grab every pubescent child and perform operations in the back of a van?

      Can you not see the illogical mess you are trying to foist upon the country by insisting on contradictions?
      Your religious values are massively unrealistic. The real world does not work according to your religion.

      Try making your religion work with the universe instead of insisting that the universe change to suit your religion.
      Contradiction only causes confusion and frustration. Conflict causes problems too. Contraception must be allowed.

      October 31, 2010 at 11:06 am |
    • Sum Dude

      @CatholicMom

      I was surprised to see so many other posts before mine. It often happens that way when I take too long to write something out.
      I hope you are not bothered too much by what must seem a great outrushing of negative responses. I think we are all terribly bored on a Sunday morning and just looking for something to do.
      I was surprised to see anyone posting on this topic and quickly hunched over my keyboard to type my response. It is the most fun I have had in hours. 😛
      If you have any good arguments for us, I sure wish you'd crank them out. Serious posters are often hard to come by, as we have driven off so many...! (that's my way of saying "good morning, I hope you are well?") lol 😛

      October 31, 2010 at 11:16 am |
    • CatholicMom

      Sum Dude,
      Your 10 points are lies….

      Lie #1. If we had contraception, there would be no embryos or fetuses in danger at any time.

      1. We already have contraception and there are embryos and fetuses in danger every day!

      Lie #2.You cannot have it both ways. And this country has freedoms and rights – this is not a Catholic country run by the Vatican.
      2. You can use natural law and not put another person’s life in danger.

      Lie #3. If you want to protect life, you need to make sure that life only gets started where it can continue in a safe manner.

      3. Life should always be protected at any point in time.

      Lie 4. If you hate abortion, you MUST allow contraception.

      4. Contraception does not allow for chast!ty.

      Lie #5. Threaten excommunication if you must, but know that your religion only has authority within the walls of your church.
      Use your opinions THERE instead of trying to foist more contradictory and ineffective laws upon this country.

      5. You threaten excommunication….the Church offers Truth. I have the right to voice my ‘religious’ opinion just as much as you have a right to voice your opinion.

      Lie #6. Societal destruction is almost sure to come from religion and not the lack of it. Religion does not admit of error.
      Intolerance is how violence often starts. Religious intolerance often doesn't even make sense.

      6. Destruction of societies has come with Godlessness throughout history. Intolerances of religion are the beginnings Godlessness if people fall into that pit.

      Lie #7. You can't keep insisting on having everything in this country run according to your religious beliefs.
      You MUST understand that. Especially when the laws you would make are patently unenforceable or unworkable.

      7. Removal of the law that says abortion is legal would be the start of pronouncing the Truth. Have no law regarding it and you will see abortions reduced because people will use their freewill to decide it is wrong. When the law says it is legal, it gives people the impression that it is a good and right thing. Abolish this law.

      Lie #8.We have rights and freedoms in this country. Would you prefer that everyone be sterilized as soon as they hit puberty? Shall we have kidnapping parties to grab every pubescent child and perform operations in the back of a van?

      8. People are not like animals; we have freewill and can control our actions. Perhaps in your mind people need to be sterilized or kidnapped and operated on, and YOU would call it a party……

      Lie #9. Can you not see the illogical mess you are trying to foist upon the country by insisting on contradictions?
      Your religious values are massively unrealistic. The real world does not work according to your religion.

      9. I can see the illogical mess your ideals cause; they are already evident. The real world is in a mess and we all know it….living Godlessly is a main cause of it.

      Lie #10.Try making your religion work with the universe instead of insisting that the universe change to suit your religion.
      Contradiction only causes confusion and frustration. Conflict causes problems too. Contraception must be allowed.

      10. The universe was made by God….religion does not control it. People need to control themselves is all. If that causes a conflict with your conscience….well, good for you….your conscience is still alive and working. Why don’t you let it do its job?

      October 31, 2010 at 1:24 pm |
    • David Johnson

      Abortion is healthcare. It should be covered by every health care policy, Including National Health Care.

      If need be, we can tax the churches to pay or it.

      Have I mentioned lately, that there is no god? Consider it mentioned.

      October 31, 2010 at 1:46 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      David Johnson,

      You said, ‘Abortion is healthcare.’

      Abortion is not healthcare. Healthcare is the taking care of sick people…getting them back into health where disease has invaded their bodies…where mental disorders are corrected…where the body needs restoration from something abnormal….

      Pregnancy is not a sickness, pregnancy is not a disease, pregnancy is not a mental disorder, pregnancy is normal and shows the body is working perfectly. Having an abortion can cause physical birthing problems for the future, abortion can cause disease to invade the body, abortion can cause mental problems….

      October 31, 2010 at 4:03 pm |
    • Andrew

      Please stop talking, you're hurting the cause.

      October 31, 2010 at 7:38 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @CatholicMom
      I am concerned that you came up with such a wild response to my post. I am all for protecting life, children, and everyone's health. I think you would find that I agree with you on many things in principle, and we are most likely just arguing over the implementations and the details.

      btw, I like how you made it all come out to "10 lies" regardless of what I said or your responses. It was kind of funny to be accused of writing lies when I was trying to use rhe-toric, hyp-erbole, and my honest opinions and personal convi-ctions as usual, but that's okay. I've had worse thrown at me.

      There are moral dilemmas all over the place in the medical world. The abortion "debate" is filled with them.
      You would kill the mother to save the child, that's fine, but where's the Republican support of that child after it is born?
      The Republicans do not want accountability for their actions, even to so small a burden as a newborn child who might require constant and expensive healthcare for the rest of its life. Where is the accountability amongst all these moral dilemmas?

      And what about when it is not a child but a few cells stuck to the uterine wall? There are times when pregnancy itself can cause so many problems that it must needs be blocked from happening in the first place.

      Most of these issues come down to particular events that happen in a particular order. Can we not reason it out step-by-step?

      1. pu-b-escence – the ability of the human body to reproduce begins at a younger age than what adults would like to see. lol
      2. se-x-ual desire also makes an appearance at this time and is a very strong and primitive physical and mental (re)action.
      3. conception only requires one sperm and one egg and happens in the body of the female of the species.
      4. the ability of the "parents" to raise a child in a "healthy" manner is never guaranteed by society or human development regardless of age.
      5. resources for raising a child are also not guaranteed to exist by society or anyone who may be involved otherwise.
      6. the basic human right to self-determination exists outside of every law, including religious ones.
      7. once a pregnancy is started, it becomes a process of cell replication according to the DNA we have as humans.
      8. during the pregnancy, the embryo becomes larger and more complicated as time goes on.
      9. Now we run into Roe vs Wade, and determining an arbitrary level of development when it is legally considered to be a "child" or a "separate life-form" and legally requiring protection becomes a bigger issue.

      If you try jumping in at the end, you trip over all the steps in between, is what I am saying here....!
      The problem with "pro-life" / "anti-choice" / "anti-abortion" / "anti-birth control" / "anti-se-x" / "pro-marriage", etc. stances is that they like to avoid examining each step in the process, prefer to control others and their intimate lives, prefer to use religious arguments instead of logical ones, and tend to ignore the hard problems altogether while blindly grasping at one facet of one dilemma –completely avoiding anything like a rational discussion.

      But I like your "top ten" list. It is so wild a reaction that I do not feel insulted by your calling me a liar. I understand that you are upset and will not hold it against you. You mean well and that is not a crime in itself. 😛

      Sorry this is not my usual argument. But it makes more sense to take these things step-by-step. Each step has separate issues that need to be faced if you want to protect babies, children, teens, and adults all at the same time.

      I'm not going to cite any extreme cases where the dilemmas are worse or obvious. Or even where they are easier to resolve. I'm going to grit my teeth and try to discuss this, even though I am not pregnant, and am not likely to become pregnant. lol

      I hope you can calm down a bit. You sound pretty frustrated and pessimistic. I would rather remain calm, but as I frequently am more frustrated and pessimistic than you are likely to ever become, this should not bar us from posting back and forth.
      Thanks for giving me a reason to respond. I will now go and get some dinner. Peace to you, CM. 😀

      October 31, 2010 at 9:34 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      Sum Dude,

      I have to say my response was hardly any more wild than the remarks I was responding to;….. just pointing out what I see as Truth about the topic.

      The Catholic Church is the world’s largest ‘care giver’ next to our government. Small, new born babies without mothers are considered blessings not burdens. There are Republican and Democratic members of the Catholic Church…though it is becoming harder for a Democrat to remain a Democrat in light of the push by their party to spread abortion around the world.

      Your question…. ‘And what about when it is not a child but a few cells stuck to the uterine wall? I am sorry that you do not see conception at its earliest as a human life since nothing more is needed for the human body to grow to adulthood. We do not kill children because they are not fully grown to their adult size; I ask, why kill them before they are a size too big for their uterine abode? It is an unjust act on a human life. It is much more difficult for the human being to live out of the uterine abode so we should be happy that it is the perfect place for the child to live while it is in its journey towards adulthood.

      Your nine comments…..with my comment following each….

      1. pu-b-essence – the ability of the human body to reproduce begins at a younger age than what adults would like to see. Lol
      1. This is where parenting and morals come into play in a person’s life. Also we need to be concerned about growth hormones that are in our food supply and avoid these contaminations….Yes, there is far more to parenting today than 40 years ago….

      2. se-x-ual desire also makes an appearance at this time and is a very strong and primitive physical and mental (re)action.
      2.This should be part of #1. Don’t forget, each has a freewill and a conscience. This is the parent’s responsibility to reinforce right from wrong actions.

      3. conception only requires one sperm and one egg and happens in the body of the female of the species.
      3. You got that one 100% right!... Remembering that the joining of the two carries the ‘whole’ essence of the person.

      4. the ability of the "parents" to raise a child in a "healthy" manner is never guaranteed by society or human development regardless of age.
      4.Yes, that’s life! But we don’t kill babies because we think the circu-mstances aren’t 100% perfect. Especially now with joblessness and greater homelessness…do we kill our children off because it is better for them not to suffer these things?

      5. resources for raising a child are also not guaranteed to exist by society or anyone who may be involved otherwise.
      5. As a nation our children have always been our treasure…or so we have said. Every effort should be made to make their lives better…which does not mean to kill them off.

      6. the basic human right to self-determination exists outside of every law, including religious ones.
      6. But that basic human right is taken from millions of babies before they can exercise their right via abortion.

      7. once a pregnancy is started, it becomes a process of cell replication according to the DNA we have as humans.
      7. This could be part of #3.

      8. during the pregnancy, the embryo becomes larger and more complicated as time goes on.
      8. This could be part of #3.

      9. Now we run into Roe vs Wade, and determining an arbitrary level of development when it is legally considered to be a "child" or a "separate life-form" and legally requiring protection becomes a bigger issue.
      9. You and I have shown by our comments that we realize that life, the fullness of life, is there at conception, because nothing more is added by another source; it is whole, and not ‘some non-human life-form’. Now every woman should appreciate that their baby is born at the time it is born and that she does not have to wait until it is full grown to adulthood. Also a woman and a man should be pleased that their eggs and sperm are the size they are to begin with….size does not determine ‘how human’ a person is, once the two unite and become one.

      I believe these are all logical arguments and carry Truth. We cannot avoid Truth by abortion…it remains. These are rational points to consider when deliberating whether a person should live or die by man’s hand.

      Thank you for not wanting to totally use your usual rants of anger against me…though it does not provoke me to be the same. Often people soften when they realize there is no hate intended, no name calling, and thoughtful respect toward another’s opinion.

      Have a good day, Sum Dude!

      November 1, 2010 at 12:11 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @CatholicMom

      Your response shows me where you are blurring the lines and also points at your religious dogma as the source of your avoiding the reasoning needed to provide total protection for those who have no defense against what others would do to them.
      *sigh*

      Thank you CatholicMom, you have a good day as well.

      November 1, 2010 at 9:45 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      Sum Dude,
      I do not understand this…how am I ‘avoiding the reasoning needed to provide total protection for those who have no defense against what others would do to them.’…?

      November 1, 2010 at 11:39 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @CatholicMom

      By being blinded by your religion. By not testing what is given to you by the Church. By assuming that you do not need to examine the problem from all sides and /or all viewpoints. By doing what you usually do, CatholicMom....!

      November 2, 2010 at 2:24 am |
    • CatholicMom

      Andrew,
      Truth cannot hurt but only help any cause.

      November 3, 2010 at 9:44 am |
  10. Josie Phylpin

    Churches have every right to encourage their members to not have an abortion or to help their neighbor who's facing an unintended pregnancy. What churches don't have the right to do is influence the legal process so that people who don't share their religious beliefs are imprisoned.

    October 31, 2010 at 7:46 am |
  11. Josie Phylpin

    If the author wants to help prevent abortion, he can't call himself pro-life and have any credibility. Pro-life's goal is to make abortion against the law, which can only mean that those who violate the law are put in prison. Putting women and doctors in prison AFTER an abortion is no solution. If he wants to help prevent abortion, he'll have to switch sides.

    October 31, 2010 at 7:46 am |
  12. Darwin Raj

    Dear readers
    Why gay practicing is opposed in church? Jesus means "He will save His people from their sins" All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, not only gays but every human beings. For this reason Jesus said I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. Everyone who dies in sin will be condemned. To save the humanity from sin Jesus came as a savior and established the church. Only qualification to come to Christ is "I am a sinner" He died for the sinners. I accepted myself as sinner and asked for forgiveness from Jesus. He is the only person who can forgive sinners because He is the only one who paid the price for the sin of the world. It is wrongly construed we call only gay's sinners. Totally wrong. Because only way to receive Jesus Christ is to accept Him as our Savior by repenting from our sin. Anyone who is a member of a church but not repented of his or her sin has not been born into the family of God. They die in their sin and are condemned. So only acceptable term to receive eternal life is to accept, repent and confess as sinner asking for forgiveness from sin. Jesus alone can forgive and give eternal life. That is why Jesus said sick people need physician not the healthy. Conclusion is everyone is born is sin not only the gay and repent from sin. They are invited in the church as they are but they have to repent from sin and leave the sin. They cannot live after that carrying the sin anymore. Hope this will throw some light. Without Jesus everyone are sure to perish.

    October 30, 2010 at 4:21 pm |
    • capnjammer

      Pal, you aren't even on the right topic, never mind that your post is only a flat-out attempt at public proselytization. Here, watch these videos that will explain to you exactly why, from a Biblical standpoint, that evangelism and the plan of salvation are wrong.

      [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q4gOBGN5_w&w=640&h=360]

      [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNtXIkyx-5o&w=640&h=360]

      October 30, 2010 at 4:33 pm |
  13. David Johnson

    If you think women should have the right to choose, then make sure you vote for the Dems in November.

    October 30, 2010 at 1:11 pm |
    • capnjammer

      If you want America to be pushed back in time to the days when women, blacks, and ho-mos-exuals were not considered people, vote Tea Party.

      October 30, 2010 at 2:26 pm |
  14. HotAirAce

    The best way religions could help with abortion is to publicly shut up. If you want to impose your beliefs on your own sheep, fine, but stay out of public policy making. On second thought, please do PUBLICLY team up with the Tea Baggers to propose additional laws and restrictions about abortion – the backlash from everyone except the extreme (religious) right would guarantee the Dems victories until you take my first bit of advice – that is, shut up.

    Second, find a better bunch of role models – pretty much every group, political or religious, that has attempted to set a standard of behaviour in this area, has failed miserably. These groups and their individual leaders have no credibility in this area. Back to advice point 1 – behave better and shut up for at least a generation so that you *might* gain some credibility in this area.

    Third, support all and any form of birth control – from abstinence thru to and including abortion (which I personally am opposed to, as in I wish there wasn't the need, but absolutely will not even attempt to take away as an option for any woman that believes that is the best solution for her). Teach the truth about every option, and truly educate (not continue to fear-monger by rolling in religious dogma), so that fully informed potential parents, already in a very stressful situation, can make the best possible decision for them, not for your brand of tribal myth.

    Fourh, truly focus on the people involved in these situations. We can argue forever about the *potential* supernatural aspects all we like, but there are real human people involved here trying to figure out how to get thru the next minute, hour, months and years – support them to the extent you can, otherwise back to point 1 – shutup and don't add to their misery.

    Finally, I just conducted poll that revealed that those asked unanimously believe all evangicals are a problem.

    October 30, 2010 at 1:08 pm |
    • Giancarlo

      Wow so if I want to put a bullet in your head, all religions should shut up and let me do it. I mean they shouldn't force their own beliefs on me right??? Hey if I want to commit murder who are they or you HotAirAce to tell me I can't. If a pre born infant has no right to have me stop, then a post born infant mind like you shouldn't either.

      October 31, 2010 at 11:22 am |
    • Sum Dude

      @Giancarlo

      If we had nothing but religious laws, I would expect to see such murderous actions carried out regularly in the name of religion.

      We have SECULAR laws against murder. SECULAR courts and such to enforce them.
      Religion only has GOD to enforce things AFTER you die.
      So your argument is FAIL in addition to being incredibly rude.

      October 31, 2010 at 11:28 am |
    • HotAirAce

      @Giancarlo

      I think Sum Dude has pretty much covered it. I won't dignify your insanity with any additional response, other than "Thanks Sum Dude!"

      October 31, 2010 at 4:38 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @HotAirAce

      Yer welcome, eh? 😛

      October 31, 2010 at 7:55 pm |
  15. Andrew VA

    Where does anyone even GET a name like Brownback, anyway?

    October 30, 2010 at 10:37 am |
  16. Reality

    The numbers, the calculations and a "bottom liner":

    "Facts on Contraceptive Use

    http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_contr_use.html
    January 2008

    WHO NEEDS CONTRACEPTIVES?

    • 62 million U.S. women (and men?) are in their childbearing years (15–44).[1]

    • 43 million women (and men) of reproductive age, or 7 in 10, are se-xually active and do not want to become pregnant, but could become pregnant if they or their partners fail to use a contraceptive method.[2]

    • The typical U.S. woman (man?) wants only 2 children. To achieve this goal, she (he?) must use contraceptives for roughly 3 decades.[3]

    WHO USES CONTRACEPTIVES?

    • Virtually all women (98%) aged 15–44 who have ever had inte-rcourse have used at least one contraceptive method.[2](and men?)

    • Overall, 62% of the 62 million women aged 15–44 are currently using one.[2] (and men)

    • 31% of the 62 million women (and men?) do not need a method because they are infertile; are pregnant, postpartum or trying to become pregnant; have never had inter-course; or are not s-exually active.[2]

    • Thus, only 7% of women aged 15–44 are at risk of unwanted pregnancy but are not using contraceptives.[2] (and men?)

    • Among the 42 million fertile, s-exually active women who do not want to become pregnant, 89% are practicing contraception.[2] (and men?)

    WHICH METHODS DO WOMEN (men?) USE?

    • 64% of reproductive-age women who practice contraception use reversible methods, such as oral contraceptives or condoms. The remaining women rely on female or male sterilization.[2]

    FIRST-YEAR CONTRACEPTIVE FAILURE RATES

    Percentage of women (men?) experiencing an unintended pregnancy (a few examples)

    Metho Typical
    Pill (combined) 8.7
    Tubal sterilization 0.7
    Male condom 17.4
    Vasectomy 0.2

    Periodic abstinence 25.3
    Calendar 9.0
    Ovulation Method 3.0
    Sympto-thermal 2.0
    Post-ovulation 1.0

    No method 85.0"

    (Abstinence) 0

    (Masturbation) 0

    More facts about contraceptives from

    guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_contr_use.html

    "CONTRACEPTIVE METHOD CHOICE

    Contraceptive method use among U.S. women who practice contraception, 2002

    Method No. of users (in 000s) % of users
    Pill 11,661 30.6
    Male condom 6,841 18.0 "

    i.e.
    The pill fails to protect women 8.7% during the first year of use (from the same reference previously shown).

    i.e. 0.087 (failure rate)
    x 62 million (# child bearing women)
    x 0.62 ( % of these women using contraception )
    x 0.306 ( % of these using the pill) =

    1,020,000 unwanted pregnancies
    during the first year of pill use.

    For male condoms (failure rate of 17.4 and 18% use level)

    1,200,000 unwanted pregnancies during the first year of male condom use.

    The Guttmacher Insti-tute (same reference) notes also that the perfect use of the pill should result in a 0.3% failure rate
    (35,000 unwanted pregnancies) and for the male condom, a 2% failure rate (138,000 unwanted pregnancies).

    o Bottom Line: The failures of the widely used birth "control" methods i.e. the pill and male condom have led to the large rate of abortions ( one million/yr) and STDs (19 million/yr) in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the pill or condoms properly and/or use other methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and STDs.

    October 30, 2010 at 9:50 am |
  17. Sum Dude

    Some of the real problems in this "debate" are the rights of a human being, in this case a female, to remove an embryo / growth that the person does not wish to have for a multltude of reasons.
    Freedom to act upon one's own body is a basic human right not open to debate at any time. Period.

    As to reducing the "problem", I can only suggest that people mind their own business where other people's bodies are concerned.
    If you want to protect children from harm, I am all for that. But to prevent abortions, all you have to do is sterilize everybody who passes puberty. A reversible and mandatory sterilization would prevent any embryo / growths from beginning in the first place.
    If you cannot face such a logical extension of the anti-choice / anti-abortion camp, then you are looking at a certain number of abortions almost guaranteed to happen. But so many of those same busy-bodies are against health-care for everyone, anyway, so why should we listen to anything they have to say regarding anyone's health-care decisions????

    Yet consider my solution. You cannot have things both ways. Either you have rights to self-determination, freedom of choice, and the right to do whatever you want to your own body – or you get none of these things.
    Sterilization, i.e. mandatory mutilation of everyone equally under the law with no end in sight for inhuman practices and torture....
    ...or freedom to choose what you want for your body. Pretty simple. Not rocket science at all.

    Some people just should not be allowed to have kids.
    I have believed this to be true for many years and have seen nothing that changes my mind about this.

    All these people want is another chance at Roe vs Wade. They've got more money to bribe people with now. They've learned a few things about unethical conduct. And they think they have the right to interfere with someone's body.

    All because of religious beliefs that do not transfer well between their delusional yet comforting fantasy world and the real world filled with real people and real situations.

    Facts and freedom.
    Personal rights and equality under the law.
    Civil rights based on real facts without mischaracterization.
    Sensible and fair solutions vs unfair religious nonsense that rips away your rights.

    Guess what? These anti-abortion extremists don't deserve a place at the table to begin with. It's none of their business in the first place. Nobody invited them. They have no standing in this debate.

    This article is a waste of time.
    Someone else's body is none of their business.
    Many of the reasons abortions happen is a direct result of these religious busy-bodies and their love of intruding into other people's lives when they can't handle their own.

    That's how they got religious in the first place.

    October 30, 2010 at 9:17 am |
    • Sum Dude

      Error: It should not have said, "That's how they got religious in the first place."

      It should have said, "They can't handle their own religion in the first place."

      October 30, 2010 at 9:37 am |
    • Giancarlo

      Funny all you Pro Death supporters love to mention a woman's right to do what she wants with her own body. I also believe this to be true as long as she doesn't affect the body of anyone else. Including that of her child!!!

      October 31, 2010 at 11:18 am |
    • Sum Dude

      @Giancarlo

      Funny you should call me Pro Death. In your case, I would certainly consider it a viable option as you seem unwilling to live in harmony with the rest of humanity. You certainly are not giving anyone much reason to respect your opinions......!

      October 31, 2010 at 11:33 am |
    • Peace2All

      @Sum Dude

      Well Said, my friend...

      Peace...

      November 1, 2010 at 5:40 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Giancarlo

      You Said........"Funny all you Pro Death supporters love to mention a woman's right to do what she wants with her own body. I also believe this to be true as long as she doesn't affect the body of anyone else. Including that of her child!!!"

      So.... You're solution is what...? Any female, regardless of age, regardless of c-i-r-c-u-mstances, (r-a-pe, i-n-cest, etc...), they 'all' should be
      'legally' 'forced' by our government to 'have to' birth a baby...?

      Is that you're solution...?

      November 1, 2010 at 5:45 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      @Giancarlo

      Please let us know at what point you consider the blob of cells that results from an egg hooking up with a sp-erm to be "a child." If your answer is "immediately" then I repectfully suggest you are an idiot, and argue that you, or anyone else, do not have any right to tell a woman what to do with her body. Now, if your answer is multiple weeks, say after the first trimester, then I would not call you an id-iot, but I would still say you, or anyone else, do not have any right to tell a women what to do with her body before a generally agreed upon point/number of weeks. If you want to get absolute about "no abortion, at any time, for any reason" then we are back to you being an idiot, and no matter my personal opinion of late-term abortions, I would take the position of it's totally up to the women.

      November 1, 2010 at 6:12 pm |
  18. David Johnson

    From the article:
    "This survey showed significant majorities supporting a wide range of possible approaches to decreasing the abortion rate – from parental consent and waiting periods before abortions to efforts at making adoption, pre- and post-natal care, and contraceptive services more accessible."

    I agree contraceptive services including education on how to use contraceptive devices and medicines starting in Junior High, help with adoption, financial support to make it possible for a woman to keep her baby and harsher penalties for harassment of people seeking and offering abortion services.

    If a woman is going to have an abortion – the sooner the better. Waiting periods are only useful, if you are trying to talk the woman out of her decision. Anyone see that HBO special on the Catholic anti-abortion efforts?

    Parental consent, I believe in. The child needs her parent's support and care after the abortion. LOL.

    You have the Teabagger Nuts wanting abortion to be outlawed for even incest and ra_pe. This is insane. Ra_pe is so traumatic. Making a woman carry the rap_ist,s baby to term is just punishing the woman. Hopefully, women who are ra_ped, are given the "morning after" pills that are available. These pills are truly a gift from god.
    We have one woman in our congregation, who pops these pills like Ju Ju Bees. She is a bit of a tramp, but we are praying for her.

    But incest! OMG. You want a child to deliver a baby conceived in incest? What would Jesus do? I think He would send the child to the abortion clinic. And even if He wouldn't, I would. Babies conceived by close relatives, often have webbed feet. Why put a child through this? Why put the child/mother through this?

    At my church, we take problems such as this to the Lord. We put a gallon milk carton on a table. We ask the Lord to move the milk carton to the other side of the table if the answer is "NO". Jesus has never turned us down. The answer is always "YES". That milk carton doesn't move an inch! Praise the Lord!!

    On a brighter note, we have been praying for Sister Norma. She is a young woman, who just recently joined our congregation. She is butt ugly. We have been praying Jesus will heal her. The poor girl has ugly all over her body. It is a big job, even for the Lord.

    Well, I hope your church is doing as well as ours. Jesus probably likes you! Cheers!

    October 30, 2010 at 8:58 am |
  19. Wisdom for life

    Another really important reality: Those who oppose abortion are actually the ones who side with the health and safety of women. The medical effects of abortion and post-abortion stress disorder indicate that abortion is almost never a good health decision for a woman. Many women battle long-term emotional and psychological damage because of profound regret about their abortions.
    See: http://thinkpoint.wordpress.com/2009/11/26/true-health-care-for-all-women/

    October 30, 2010 at 8:24 am |
    • Colin

      Unfortunately you are ignoring the fact that not all women have abortions because they dont want the baby. There are NUMEROUS medical reasons why a woman would get an abortion you dumb fool. And it is important there be specific precautions in place to make sure the proper medical care is provided by medical professionals who know what they are doing. It is unfortunate christian terrorists are killing these doctors by bombs and shootings. Too bad for you that supreme court decision will never get overturned and there will always be the option for a woman to CHOOSE what she does with her own body and not some religious fanatic who thinks they know better (shocker: they don't). Get it through your thick skull.

      October 30, 2010 at 1:14 pm |
    • capnjammer

      I've known women who were ra-ped and so emotionally distraught that they would have killed themselves had they had to carry the child full term. I used to date a girl who had had difficulties in her previous pregnancy, and so not only was she infertile but she suffered from constant physical pain and mental anguish. I know of families whose lives have been ruined because the mother died trying to give birth to a child with hydroencephaly which died hours later anyway. I have heard of young girls eager to have abor-tions who have ruined their bodies and even died of terrible internal infections because a sterile, LEGAL hospital abo-rtion was not provided, which would become an overwhelming statistic should abo-rtion be made illegal.

      Don't kid yourself. You don't care about the baby (as George Carlin said, you want it to have rights before it's born, but you're willing to grab them all up again afterward, until he's old enough to join the military and go die for whatever cause you may support).

      Man, I could not find the word that time. II think it might be sn-atch

      October 30, 2010 at 2:20 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Wisdom for life

      And your answer would be what...? So.... every woman who gets pregnant must be 'forced' by 'law' to carry a child to 'term' no matter what the circ-u-m stances...?

      Your argument offers no solutions and -0- understanding of the law, what women go through, and just plain co-m-mon sense.

      Obviously, you are just spouting more radical christian right-wing doctrine. Please try and think this through before posting non-sense like that.

      October 30, 2010 at 3:48 pm |
    • Sum Dude

      @Peace2All

      Word!

      You said, "Please try and think this through before posting non-sense like that."
      You are kidding, right? lol
      "thinkpoint" or "Wisdom for life" (both extremely ironic choices for a name) is not likely to think things through, as proven by a long list of posts and even a personal blog that shows a definite lack in this area.
      But I enjoy the ironic possibility that you posted your reply without thinking "that" through....LOL
      Maybe you should get all "guru" on their asses. 😀

      November 1, 2010 at 10:49 pm |
    • Disa

      If pro-lifers sided with the health and safety of women, then instead of shoving pictures of dead babies in people's faces, they would work to promote an affordable health-care system that would care for mothers. Pro-lifers need to stop blaming women, but instead address the fundamental social reasons why women have abortions. That means more social programs and safety nets so a woman can feel like having a child isn't the end of her life.

      November 2, 2010 at 3:30 pm |
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.