Tag Archives: Abortion

Rev. Katherine Ragsdale still thinks abortion is a blessing

Posted on by
7

Rev. Ragsdale is Dean of the Episcopal Divinity School, a seminary of the Episcopal Church. She is a lesbian and in 2011 married another woman. In 2009 she declared that abortion is a blessing.

She was recently interviewed by Laura Ingraham and apparently, she still thinks abortion is a blessing. Having an abortion – even a late term abortion – is “health care” and is to be regretted only in the same sense as a heart operation is to be regretted.

Is this woman mad, evil, deluded, possessed or a combination of all four? I have no idea – you decide. One thing is certain: she should not be an Anglican priest, let alone Dean of a seminary.

Archbishop Robert Duncan stands with Catholics against abortion

Posted on by
3

The Obama administration has mandated that Catholic institutions, as employers, fund the prescribing of abortifacient contraceptive drugs to their employees. Unsurprisingly, Catholics are somewhat upset about this.

Archbishop Robert Duncan has made this statement in support of the Catholic Church:

Archbishop Robert Duncan released the following statement in support of the Catholic Church’s fight to maintain freedom of conscience in the midst of the U.S. federal government issuing a preventive care mandate in violation of its teaching.

“The Anglican Church in North America stands by our Catholic brothers and sisters as followers of Christ in a nation whose Constitution guarantees ‘the free exercise’ of religion.  As Christians, our faith and doctrine are at the very heart of our service to others in our community.  Therefore, it is extremely troubling to see our government mandate services contrary to Catholic Church teaching.  I call on all members of the Anglican Church to stand by our Catholic brothers and sisters, and pray for our elected officials to have the courage to stand up for religious freedom and overturn this mandate,” said Archbishop Duncan.

As Archbishop Duncan has called “on all members of the Anglican Church” to add their support, I’m expecting a flood of agreement from Anglican bishops all over North America, starting with Katharine Jefferts-Schori and Fred Hiltz.

Or not.

The pathetic truth is that, for all their trumpeting about social justice, both TEC and the ACoC are completely indifferent to the injustice that will define the callous barbarity of Western civilisation for ages to come: murdering their unborn.

Police seize pro-life posters in Calgary

Posted on by
Reply

 

The excuse seems to have been that the posters were “obscene”, a contention I find easy to believe; the problem is, the posters are considerably less obscene than the act they depict.

While on the subject of obscene images, in Canada it is illegal to sell a package of cigarettes that is not covered in images of equal aesthetic obscenity (even the Huffington Post thinks they’re horrifying) to those of gory aborted babies. This is done, apparently because the government of Canada wants to “horrify smokers into not smoking” and using gory photographs is a good way to do it; if children see them, so much the better.

When it comes to applying the same tactics to horrifying mothers and doctors into not aborting, the opposite rules seem to apply.

This must be because, on the scale of Canuck-confused societal evils, killing unborn babies is a mere peccadillo while smoking is the foremost scourge of our age.

Harebrained pro-abortionists

Posted on by
8

Rather than condemning something that is done routinely, and for no particularly good reason, to unborn babies – killing them – abortion enthusiasts are fretting about something that is less likely to occur than being struck by lightning seven times in a row:  being shot at any time.

That must be why they are recommending defending themselves with deadly force only if  really necessary:

h/t: Jill Stanek

Linda Gibbons spends 3 months in jail on outdated injunction

Posted on by
6

Linda Gibbons, a 63 year old great grandmother has just spent three months in jail for silently protesting outside the Morgentaler abortion clinic. The arrest was for violating a court injunction designed to prevent her protest – except the injunction was invalid because it was out of date.

So while a harmless little old lady is illegally incarcerated for three months because she protested the killing of unborn babies, an assortment of degenerate yahoos are allowed to break numerous bye-laws by camping in a Toronto park to protest capitalism, all the while being enthusiastically cheered on by Church, union and batty journalists. That’s called social justice in this funny old world.

From here:

After three months in prison, Linda Gibbons was found not guilty on a charge of disobeying a court order and released from custody to the hugs of supporters in a downtown Toronto courtroom Friday afternoon. Justice Alphonse T. Lacavera determined Sheriff Peter Krause improperly read the text of an outdated injunction when he directed that she be arrested outside the Morgentaler Clinic (known corporately as “Lexogest Inc.”) abortion site this past August 4.

N. T. Wright on abortion, the death penalty, Iraq and 9/11

Posted on by
1

From here:

You can’t reconcile being pro-life on abortion and pro-death on the death penalty. Almost all the early Christian Fathers were opposed to the death penalty, even though it was of course standard practice across the ancient world. As far as they were concerned, their stance went along with the traditional ancient Jewish and Christian belief in life as a gift from God, which is why (for instance) they refused to follow the ubiquitous pagan practice of ‘exposing’ baby girls (i.e. leaving them out for the wolves or for slave-traders to pick up).

Mind you, there is in my view just as illogical a position on the part of those who solidly oppose the death penalty but are very keen on the ‘right’ of a woman (or couple) to kill their conceived but not yet born child…

From where many of us in the UK sit, American politics is hopelessly polarized. All kinds of issues get bundled up into two great heaps. The rest of the world, today and across the centuries, simply doesn’t see things in this horribly oversimplified way…

While we’re about it, how many folk out there were deeply moved both by the reading of the 9/11 victim names and by the thought that if they’d read the names of Iraqi civilians killed by your country and mine over the last ten years we’d have been there for several days?

To summarise:

  1. The execution by the state of a person guilty of the crime of murder is equivalent to the killing of an innocent baby for the sake of convenience. Therefore, the only consistent position is a polarized one where either abortion and capital punishment are both permitted or neither are permitted.
  2. The polarization of American politics is all wrong – except for point 1 above where it is obligatory because it is the Wright kind of polarization.
  3. If you are moved by remembering the deliberate murder of 3000 of your own countrymen, you must be equally moved by the wartime deaths of enemy civilians, even though you tried your best to minimise such casualties. This may appear to be a yet another polarized viewpoint, but it’s fine since it is an example of a number of issues piled into one great Wright-approved heap, not two.
  4. The rest of the world isn’t deceived by American Horrible Simplifications. That’s why, for example, UK sophisticates riot at the slightest pretext, routinely indulge in binge drinking and erect sharia controlled zones  –  all horrible, but at lease not horrible simplifications.

I get the impression that N. T. Wright doesn’t much like America; oops – that’s another hopelessly polarized opinion.

 

Reminders being sent for abortion appointments because the prospective mothers are forgetting to show up

Posted on by
Reply

From here:

Britain’s largest abortion provider said it is introducing reminders because some girls and women had forgotten about their procedures.

Critics said the move, by the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), gave a disturbing insight into casual attitudes to abortion.

BPAS, which carries out almost one third of NHS-funded terminations, likened the service, which begins in November, to reminders sent out by dentists before check-ups.

[….]

Stewart Jackson, Conservative MP for Northampton, who supported an amendment earlier this month by Nadine Dorries to introduce independent counselling for abortion, described the initiative from BPAS as “morally squalid”.

If an unborn baby is a non-human with no soul, not bearing the image of her Creator, then dismembering her in the womb and scraping out the broken parts is of no more significance than a tooth extraction, so sending a reminder is simply – practical.

If an unborn baby is a human, then a reminder to keep an appointment to murder could hardly be more morally squalid than the decision to murder or the act of murder.

The pro-abortion contingent can’t have it both ways.

In Canada you can now kill new-borns as well as the unborn

Posted on by
9

A judge has ruled that since we can kill the unborn no matter how far into the pregnancy, we can also kill new-born babies because of “the onerous demands pregnancy and childbirth exact from mothers”.

I have to admit, it’s logical: logical devilry.

From here:

An Alberta judge has let a woman who strangled her newborn son walk free by arguing that Canada’s absence of a law on abortion signals that Canadians “sympathize” with the mother.

“We live in a country where there is no protection for children in the womb right up until birth and now this judge has extended the protection for the perpetrator rather than the victim, even though the child is born and as such should be protected by the court,” said Jim Hughes, national president of Campaign Life Coalition.

Katrina Effert of Wetaskiwin, Alberta gave birth secretly in her parents’ downstairs bathroom on April 13, 2005, and then later strangled the newborn and threw his body over a fence.  She was 19 at the time.

She has been found guilty of second-degree murder by two juries, but both times the judgment was thrown out by the appeals court.  In May, the Alberta Court of Appeal overturned her 2009 murder conviction and replaced it with the lesser charge of infanticide.

On Friday, Effert got a three-year suspended sentence from Justice Joanne Veit of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench.  As a result, she was able to walk out of court, though she will have to abide by certain conditions.

According to Justice Veit, Canada’s lack of an abortion law indicates that “while many Canadians undoubtedly view abortion as a less than ideal solution to unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancy, they generally understand, accept and sympathize with the onerous demands pregnancy and childbirth exact from mothers, especially mothers without support.”

 

ACLU challenges “Choose Life” license plate

Posted on by
Reply

From here:

The American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina filed a lawsuit challenging a specialty license plate that supports the pro-life stance on abortion.  State lawmakers authorized the “Choose Life” plate, although a pro-choice plate was voted down.

ACLU legal director Katy Parker says the state cannot allow only one side of the argument to be heard. “This would be discrimination regardless of which side was being supported by the state,” said Parker.  The ACLU claims the State is engaging in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.

The ACLU has a point. To balance things, there should be a pro-abortion plate that reads “Choose Death”.

Abortion advocates know deep down that abortion is murder

Posted on by
3

As this article from Slate notes, people who are otherwise quite sanguine about aborting babies become queasy when it comes to the “reduction” – an obscene euphemism if ever there was one – of twins. The discrepancy is quite illogical.

Our conscience is given by God and, hardened though it may have become, we know that to abort a foetus is to kill a baby; a new reason to abort stirs suppressed misgivings and makes us question whether what we are doing is right.

The fact that we have, nevertheless, embarked on this new horror is, yet again, a testament to the depths of evil to which we are prepared to sink for the sake of mere convenience.

What’s worse than an abortion? Half an abortion.

It sounds like a bad joke. But it’s real. According to Sunday’s New York Times Magazine, demand is rising for “reduction” procedures in which a woman carrying twins keeps one and has the other aborted. Since twin pregnancies are generally safe, these abortions are largely elective.

Across the pro-choice blogosphere, including Slate, the article has provoked discomfort. RH Reality Check, a Web site dedicated to abortion rights, ran an item voicing qualms with one woman’s reduction decision. Jezebel, another pro-choice site, acknowledged the “complicated ethics” of reduction. Frances Kissling, a longtime reproductive rights leader, wrote a Washington Post essay asking whether women should forego fertility treatment rather than risk a twin pregnancy they’d end up half-aborting.