Democrats & Liberals Archives

The Decline into Irrelevance of the Evangelical Right

The rise of Ronald Reagan and conservatism in the 1980’s owed a great deal to the Evangelical right, personified by Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority movement. It proved strong enough to drive a partisan impeachment of a successful president, Bill Clinton. In 2001, the most conservative president of the modern era, George Bush, assumed office, thanks in part to those same evangelicals.

The beginning of the Bush presidency’s decline in popularity coincided with the Terry Schiavo fiasco, and the same decline seems to have destroyed the viability of the Evangelical right. When it came to the Evangelicals, if there was one thing the vast majority of the electorate was certain of, it was this: most Americans did not want Evangelicals using the power of government to intervene in the personal moments, moments of life and death. And where are we today?

In the current election cycle, social conservatives were unable to unite behind a candidate. In fact, the Evangelicals voted in the exact same ratios as the rest of the Republican electorate during the South Carolina primary. A Mormom candidate and a leader of the Clinton impeachment who was secretly having an affair at the same time both flourished, while the candidate who should have appealed to this group simply failed.

And now, another attempt by Evangelicals to promote one of their favorite issues resulted in an epic FAIL, but not before threatening to harm anyone concerned with women's issues. The social conservatives convinced the Komen charity to withdraw its funding from Planned Parenthood. The vast majority of American fought back in a vast demonstration of outrage. Planned Parenthood won. Komen lost in its clumsy effort to defund PP, and no one lost more than the Evangelicals. Not only have they become politically irrelevant- their support seems to guarantee a loss in the political arena for anyone foolish enough to openly cooperate with them.

As a result, we are all much better off.

Posted by phx8 at February 6, 2012 12:21 AM
Comments
Comment #335690

There’s still a long time to go this year before the election and it’s all still up in the air, but things continue shifting toward November pain for conservatives and a very merry Christmas for liberals.

That conservatives are just so certain of the demise of liberal control reminds me a lot of the Bush years. I thought that we could have run an old hound dog up against Bush and the public would have had enough and given the dog 4 years. But a strong opposing candidate makes a difference far more than how much the opposition simply hates the President.

Here are just a few reasons for Republicans to worry so far this year:

* Low turnout so far in the primary suggesting weak field

* Continued uptick in President Obama’s job approval

* Widening gap between Romney and Obama with Obama well on top

* Widening gap between Democrats and Republicans in generic ballot with Democrats on top

* Confidence in the economy continues to trend upward making it harder for conservatives to use the economy against Obama

* Democratic voters have narrowed the enthusiasm gap that sunk them in 2010

Posted by: Adam Ducker at February 6, 2012 9:31 AM
Comment #335695

This posting is sick. Glorifying baby killers is Hitlerian.

” The vast majority of American fought back in a vast demonstration of outrage.”

Where do you get this garbage. Komen folded from within and pressure from PP.

Any time baby killers are praised represents a sick bunch of people.

Just for the record 16 of 19 of the PP centers that Komen gave money to do not do mammograms.

This world will not be around long when this type of thinking persists.

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at February 6, 2012 12:13 PM
Comment #335696

tom humes,
Well, wasting no time in godwinizing a thread, eh? Just for the record, I am not glorifying Evangelicals as baby killers. I don’t think Evangelicals kill babies. Health care for women is important. PP provides that health care. Opposing organizations like PP and thereby increasing America’s infant mortality rate does not make Evangelicals baby killers.

Adam,
Good points! Most of the GOP primaries & caucuses are experiencing low turnout. FL was down by 300,000. NV was much lower too. Part of that has to be the fragmentation of the Evangelical bloc. Their interests have been consistently opposed by a majority of Americans, and the GOP knows this, so there is little reason to kowtow to them anymore. As a result, the Evangelicals are not participating based upon their religious agenda.

Posted by: phx8 at February 6, 2012 12:50 PM
Comment #335698


When it comes to issues like abortion, guns and gays, the evangelicals are still a solid block. When it comes to issues like Social Security, Medicare, and other parts of the domestic agenda, the evangelicals become divided.

It has been the general order, that when it comes to foreign affairs the Republicans are favored and when it comes to internal affairs the Democrats are preferred.

When it comes to foreign affairs, Obama has made it hard for the conservatives to attack his positions because most of them are popular with the people.

This election guns, gays and abortion are only going to be peripheral issues, used by the Republicans to try and keep the evangelical block intact. It is going to be more about the economy and inequity. If the economy is improving it bodes well for Democrats.

When Romney secures the nomination, he will become Gingrich.

It looks as if the Republicans are going to try and run as anti-union, pro free market populists, what a joke, the party of wealth running as populists.

Posted by: jlw at February 6, 2012 2:31 PM
Comment #335699

Then I guess the conservative Christian right is a moot point and we will not have to hear any more anti-Christian attacks from the left…right. In fact, it looks like Obama is an absolute shoo in for November.

Is the irrelevance of the Tea Party and Christian conservatives that daily talking point of the left? Maybe I need to check moveon.org of the dailykos. I have noticed all articles written by liberals on WB seem to coincide with the Democrat daily talking points. It’s a shame the left can’t discuss something of the own origination.

Posted by: Billinflorida at February 6, 2012 2:37 PM
Comment #335700

Government and private orgs fund PP, not Komen alone. This whole BS did nothing but show that being pro abortion is more important than helping breast cancer awareness.

The only people who lost anything in this were the women who depend on the SGK donations for awareness. The nutjob leftists are still upset that SGK is about breast cancer awareness and many regular people who believe private orgs should be able to donate to who they want, will now ignore the Pink Ribbon.
The ‘evangelicals’ lost nothing.

Posted by: kctim at February 6, 2012 2:54 PM
Comment #335703


Billinflorida, no, it is just that Democrats, just like Republicans read polls and make comments on them. The polls say that there has been a drop off of support for the tea party and it’s politicians because of some of their more unpopular policy stances and their stubborn refusal to do any compromising.

A significant number of evangelical voters are in unions and many work for the government as teachers, fire fighters, bureaucrats, etc. Many of them are not real happy with the anti-government, anti-government worker stance of the Republican party. Many of them oppose the Republican/tea party stance on the social programs. The Republican/tea party stance on taxes, especially taxes on the wealthy are not in tune with the majority.

kctim, why do you think Komen decided to end PP funding in the first place? Where they pressured into doing so? If so, by whom?

Posted by: jlw at February 6, 2012 3:37 PM
Comment #335704

billinflorida,
I can’t speak for others, but as for Democratic talking points, if you review my past articles, you will see they are anything but mere talking points. I follow multiple news sources on a casual basis. I’m one of those people who flips channels. One channel covers eight insets of different newscasts at the same time. That’s perfect for me. Anyway, as for talking points, I have not seen any stories like mine about the irrelevance of the Evangelicals. It’s a conclusion I reached on my own, and I’m surprised the topic doesn’t receive more attention. My article on “The B Word” is also original. Neither Republicans or Democrats want to even mention Bush. It really is remarkable. The article prior to that, “Portlandia,” was obviously original and inspired by local developments. “The Benefits of Space Exploration” reflects my general agreement with Newt Gingrich…

As for polls, and widely covered stories, and facts- it’s not a talking point when unemployment numbers look good. Low GOP turnout in FL & NV and other states is not a talking point. It’s a fact.

Funny the way facts have a progressive bias.

Posted by: phx8 at February 6, 2012 3:51 PM
Comment #335705

JLW
Why does it matter? They are a private org who collect contributions for breast cancer awareness and they are entitled to donate that money however they wish, to whomever they wish.

To bad they folded to the pro-abortion mob.

Posted by: kctim at February 6, 2012 4:26 PM
Comment #335706

kctim,
When a breast cancer awareness organization stopped giving to a big provider of breast examinations, it forgot its original purpose and became an organization for promoting a political agenda. Of course an organization has every right to do that. Thanks in large part to social media, the broader public became aware of it, and came down on Komen like a ton of bricks.

The oddest thing about the whole story is that it took social media to blow the anti-choice crowd out of the water. Various political groups never gained any traction in little noticed fights over PP funding. The GOP threatened to shut down the government over PP funding, and was ignored. But when people became aware of the issue through social media- BOOM! Bye, bye Evangelicals.

Posted by: phx8 at February 6, 2012 4:54 PM
Comment #335708

“When a breast cancer awareness organization stopped giving to a big provider of breast examinations,”

Komen contributions went to PP for the mammograms. 16 of 19 of the centers did not perform mammograms.

The left gets the CM Syndrome going when something of this nature occurs.

May God Have Mercy on Your Souls

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at February 6, 2012 5:06 PM
Comment #335709

Sorry Phx8
But they are allowed to start and stop funding for whatever they wish and the pro-abortion mob making it about abortion instead of breast cancer awareness, is where the promoting a political agenda BS came in.

The pro-abortion mob should have said fine, you do your pink ribbon thing and we will do our thing, and women will be helped by us both. Instead, the pro-abortion mob said our way or the highway and is attempting to destroy an organization that helps millions of women.
There isn’t an org out there that does what SGK does and when they are gone, it will take decades for somebody to take their place.
Great way to show that the real issue is women.

Posted by: kctim at February 6, 2012 5:08 PM
Comment #335710

So “the right” does not march in lockstep and the Republican electorate is able and willing to accept nuance. That is what you are saying in this post.

I would make a comment about choice. Like most Americans, I think that abortion is a moral wrong and that it should be regulated but it should not be illegal. I understand that there are a variety of opinions on this contentious subject. Those who believe that abortion is baby killing cannot accept it - ever. Those who believe is is merely a medical procedure that can be done at convenience can never accept any restrictions. In a diverse society, we can allow many opinions.

When you make laws forcing Catholic institutions to actively support practices odious to their values, you are destroying choice and diversity as well as imposing a monoculture of values in a tyrannous way. This is a serious overstep of government’s legitimate rights.

IMO it is tyrannous for government to impose its will by making abortions illegal and it is equally tyrannous for it to force those who oppose them to be complicit in what they consider a crime.

Posted by: C&J at February 6, 2012 5:11 PM
Comment #335711

Belief in God and God given reason is Deism.

Looking at the issue of abortion, relying solely on reason which is a requirement of being a Deist, it becomes obvious that abortion for convenience sake is wrong. The key argument for proponents of this act is that a woman has a right to her own body. This is a true and correct statement. All people have a right to do to their own bodies what they will. However, the fetus, or unborn baby, is a distinct individual. Even though it resides inside its mother, it is a separate entity genetically. Its DNA is completely its own, and different from its mother’s DNA. From the moment of conception, it is an entirely separate genetic individual. Therefore, the argument in favor of abortion on demand, or abortion for convenience sake, that a woman has a right to do as she wishes to her own body, is not applicable to the question of abortion, since the mother’s body is different from that of her baby, or fetus.

According to Wikipedia, roughly 50 million legal induced abortions have been performed in the US since 1973.

Why do women abort?

On average, women offer four reasons for choosing abortion: 75 percent say that having a baby interferes with work, school or other responsibilities; 75 percent say they cannot afford a child; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner. [SOURCE: AGI]

A small percentage of abortions occur because of medical necessity, meaning they are performed to save the life of the mother.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 6, 2012 5:23 PM
Comment #335713

C&J,
Oh, the lockstep is very real. It’s just that the Evangelicals are no longer calling the shots. They discredited themselves in the Terry Schiavo affair, and again with the attempt to defund PP. Kctim attempts to spin it, but obviously the public has not bought that spin. PP is a very important provider of mammograms, especially to lower income women who cannot afford it. Women know that. When people became aware of what Komen was trying to do, they turned on Komen en masse.

As I was saying, the lockstep is real. It is following Romney, which was dictated from the very beginning. Corporations want Romney. “Corporations are people, my friend.” And Citizens United has made huge, ‘anonymous’ contributions possible. It’s the only hope Romney has to prevent a landslide- lots and lots of money to tell conservatives hup, two, three, four.

Life does not begin at conception. Life began billions of years ago. An ova is alive. Sperm cells are alive. When they combine, nothing supernatural happens. Genomes combine. The exact same process occurs in just about every creature that depends upon sexual reproduction. Exact same process.

A human being becomes a human being at birth, when independent of the mother. Almost every culture and religion throughout history worked with this definition of when a human becomes a human. Some cultures did not grant the status of human until three or even seven days after birth.

A lot of people believe in the supernatural. That’s fine. As long as I’m not subject to having those beliefs imposed on me, no problem. I expect the same courtesy in return.

Generally, Evangelicals do not provide this courtesy. They routinely quote the Bible on WB, as if that is a reasonable way to argue the point, as if I should respect and accept it just because someone invokes the supernatural formulations put together by Middle Eastern tribes thousands of years ago.

I don’t respect it and I don’t accept it. I don’t care about who smote whom, or which team God rooted for, or what was His favored piece of real estate with supernaturally approved border lines, or how God approved of slavery and viewed women as property. I think it’s just primitive.

Posted by: phx8 at February 6, 2012 5:43 PM
Comment #335714
However, the fetus, or unborn baby, is a distinct individual. Even though it resides inside its mother, it is a separate entity genetically. Its DNA is completely its own, and different from its mother’s DNA. From the moment of conception, it is an entirely separate genetic individual.

Under this standard, tumors are also “distinct individuals”, which is absurd. This means conception is not the moment whereby personhood is achieved. That moment comes later when the fetus actually has the capacity to survive outside of the uterus.

Posted by: Warped Reality at February 6, 2012 5:55 PM
Comment #335715

The outrage over Komen wasn’t about abortion. It was about cancer. Period.

Posted by: Rich at February 6, 2012 5:59 PM
Comment #335716

Royal Flush,
The statistics on abortion sound wrong. I am close to a person who had an abortion. She was Catholic, and a nurse by profession. She desperately wanted to have another baby. Amniocentesis revealed Downs. I won’t go into the details of Downs, but it’s terrible, and can threaten the life of the mother. Anyway, that ended in abortion.

Friends of mine who had lived together a long time asked my opinion about what they should do when she accidentally got pregnant. I told them they should marry and have the child. They asked me, and I gave my opinion. They went ahead with the abortion anyway. I don’t think they liked the answer I gave to their question.

The point is, whether or not to have a baby is a very personal matter. Different people will have different opinions, and sometimes the differences will be unexpected. It’s not a matter for government intervention. It’s a personal choice, and that sums it up. By definition, a controversial issue is one on which reasonable people will disagree…

Posted by: phx8 at February 6, 2012 6:03 PM
Comment #335717

phx8

If evangelicals are a big part of the Republican coalition and they are “no longer calling the shots” and are less than happy about the choices being made, it must mean that they disagree. Nevertheless, they are not getting their way. I fail to see how being divided among different candidates, voting different ways, espousing different preferences and behaving in different ways is lockstep.

We hope and believe that Republicans will generally back the eventual nominee. In that case they will be acting no less and no more in lockstep than Democrats who support their nominee.

The whole meme of conservative lockstep is in ruins. It just is disproved by facts and even by what liberals write.

The new liberal line is just plain stupid. I can sum it up. Republicans disagree and are manifesting different preferences and behaviors but since we (liberals) have chosen to believe they move in lockstep we will continue to repeat it.

Re your opinions on abortion - This is also a typical liberal truth. One might even think of it as lockstep. I take a truly tolerant stand. I accept that abortion should be legal, although I consider those that do it morally deficient. On the other hand, I do not believe that those who think abortion is odious should be forced by government fiat to support it. In both cases, government has no right to impose beliefs.

So can we agree that abortion should be illegal. We can all make our own moral choices. But that those who think abortion is odious should not be forced to support it. In other words, the recent Obama decision to pressure Catholic hospitals and charities is morally bankrupt.

Rich

It is not about cancer. If a private charity chooses to fund one organization over others or some not at all, it does not rise to this level of outrage. Planned parenthood does cancer screening. So do many others.

Posted by: C&J at February 6, 2012 6:14 PM
Comment #335721

Warped, what is it like inside a brain that equates a tumor with a human fetus? Granted, some liberals are a real Cancer on our society.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 6, 2012 6:53 PM
Comment #335722

Stop using the crutch that PP does all those mammograms. It does very little.

SGK and PP are partners in killing babies.

I know of a situation where twins were born 17 weeks premature. That is a long way from what the left wants to argue as viability. In this case one died and the other lived.

75% of babies that are known to be Down Syndrome are aborted. Those Downs Syndrome people are really some really precious people. When did you ever hear of a DS person being arrested for criminal activity? People aborting DS babies are missing on some of the most dearest moments of life that they chose to put in the garbage can.

The only good thing that comes from an abortion is that they go to Heaven, no ifs ands or buts. The ones involved with the killing have some questions to be answered.

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at February 6, 2012 7:03 PM
Comment #335724

tom humes,
Downs is a horrible topic. Between 87 - 95 percent of all Downs pregnancies are aborted. Carrying a Downs pregnancy to term carries significant risk. A lot of Downs pregnancies will miscarry. A late term miscarriage can be very dangerous to the mother. After birth, many Downs Syndrome babies dies shortly afterwards. Only a small percentage survive. Among those, some will suffer moderate to severe retardation. Look up “severe retardation” if you want to learn about something really depressing. The number of “precious people” represents a single digit percentage of all Downs pregnancies, and those survivors have an average IQ of 50, a life expectancy of 35, and a guaranteed life full of medical problems- problems which would bankrupt most families.

There is a good reason most doctors recommend aborting Downs pregnancies after the amniocentesis.

Sorry to go into this subject. Time for a new thread.

Posted by: phx8 at February 6, 2012 7:53 PM
Comment #335725

C&J,

I respectfully disagree. As some have pointed out, there has not been national outrage over the attacks on Planned Parenthood until this episode. It has been intense but limited to pro-life vs. pro-choice partisans. What distinguishes this event from past efforts to de-fund Planned Parenthood? It is cancer.

I don’t think that you appreciate the devastating physical and emotional impact of cancer. It is something, perhaps, that one needs to experience to understand its profound impact.

The idea that a leading cancer prevention and treatment organization would allow itself to be pressured into a political decision based on opposition to abortion and potentially deny low income women the opportunity for cancer screenings was simply beyond the pale.

The message here is simple. Argue all you want about abortion, but when it comes to cancer, don’t mix the issues. Planned Parenthood does a lot more than abortions. The public is fully aware of that. The public is fully aware that it is leading organization for the provision of a wide range of female preventive health service for low income women,including cancer.

Komen is a private charitable organization and can give its donations to whomever it wishes. On the other hand, its donors can equally decide whether its choices are consistent with the basic goal of cancer prevention without regard to race, creed, ethnicity, income.


Posted by: Rich at February 6, 2012 7:56 PM
Comment #335727

Must be a heavy load to bear to determine who lives and who get murdered. Playing GOD is not fun.

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at February 6, 2012 8:27 PM
Comment #335728

Playing GOD is not fun.

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at February 6, 2012

To find out, just ask obama. He thinks it is.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 6, 2012 8:32 PM
Comment #335732

Ah, people show up, spew some bile, and wonder where the warm reception went.

As a Christian, I’m put an interesting, and not always comfortable position by this subject. But the real long and short of it for me is that Christianity in our culture has become little more than a parody of its true principles.

For a religion that is based on forgiveness and mercy, its so called exemplars seem short on both, and it creates a real image problem, especially when we see them falter and fail. They don’t prove that people can resist temptation and behave better than the default individual, they prove, at least to most people, that they are no more moral than anybody else, if not worse off for their hypocrisy.

Christians, in my opinion, need to look at the nuts and bolts of everything they’ve been helping to push over the last few years, and realize that they’ve been co-opted by the culture, and that they really aren’t superior to the people they’ve been bashing. They need to relearn the humility that politics has undone in them, relearn the message of forgiveness, reconciliation, and mercy that would draw so many more people in if they could actually hear it over the din of the pious frauds of the right, trying to use Christ to sell themselves to an electorate.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 6, 2012 9:45 PM
Comment #335733


Playing God is exactly what you fellas are trying to do in many other ways than just abortion.

Playing God is what the religious leaders of Iran are doing.

Playing God is what most religions have done and will do if given the opportunity, given enough devoted followers.

Then there are your allies who present a whole new meaning of the term ‘playing God.’ The wealthy and the secular Republicans who could care less about any of these issues that don’t affect their pocketbooks, but they do care a whole lot about your vote.

Posted by: jlw at February 6, 2012 10:22 PM
Comment #335734

Your right kctim, as a private sector charity the board of directors had the right to choose who to fund and for what amount. It also had the responsibility to act fairly and within the rules they set forth. The private sector that donates to the charity also has a right to donate or not donate based upon the actions of the board of directors of the charity.

In this case the board was mislead by an ideologue determined to defund PP for political reasons. It was one person, a VP, that set arbitrary rules with the intention of not funding just one organization while funding others with the same issues. This was a bad decision by the board, who by all rights should fire the VP, and the free market made itself heard. The truth came out, the extremist was outed for the dishonesty she perpetrated upon the charity.

The board upon weighing all information discovered the fraud and made amends for the error. My hats off to the VP as her narrow minded dishonesty caused PP to receive much more money from others willing to make up the difference as well as the original funding from Komen. It ended well for PP.

The evangelicals lost face. They embarrassed themselves with this bit of foolishness. They outed themselves as “momma killers” willing to go to any extreme to stop PP. They should be ashamed for gambling with the lives of these young women for political gain.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 6, 2012 11:16 PM
Comment #335739

Endangering those young womens lives amounts to less than 1%. You are reaching for straws and drew the wrong one.

The larger problem after killing the baby is the mental anguish that the women go thru and their future health issues. Those do not occur to those who carry their baby to full term. Yeah maybe 1/10th of 1%.

Hear Ye! Hear Ye! Pope Stephen has spoken.

Your target is narrow. You are blaiming republican conservative Christians. You should be preaching to the liberal democrats likewise. Your message of forgiveness and redemption should be employed by all people. Reconciliation is only done by God.

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at February 7, 2012 2:32 AM
Comment #335741

I just required some wholesale nike shoesinformation and was searching on Google cheap nike shoesfor it. I visited each page that wholesale cheap nike shoescame on first page and didn’t got any relevant nike shoes wholesaleresult then I thought to check out the second cheap nike air maxone and got your blog. This is what I wanted!

Posted by: wholesale hats at February 7, 2012 3:32 AM
Comment #335755

And about time. Let the mullahs run Iran, not the US.

Posted by: bills at February 7, 2012 6:41 AM
Comment #335756

I live in the Philippines. Abortion is aggainst the law. Contraception is beyond the reach of most. This at the behest of the Catholic Church. Results? A high abortion rate. Poison concoctions are available at any market. NGO estimates are 2000 young women die from unsafe abortions every year. Its probably higher. There is a bill in congress to make birth control easier to obtain, not abortion, birth control. The RC have effectively stalled it yet again. Is that the right’s dream for America?

Posted by: bills at February 7, 2012 6:51 AM
Comment #335758

tom humes-
That’s just a word game. Can’t we be reconciled to each other? Isn’t that the point of what our Lord tells us to do?

There is an emphasis in the New Testament to match faith and real belief to words and rituals. Paul talks about the hollowness of the second without the first, and the hollowness of it all without love. Love, which is what our Lord commands us to do with our neighbor, even our enemy. He tells us to bless those who curse us.

Now I don’t think he said this with merely impressing people in mind. I think he was on to something two thousand years, ago, something about human nature. People like us, we’re like pitbulls sometimes, going after those we disagree with, and sometimes we forget there is a living, breathing human being much like us on the other side of things.

Folks are programmed by nature to see things in terms of us vs. them. The language of the bible in my opinion tells us two important things: there will be divisions, even because of Jesus’ teachings of peace, forgiveness, love, etc; and that we should still endeavor to reach out to others, and do good by them. Our blessings, the good we do should not simply be towards those who we are close to, that we like. We should, and we must look at human beings who are not like us, who are perhaps even against us, and see them as human beings, as fellow children of God.

I have seen personally what estrangements life can inflict on people, and it breaks my heart. I have also read from people on this very site, who started out as reasonably mellow folks, and have gotten to the point where their posts have become more snide and angry. I’m not immune, to be sure.

We get to thinking that it means the world that we win an argument, that if we concede anything to the other side, all is lost. We let the stakes of that which we care about blind us to our own fallibility, the potential that another side might be right, or worse yet, that all could be mistaken, and that both could remain in error, if they merely define what is right and wrong in policy by what is opposite their rival’s position.

To believe in God is to believe in right and wrong, in truth that extends beyond what is visible, what is arguable or provable by you or anybody in particular, beyond what we are capable of imagining or understanding. It is to humble ourselves before the ultimately objective God who made everything, and understand that we are not Him, and never could be Him.

It is to understand that there is good in others, and the potential for good in others, that we may be too strung up in our differences to notice. It is to understand that there is evil and error in others, even those we love and cherish, who are our allies, that we may be too close to them to fully appreciate. It is to understand all that about ourselves, too.

Too much about what I see Christians doing in today’s political sphere is charged with this certainty about what they believe they know, and how awful, inhuman, and evil they believe their opponents are. They’ve fought a culture war with them for so long, they don’t much understand who they’re dealing with. They only see people who oppose all the believe in.

They don’t see folks who share many of their concerns. They don’t see that simple black-and-white opposition is not their only option. They don’t see what I suspect God sees when he looks down on us from his vantage point, and conservatives like yourself don’t see that all the hate and opposition you send our way only serves to turn us against you, and fall into our own trap of oppositionally narrowed logic and decision-making.

I guess the point would be that Christian’s political and social attitudes have become a stumbling block for others, as far as their beliefs and their ideas, and the strength of their faith is being used to backstop leaders who bring shame to people like them, and which discredit them in the eyes of other people.

Doesn’t seem to be the best way to persuade people, even if you are right.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 7, 2012 7:34 AM
Comment #335760

It’s interesting that the same people would would risk thier lives to save a whale, tree, snail darter, or frog; are more than willing to demand that a human baby die.

The reason there was such hatred for Palin by the left, was because she allowed her Down Syndrom baby to be born; and not only born, but also loved by all of their family. It is almost as if the left wants a perfect race of humans, similar to Hitler; by destroying any human who does not fit in with their idea of perfection.

Just as the left wants to live and die by the writing of Kenesian economics, Saul Alinski, and Cloward and Piven; Christians live and die by the writings of the bible. It infuriates the left that a group of people could actually put faith in God’s Word.

I belive I have read Warped Realty speaking of his Jewish heritage, and yet does not believe a baby to be human until he/she is born. Yet, God told the Jews in the Torah, that life begins at conception, so WR is a Jew in name only.

Stephen Daugherty wants to convince himself as well as others that he is a Christian; but how can one be a Christian when they have no problem with killing millions of babies simply for convience? Christians hold to the same Bible as the Jews, so the same Word that applies to the Jews applies to Christians.

Most liberals are infidels and therefore have no problem with killing babies inside or outside the womb, so the problem is moot with them.

Posted by: Billinflorida at February 7, 2012 9:23 AM
Comment #335761

Phx8
“Kctim attempts to spin it”

So what part was I spinning? SGK being a private foundation? Them having the right to donate and support who and what they want? That the two orgs would help more women than just one of them could alone? That the pro-abortion mob went out to destroy SGK for daring not to support PP?

Seems being “pro-choice” doesn’t apply to SGK, doesn’t it.
Just another example proving that the abortion movement has nothing to do with being pro-choice. They are pro-abortion and there is not choice involved.

Posted by: kctim at February 7, 2012 9:31 AM
Comment #335762

J2
Evangelicals are not the only ones who oppose abortion or paying for abortions.
PP does not rely on SGK in order to operate so it was not going to fold if they cut their funding. Claiming this was some kind of covert extreme move by evangelicals to stop PP is ridiculous. They do not have that amount of power and in a country that has made them The enemy of the nation, they will not get that kind of power.

“They should be ashamed for gambling with the lives of these young women for political gain.”

Really now?
SGK is the largest fund raiser for breast cancer awareness. They have raised over two billion dollars towards the “cure” to help women. Stopping funding to PP would not have changed any of that and they would have continued pumping money into that cause.
Yea, that’s pretty diabolical.

But now, the pro-abortion mob is out to destroy them because they dare not support what the mob said to. SGK support and donations may now fall and SGK will be half as effective as they once were. I myself have thousands of hours, miles and money in SGK, but no more. That means less money towards breast cancer awareness. But who cares, right? The important thing is that the pro-abortion mob has squeezed money from others. God only knows that they shouldn’t have to pay themselves.

Posted by: kctim at February 7, 2012 10:09 AM
Comment #335763
Komen contributions went to PP for the mammograms. 16 of 19 of the centers did not perform mammograms.

Tom I don’t think any of them provide mammograms do they? PP provides early detection exams and training for self detecting breast cancer in the early stages of the disease. The whole mammogram thing is just to confuse the issue.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 7, 2012 10:17 AM
Comment #335765

J2
Confuse the issue indeed.
It started out as PP saving thousands of lives with mammograms and then when caught, it has changed to PP saving thousands of lives with exams and just ‘references’ to doctors for a mammogram.

Posted by: kctim at February 7, 2012 10:45 AM
Comment #335766

One important fact. PP started by Margaret Sanger. The purpose was to do genocide on black babies. She wrote that. Was she lying? Was she telling the truth? The evidence is that more black babies are aborted than others. The plan is still in effect.

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at February 7, 2012 11:54 AM
Comment #335767

tom humes,

Except for the fact that Sanger was against abortion, and was for “negative” eugenics, not genocide, you might have a point. She was for sterilization for those deemed unfit to procreate, she was not for euthanasia.

Sanger wrote in her book “Women and the New Race” released in 1920;
“while there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization”.

Somehow that doesn’t jibe with you assertions.

Sanger also pushed for the abolition of the “Comstock Laws” which lumped information on birth control in with “obscene” materials.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 7, 2012 1:18 PM
Comment #335770

RF,

Warped, what is it like inside a brain that equates a tumor with a human fetus?

I’m not the one that equated the two. I was merely applying your definition of personhood. Tumors are the results of mutations of human cells, which means they have DNA that is unique from that of the host, but are still human. If we want a working definition of personhood, it must allow us to exclude tumors and include recently born infants.

Bill,

It’s interesting that the same people would would risk thier lives to save a whale, tree, snail darter, or frog; are more than willing to demand that a human baby die.

The reason there was such hatred for Palin by the left, was because she allowed her Down Syndrom baby to be born; and not only born, but also loved by all of their family. It is almost as if the left wants a perfect race of humans, similar to Hitler; by destroying any human who does not fit in with their idea of perfection.

Just as the left wants to live and die by the writing of Kenesian economics, Saul Alinski, and Cloward and Piven; Christians live and die by the writings of the bible. It infuriates the left that a group of people could actually put faith in God’s Word.
If you want to be taken seriously, you should cut out the hyperbole and simply discuss the points you want to make.

yet does not believe a baby to be human until he/she is born.
.

Actually that is not true. I do believe that a human being is not a baby until after he/she is born. However, I do believe personhood is achieved by a fetus once it reaches the point of viability in the womb coupled with significant development that infers to us that it might be sentient. From what I’ve read, this tends to happen around the end of the 2nd trimester, which means I’m willing to accept restricting 3rd trimester abortions to only the most rare circumstances (e.g. mother’s health is at risk). However, as far as I know the major complaints in the abortion controversy are about embryos and fetuses that have not developed to that stage yet.

I belive I have read Warped Realty speaking of his Jewish heritage, and yet does not believe a baby to be human until he/she is born. Yet, God told the Jews in the Torah, that life begins at conception, so WR is a Jew in name only.

My mother’s family is Jewish. I was raised within the Unitarian-Universalist Church, but I’ve recently experimented with Messianic Judaism for the past few years. I don’t like to use the word “life” because technically, sperm and ova fulfill the biological definitions of life.

Nowhere in the Tanakh (or in the New Testament) does God tell anyone that personhood begins at conception. Here is sampling what we do have:
In the Mosaic Law (Exodus 21:22, I believe) , the penalty for assaulting a pregnant woman and inducing a miscarriage is a monetary fine, which does not fit with the conservative claim that such an action is murder. Murder always carries a capital punishment in the Mosaic Law (contrast with the following verse, which prescribes capital punishment to someone who kills a pregnant woman).

Several Prophets have references to their time in their mothers’ wombs. One of the more often cited is the case of Jeremiah, who was destined to be a prophet even before he was born. However, Jeremiah also says that God knew him even before Jeremiah was in the womb, which also clashes with the claim that life begins at conception. I guess one could try to use Jeremiah to claim that personhood begins before conception, but the legal consequences of that are absurd.

TH,

One important fact. PP started by Margaret Sanger. The purpose was to do genocide on black babies. She wrote that. Was she lying? Was she telling the truth? The evidence is that more black babies are aborted than others. The plan is still in effect.

Sanger has been dead for almost half a century and was personally opposed to abortion. I don’t think she is terribly relevant to this discussion. I think the disproportionate number of minority women who seek abortions is a result of the fact that minority women are more likely to be living in poverty than non-minority women, and it is not the result of some conspiracy to eliminate African-Americans.

Posted by: Warped Reality at February 7, 2012 2:00 PM
Comment #335775

Sad to see that not a single woman has commented in this thread yet. Since this topic is about women’s health, I guess it’d be good for at least one woman in WB to weigh in here, no? If you gentlemen don’t mind?

Well, the latest news is that Komen Rightwing lobbyist Karen Handel has just stepped down (or maybe she was fired but they allowed her to try to save face by claiming she is stepping down?). The fact is, Komen may never recover from this politicized mess they created for themselves — because it takes years to gain credibility, and only a moment to lose it.
And let’s be clear: Komen has definitely lost their credibility over this. Their reputation now lies in tatters because they ultimately allowed Rightwing politics to destroy their reputation and corporate brand name. They will now no longer be known simply as that Breast Cancer Charity, they will henceforth be known as the Rightwing Anti-Choice Breast Cancer Charity.

Actually, a huge number of America women feel that Komen lost their credibility many years ago. I know I certainly did, and that’s when I stopped donating to them. Because I knew I couldn’t support any “Cancer Charity” the minute they began the large scale corporate branding (or “pinking” if you will) of cancer-causing products that are very obviously detrimental to women’s health. Komen has courted and accepted corporate sponsors for things such as cars, and alcohol, and all kinds of chemically-laden cosmetics and plastic do-dads, and plastic running shoes, and chemically-laden fast food.
The moment all that began to appear I immediately understood Komen was no longer an actual breast cancer prevention charity, but had in actuality become a big corporate business unto themselves.
Let’s face it folks, no HONEST women’s cancer charity would ever be proud to go around painting buckets of greasy Kentucky Fried Chicken bright artificial pink simply to collect a bit of cash with every single cancer-causing bucket that is sold.

This was further reinforced when Komen began aggressively defending their trademarks, marketing tools and corporate brand image to the tune of millions of dollars every year. They’ve been using millions of dollars of DONATED money simply to harass and sue much smaller cancer organizations who (unknowingly) dared to use Komen’s copyrighted phrase “for the cure” or their trademarked color pink anywhere in their names or on their marketing materials. Seriously, how much could Komen truly care about breast cancer when they’re out there suing the crap out of tiny grassroots charities like Cupcakes for a Cure, Surfing for a Cure, Kites for a Cure, or Par for The Cure?

On top of all that, Komen has taken a regressive stance on breast cancer screening in recent years. They’re still pushing their early detection message with unquestioning support for yearly mammograms for low risk women under 50 — and for expensive and often unnecessary digital mamography, and often unnecessary but wide-spread biopsies, and automatic-mandatory chemotherapy (incredibly expensive). In these areas Komen, just like the rest of the multi-billion dollar breast cancer industry, has made the choice to ignore the latest mammography guidelines that were put out by the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force in 2009. I think it’s very telling that a breast cancer charity would choose stick to older guidelines rather than actually look into what would be best for women’s health.

So, when Komen decided to pull this rightwing crap over Planned Parenhood many women were not all that surprised. It’s really all of a piece with what they’ve come to represent over a great many years: a Rightwing Corporation that wants to call themselves a non-profit charity, but whose income topped $350 million in 2008. The average salary of a CEO for a non-profit in America is less than $80,000 a year. Komen CEO Nancy Brinker’s salary? $531,924 per year. Makes perfect sense.
Getting rid of rightwing lobbyist Karen Handel, then hiring an enormously expensive Washington PR firm to try to repair their image, and now bringing on board GOP insider Ari Fleischer as an adviser? Makes perfect sense.
Because paying Rightwing Washington insiders big salaries is the Komen goal, and “breast cancer” has merely become the tool.

Nonetheless, serious damage has been done. Komen did this to themselves, and an enormous number of Americans won’t ever trust them or donate to them again.

C&J:

When you make laws forcing Catholic institutions to actively support practices odious to their values, you are destroying choice and diversity as well as imposing a monoculture of values in a tyrannous way. This is a serious overstep of government’s legitimate rights.

This is bunk. The moment Catholic institutions went into the healthcare business they should automatically lose all rights to place themselves outside of the rules that apply to every other business in America. Religion should never be allowed to trump what is best for any women’s health.
Businesses in America shouldn’t be allowed to discriminate in America on the basis of race, color OR religion.
If the Catholic Church doesn’t like having to follow rules that apply to every other business in this nation, then maybe they should get out of the healthcare business and go back to focusing their attention on strictly not for profit religious activities.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 2:35 PM
Comment #335776

Catholic Hospitals are PRIVATE hospitals. Therefore they dictate which treatments they will or will NOT do much like any other PRIVATE institution. So now Adrienne remember seperation of Church and State you don’t want church in government affairs so don’t put government in church affairs. You don’t like Catholic Hospitals go somewhere else. By the way I’m NOT Catholic. By the way some of the best Hospitals in my city are Catholic Hospitals.

Posted by: KAP at February 7, 2012 2:49 PM
Comment #335779

You think because they’re private they should be allowed to endanger women’s health. This too, is bunk.
With widespread STD’s contraception saves women’s lives. Contraception for women with heart conditions and diabetes means saving their lives. Emergency abortions of doomed pregnancies means saving women’s lives.
Catholic hospitals in America should not to allowed to kill women for religious reasons.
Just because “the Pope says” shouldn’t be considered an acceptable answer when any healthcare business wants to claim they have carte blanche to harm, damage, or kill any American woman.
Period.

Like I said, if the Catholic Church doesn’t like doing business in America, they can get out of the healthcare business in America.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 2:58 PM
Comment #335780


The claim is the right to discriminate based on religious beliefs.

Posted by: jlw at February 7, 2012 3:00 PM
Comment #335781

This is working out really well. Conservatives have effectively come out against PP, birth control, Clint Eastwood, and American cars. Is there any major constituency they have not managed to alienate in the past few days?

Posted by: phx8 at February 7, 2012 3:05 PM
Comment #335784

“if the Catholic Church doesn’t like doing business in America, they can get out of the healthcare business in America”

Absolutely correct Adrienne. The millions of people who benefit from Catholic Hospitals and the billions of dollars SGK raise for awareness means nothing. It’s ALL about abortion.

KAP
Private no longer means crap when it comes to religion and abortion.
You can’t tell people God doesn’t want you to have an abortion, but you sure as hell can use government to force people to give them.

Posted by: kctim at February 7, 2012 3:21 PM
Comment #335787

That6’s BS Adrienne every Hospital has to at least stabalize you in order to transfer to a facility that will do abortions. It’s all about abortion on demand isn’t it Adrienne.

Posted by: KAP at February 7, 2012 3:59 PM
Comment #335788
The millions of people who benefit from Catholic Hospitals and the billions of dollars SGK raise for awareness means nothing. It’s ALL about abortion.

Actually, it’s all about women’s health — and the Catholic Church and Komen have proved they don’t really care all that much about women’s health when it comes into conflict with their political and religious ideology.
As for abortion, that too has to do with women’s health and well being.
So let’s be perfectly clear here: if abortion can’t be considered an acceptable part of women’s health and well being, that means it’s okay with the America people that women should go back to a time when we are forced to have our bodies endure as many pregnancies as possible, and that it’s okay if we frequently eventually die giving birth to one too many children. Or dying from getting back alley abortions because abortion has been made illegal. Or die because some religiously fanatical doctor wants to claim that it’s “God’s will” for a woman to die while in the agony of complications during childbirth because a fetus is actually more important than any woman’s life.


You can’t tell people God doesn’t want you to have an abortion, but you sure as hell can use government to force people to give them.

Yes, it’s clear that in emergency situations the government should force doctors in Catholic hospitals to have someone on hand who will perform abortions in order to uphold the oath doctors take to save ALL of their patient’s lives.
Otherwise, what you’re saying is that it should be considered acceptable for women to die in order to uphold the religion of whatever doctor(s) happens to be on duty at a hospital. That in certain situations, and with certain doctors, religion can and should be allowed to trump the lives of American women.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 4:01 PM
Comment #335790
That6’s BS Adrienne every Hospital has to at least stabalize you in order to transfer to a facility that will do abortions.

I already provided proof to you in the other thread where we discussed this issue that despite the fact that all hospitals are expected to stabilize women before transferring them that this often isn’t and hasn’t been the case and that women have suffered and been seriously harmed as a result.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 4:08 PM
Comment #335791

“Actually, it’s all about women’s health”

IF it was, you wouldn’t be calling for these hospitals and charities to stop helping millions of women just because a few women have to go to a different hospital to have an abortion or mammogram.

I know I’m hard hearted for promoting personal responsibility, but telling private orgs to take their billions of dollars and all their help and go to hell, really takes the cake.

Posted by: kctim at February 7, 2012 4:56 PM
Comment #335792

As I stated in that other thread those Hospitals should be closed. Your not about womens health your just for the right to abort on demand. Those Catholic hospitals provide screenings for all sorts of female troubles and problems, they just won’t abort or provde contraceptives. So Adrienne your all about choice just choose not to use a Catholic Hospital if your looking for an abortion. There are plenty of other Hospitals around that will gladly provide those services for you.

Posted by: KAP at February 7, 2012 4:59 PM
Comment #335804
IF it was, you wouldn’t be calling for these hospitals and charities to stop helping millions of women just because a few women have to go to a different hospital to have an abortion or mammogram.

You prove with this comment how little you think of those “few” women and whether they live or die — and it’s disgusting.
Imagine if you had a burst appendix and you were rushed to a hospital only to be told they don’t believe in performing emergency appendectomies because the appendix is “sacred”, and then they let you lay there in agony for hours waiting to be transferred to a far away hospital, and possibly die because you didn’t receive proper care in time. This is what these so-called “religious” hospitals do to women who need emergency abortions. It’s idiotic and INSANE — and you’re defending it.

quote text
I know I’m hard hearted for promoting personal responsibility, but telling private orgs to take their billions of dollars and all their help and go to hell, really takes the cake.

You know who said “go to hell”? Komen — to every woman who must use Planned Parenthood for their gynecological health needs because they just can’t afford the high cost of “free market” health care.
Thankfully, Planned Parenthood no longer needs the 700,000 dollars that Komen gives them for cancer screening — they just made well over a million dollars in only a few days after the stupid rightwing political stunt that Komen pulled. Now that people are aware of that Komen is an anti-poor, anti-choice “charity”, lots of the money that used to get funneled through Komen will now going to start being donated directly to Planned Parenthood as a result of those idiots deciding to destroy their own reputation.

Your not about womens health your just for the right to abort on demand.

I’m all for women’s health, and for women’s right to choose.
This automatically includes medically safe and sanitary abortions — because unlike in the past, this has saved enormous numbers of women’s lives.

The problem with you anti-choice fanatics is that you’re sadly very hung up and obsessed with everything having to do with sex, reproduction, and contraception. And when it is all boiled down, it always comes back to the fact that this is an issue of people using religion because they want the power to exert complete control over women and our sexuality. So many so-called Christian’s seem to think that women should rightfully be treated like second class citizens — and that they must therefore be told by you what we can and can’t do with our bodies.

But the vast majority of women (including many women on the political right) aren’t fooled by all these empty religious arguments we often hear. We know we have the right to make choices about our own health for ourselves — and we’re not going back in time just because some religious control freaks liked things better that way. Try as you might, ultimately we’re not going to allow you to force us to become mothers against our wills, nor can you kill us simply to enact fanatical religious punishment upon us.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 6:10 PM
Comment #335808

I get it Adrienne, it’s all about choice as long as that choice agrees with you. No one else matters. Religious beliefs do not matter. I’m not anti choice you have the right to do with your body as you see fit and the Catholic Hospital or whatever religious organization has the right to choose NOT to aid you in your choice. No one is forcing you to become mothers against your will but don’t force any Christian organization to go against their beliefs. Many facilities are ready and willing to aid in safe and sanitary abortions. You don’t have to go to a Catholic Hospital and that is your choice.

Posted by: KAP at February 7, 2012 6:59 PM
Comment #335815
Catholic Hospital or whatever religious organization has the right to choose NOT to aid you in your choice.

What you’re saying is that you think it’s a fine “choice” if women who need emergency abortions (and their families) simply have to accept the risk of dying in Catholic/Evangelical hospitals because they have every right to refuse to give them a safe medical procedure that will save their life for “religious reasons.”

And I’m supposed to learn to respect how very “Christian” that is?

The way I’m supposed to respect the “Christians” who insisted that Terri Shiavo had to be kept on life support permanently, despite her own stated wish and that of her husband? The way I’m supposed to respect as “Christian” the Catholic Church allowing generations of children to be raped and abused, and doing nothing instead of making sure that their many mentally sick and twisted pediphile priests went to jail? The way I’m supposed to respect the “Christian” Evangelicals who insist that homosexuality is a “choice” and that people just need to “pray away their gay” in order to be accepted by themselves, and naturally their “Loving God?”

Sorry, but some things don’t deserve an ounce of respect. And allowing women to die in order to show “respect” on behalf of a hospital or doctor’s antiquated, authoritarian religious beliefs happens to be one of them.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 8:16 PM
Comment #335816
if women who need emergency abortions

I think KAP is talking about elective abortions, not emergency abortions.

Posted by: Warped Reality at February 7, 2012 8:18 PM
Comment #335819

Warped, A Catholic Hospital would Not do an emergency abortion either. But would by law stabalize and transfer to a facility that would, at least that is what they should do, and in my city they do, usually to our Metro General Hospital. No religious organization should be compeled to do any procedure that is against their beliefs.
Adrienne, Sorry but if you don’t respect the values of a Christian, How do expect them to respect your values? By the way I have no respect for the priest or ministers that rape and abuse children but have less respect for a person that gages a whole group on the few.

Posted by: KAP at February 7, 2012 8:57 PM
Comment #335827

I wonder how many more Democrat politicians feel betrayed by that lying SOB in the WH? It’s a real shame these people did’nt take time to read it before they signed on.

“Dem Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper: I Wouldn’t Have Voted for Obamacare If I’d Known About HHS Regulation”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dem-rep-kathy-dahlkemper-i-wouldnt-have-voted-obamacare-if-id-known-about-hhs-regulation_626302.html

Posted by: Bill at February 7, 2012 9:28 PM
Comment #335832

No sob’s in the white house but there are plenty here.

Posted by: Jeff at February 7, 2012 10:10 PM
Comment #335833

Bill,

What nonsense. Former Rep. Dahlkemper, in the article you cited, claims that Obamacare forces Catholic hospitals to perform abortions. She mixes insurance with providers. Lets be clear. The health care financing bill has to do with health insurance. The issue has to do with federal subsidies for private insurance purchased by private individuals on a private insurance market which may or may not provide for abortions. Obamacare doesn’t force Catholic hospitals to do anything with regard to abortion. The final bill and executive order requires that any federal subsidy for low income individuals private insurance purchase be segregated from any abortion services offered under a private policy.

If you don’t like private health insurers providing abortion services, then I suggest you direct your ire toward private insurance companies.

Posted by: Rich at February 7, 2012 10:18 PM
Comment #335835

Rich, It’s the CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICES that they are going to be forced to provide in their health coverage insurance for their employees. Nothing to do with abortion. Read the last sentence first paragraph of the link Bill provided.

Posted by: KAP at February 7, 2012 10:41 PM
Comment #335836
A Catholic Hospital would Not do an emergency abortion either. But would by law stabalize and transfer to a facility that would, at least that is what they should do, and in my city they do, usually to our Metro General Hospital. No religious organization should be compeled to do any procedure that is against their beliefs.

How would you feel if a woman, died because a religious hospital refused to transfer her or because the transfer cost her a few too many precious minutes?

To be honest, I don’t know how would feel. Unlike the case with pharmacies, I have fewer qualms with letting a Catholic Hospital exercise their conscience and refuse to perform abortions.

Posted by: Warped Reality at February 7, 2012 10:45 PM
Comment #335837

Any doctor who would refuse to perform a life saving operation in an emergency situation, for religious reasons or any other reason, means he is a man who is in the wrong profession. Indeed, it means this person never became a DOCTOR at all. Because any “doctor” who who would withhold care and let a patient suffer or die for his own selfish, self-centered reasons happens to be breaking the oath every doctor takes to provide care for ALL of their patients in their hour of need.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 11:05 PM
Comment #335838

Warped, Did I not say that the hospital should be closed down if they refuse to transfer or are neglegent in another thread. Emergency abortions are rare and account for less than 1/2 of 1% of all abortions in this country to date since Roe V Wade, I googled that awhile back. So in reality abortions are elective and in most cases a form of contraception.

Posted by: KAP at February 7, 2012 11:10 PM
Comment #335839
It’s the CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICES that they are going to be forced to provide in their health coverage insurance for their employees.

Honestly, I cannot believe that in the year 2012 there is actually an outraged debate going on over the idea of contraception in America! It is SO incredibly stupid and embarrassing that our American political debates make us look so damn regressive, backward, and ignorant.
For pity’s sake — it’s like were still surrounded by nothing but buckled-up, uptight Puritans who just stepped off the damn Mayflower!

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 11:20 PM
Comment #335840
Did I not say that the hospital should be closed down if they refuse to transfer or are neglegent in another thread.

I must’ve missed it. Sorry. To be honest, I wouldn’t close down a hospital over that issue; a fine would be sufficient.

Posted by: Warped Reality at February 7, 2012 11:30 PM
Comment #335841
Emergency abortions are rare and account for less than 1/2 of 1% of all abortions in this country to date since Roe V Wade, I googled that awhile back. So in reality abortions are elective and in most cases a form of contraception.

Oh — so you’ve Googled it! Well then — say no more! This means you couldn’t possibly be talking out of your back end!
LOL!

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 11:31 PM
Comment #335842
To be honest, I wouldn’t close down a hospital over that issue; a fine would be sufficient.

A fine for attempted murder of a pregnant woman seems sufficient?

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 11:33 PM
Comment #335843
attempted murder

It’s not murder, it’s negligence leading to a wrongful death.

Posted by: Warped Reality at February 7, 2012 11:40 PM
Comment #335844

Ok Adrienne, out of the approx. 3700 abortions preformed per day, how many are life threatining and the mother will die in minutes if abortion is not preformed? I’d bet 99.999% are convenience abortions.

Posted by: KAP at February 7, 2012 11:43 PM
Comment #335845

No, it’s Murder. And, as thoroughly Premeditated as it gets.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 7, 2012 11:45 PM
Comment #335846

Adrienne,

Now, that’s absurdly hyperbolic. Catholic hospitals do not intentionally kill women.

Posted by: Warped Reality at February 7, 2012 11:53 PM
Comment #335847
Now, that’s absurdly hyperbolic. Catholic hospitals do not intentionally kill women.

No, it’s not hyperbolic. I didn’t say that lightly, and I’m being completely sincere. Every single woman entering a Catholic hospital while pregnant and miscarrying or experiencing various sorts of complications with her pregnancy is in fact putting herself in jeopardy of being permanently harmed or even killed on behalf of fanatical religious beliefs.
This is due to the fact that many Catholic hospitals in America seem to have a guiding policy that is intended to ensure that the life of a fetus will always be considered of primary importance, and the life of the mother, of secondary importance. As a result, these hospitals are actually torturing a lot of the women who end up in their care in emergency situations.

I hope you will read this and weep — I know I did:

When There’s a Heartbeat: Miscarriage Management in Catholic-Owned Hospitals

Whoever has been making such barbaric policies, and/or going along with them on behalf of the Catholic Church should be sued over these clearly dangerous, inhumane, fetus-fetishizing practices.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 8, 2012 1:31 AM
Comment #335849

Adrienne,

I have been somewhat confused by this discussion since it was my understanding that Catholic doctrine has long held that abortion to preserve the life of the woman was permissible. The article you linked confirms that interpretation.

On its face, then, there doesn’t seem to be any conflict. But, as the article points out, the devil is in the details. Restrictive interpretations of that doctrine by some Catholic hospital administrators have created a conflict between medical “best practices” and religious doctrine. The solution seems obvious. Hospital guidelines should be aligned with generally accepted medical best practices. But, don’t hold your breathe when it comes to emotional issues like abortion.

Posted by: Rich at February 8, 2012 8:44 AM
Comment #335852

Ah, Adrienne

“You prove with this comment how little you think of those “few” women and whether they live or die — and it’s disgusting.”

I guess that then proves how little you think of the millions of women Catholic Hospitals and Komen help and whether they live or die.
That puts me in the care about millions category and you in the care about a few abortions category. I place the health of millions ahead of the abortions of a few and you place the abortions of a few ahead of the health of millions.
It’s clear that what we are concerned about differs greatly.

“Imagine if you had a burst appendix…”

Seriously? Using a rare and extreme example to justify a rare and extreme situation? Sigh, ok.

First, I am not defending “it,” I am defending freedom of religion and individual choice. While you and I may not care about religion, the vast majority do and their rights are just as important as ours.
Second, if you want or need an abortion, don’t go to a place that does not provide them. You don’t go to Home Depot to buy your groceries, do you?

“You know who said “go to hell”? Komen — to every woman who must use Planned Parenthood…”

Fair enough, believe that SGK told that to the 130,000 women who received exams through planned parenthood if you want, I just find it amazing and extremely selfish for you to tell the exact same thing to the millions of other women who benefit from SGK who don’t use planned parenthood.

“Now that people are aware of that Komen is an anti-poor, anti-choice “charity”, lots of the money that used to get funneled through Komen will now going to start being donated directly to Planned Parenthood as a result of those idiots deciding to destroy their own reputation”

Ah, having another OWS ‘bigger and better than it really is’ moment, are we?

SGK is about “The Cure” not about being pro-abortion. Even if the pro-abortion mob gets their way and destroys SGK, they will still have their fundraisers and raise some money for breast cancer awareness. It probably won’t be close to the 2 billion dollars that have collected for the cause, and that is sad for anybody who actually cares about women.

What’s funny is that you seem to believe that an org that you approve of will be as successful as SGK and start collecting that kind of money overnight. In case you didn’t know, people of ALL beliefs support SGK, not just pro-abortion fanatics. I have walked miles for SGK with a lefty who believes in government funded abortions on demand on one side and a nice Christian lady who is against abortion on the other. It didn’t matter that I am strongly against government provided abortions or that I am an atheist. We talked about our loved ones, who we know or have lost and how great it was that so many people of all beliefs show up to help the search for a cure.
It will take years, probably decades for another org to be able to accomplish that.
But hey, at least the really important thing, the pro-abortion mob, got in the headlines.

Posted by: kctim at February 8, 2012 11:06 AM
Comment #335888

kctim,

That puts me in the care about millions category and you in the care about a few abortions category. I place the health of millions ahead of the abortions of a few and you place the abortions of a few ahead of the health of millions. It’s clear that what we are concerned about differs greatly.

This is bullsh*t — and whats more, I know you know it’s bullsh*t.

Re: SGK

show up to help the search for a cure.

I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for Komen to produce a cure for breast cancer. They don’t allocate very much of their money toward scientific research. And besides, Komen is no longer really a charity. It’s a Big Business — much like the entire multi-billion dollar breast cancer industry. So, finding a cure for breast cancer means their big gravy train would have to come to an end.
That’s why I support much smaller breast cancer charities these days — ones that are far more dedicated and motivated toward medical research.

But hey, at least the really important thing, the pro-abortion mob, got in the headlines.

You mean pro-choice, and yes that’s always a good thing. After all, we’re in the majority. Just because the anti-choice religious fanatics scream loudly doesn’t mean anything.
However, what’s MOST important here is that what Komen tried to do (namely trying to demonize Planned Parenthood and politicize the concept of breast cancer when this cancer can strike any woman, anywhere) was exposed to the entire country — and loudly rejected as being very wrong.

And btw, let’s give credit where credit is due: there are pro-choice women standing on the Right who fully understand how the GOP’s continual attacks on Planned Parenthood and women’s health issues in general, is a truly terrible thing — and politically very stupid.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 9, 2012 12:37 AM
Comment #335920

So let me get this straight. The conservatives are up in arms because they are told their religious rights are being violated by Obama because of this ruling the insurance must include contraceptives. They are being told that Obama is waging a war on religion. is that right so far?

Yet the constitution says we the people not we the coporate business entity, right? The first amendment says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”

So if I understand the rule in question it does not force anyone to take contraceptives against their religious beliefs. It does say those business entities must provide insurance that covers contraceptives. The Catholic church has business entities and/or operates a business with employees that cannot get contraceptives as part of their health care plan. So it is the health insurance companies that must provide the coverage not the church. It is the employees that pay for the insurance as it is part of the compensation package.
Although the Church is not a person that is covered by the first amendment they do choose to impose the church’s religious beliefs upon those that work for one of the business units operated by the church. So if the employees are not a Catholic they cannot get contraceptives through their insurance plans and if they are Catholic they do not have to take the contraceptives.

Seems the Obama administration got it right to me. Seems the conservatives are falling for the political spin. What am I missing.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 9, 2012 12:49 PM
Comment #335931

Adrienne

Saying that I don’t care about the health of women simply because I believe in individual choice is equally bullsh*t.

“They don’t allocate very much of their money toward scientific research”

Ok, how much do they allocate then? 62%? 40%? How does that compare to others who provide the same amount?

I’m glad you support the charity of your choice, would be nice if you offered SGK the same amount of freedom.
But please don’t try to suggest SGK hasn’t had the greatest impact on breast cancer awareness becoming a household concern.

“You mean pro-choice, and yes that’s always a good thing.”

Um, no. I mean pro-abortion. IF they were pro-choice, they would afford the same choice to everybody and they most certainly do not. I know it’s not convienent, but choice is a two way street. As in, you choose what to do with your body and I choose if and how I support it.
I’ll keep my politics out of your uterus when you keep my wallet out of your uterus.

“After all, we’re in the majority. Just because the anti-choice religious fanatics scream loudly doesn’t mean anything.”

Granted, for some it is about religion, but for others it is about being forced to pay. I wonder how much the pro-abortion crowd would really be in the majority if the choice of all was of concern?

“However, what’s MOST important here is that what Komen tried to do (namely trying to demonize Planned Parenthood and politicize the concept of breast cancer when this cancer can strike any woman, anywhere) was exposed to the entire country — and loudly rejected as being very wrong.”

Sad but expected. What’s MOST important is that a private org has the right to choose who gets their help. As evident by the lack of coverage for other orgs SGK doesn’t give funding to, this would not be so ugly if PP didn’t provide abortions. And, in case you hadn’t noticed, abortion is a political issue, breast cancer awareness is not.

” — and politically very stupid.”

Yes, some women on the right are indeed pro-abortion. Luckily, they know that abortion does not trump their beliefs on other things. Some support places like PP, some do not.
It all boils down to this though, as long as the pro-abortion mob keeps demanding others have no choice in the matter, people will keep trying to stop them in one way or another.

Posted by: kctim at February 9, 2012 2:53 PM
Comment #335935

j2t2:

the rule in question it does not force anyone to take contraceptives against their religious beliefs.

What am I missing.

Isn’t it obvious? There are a percentage of Americans who stand completely against individual freedoms, and want imposed Theocracy in America. They aren’t a very large percentage, but they’ve become extremely loud and obnoxious, so they get a lot of media attention. This deludes them into thinking they’re actually in the majority, even though they aren’t.

These so-called “Christians” have long been using religion as a political tactic to gain power and control — in order to assert that they have the right to force their beliefs on everyone. This is all of a piece whether we talk about abortion, or contraception, or same sex relationships and marriage, etc. No one is trying to force any of these people to embrace ANYTHING they don’t want to embrace.

If they don’t approve of abortions? They don’t have to have them. If they don’t like contraception? They don’t have to use them. If they don’t like homosexuality and same sex marriage? They don’t have to have gay relationships, and don’t have to get married to a person of the same sex.

But that is clearly not good enough for them — because these are authoritarians who want the POWER TO CONTROL the actions of every individual in this nation, and the ability to harshly discriminate against those who don’t agree with their “religious” viewpoints.

And when Americans object and say:
DO WHAT YOU WANT — BUT LEAVE US ALONE! WE DON’T WANT TO LIVE WITHIN THE NARROW CONFINES OF YOUR THEOCRACY!
They this group starts screaming that people (who only want the freedom that was very clearly granted to us by the first amendment) are somehow ATTACKING THEM and WAGING WAR UPON THEIR FAITH.
An utterly ridiculous stance — but this too gets a lot of media attention.

In truth, it is these authoritarians who are waging war. It is a Crusade against American Liberty and Freedom. And so they relentlessly attack everyone who disagrees with them; saving the most virulent abuse and hatred for those who they are unable to control through fear. Such as social progressives. Or women who demand freedom over their reproductive rights. Or gay people who demand full civil rights and liberties. Or atheists and agnostics who can see through all their sanctimonious BS straight to the fraudulent character of these authoritarians — who actually think they can disguise their blatant sexism, jingoism and megalomania with labels like “faith” and “family values.”

Indeed, this small percentage makes a sad mockery out of concepts of American Liberty and Religious Freedom.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 9, 2012 3:33 PM
Comment #335936
Ok, how much do they allocate then? 62%? 40%? How does that compare to others who provide the same amount?

The answer, according to Komen’s own figures is 19%.

Instead of research into cures, or into the causes of breast cancer Komen chooses to spend all their time making their entire message about only one thing: Screening and only screening saves lives. Specifically, mammography screening — not MRI’s or ultrasound. Not women having nationwide access to continuous quality health care. Not newer and improved treatments being developed to treat breast cancer. Not targeted therapies for specific types of breast cancer. Not biological, genetic, molecular, dietary, or environmental factors into what is actually causing so many women to get breast cancer — all information that is as yet unknown — precisely because there has not been enough scientific research into those things.

Komen completely ignores the concept that women even might be able to AVOID getting breast cancer in the first place! And, they have now chosen to stick with older guidelines even thought the latest research and new guidelines being put out are saying that women have been getting far too many mammograms — and that this is dangerous.
No, with Komen it’s always been all about Mammography Screening, and women can never get too many, period. Komen and Brinker the CEO has been saying the exact same damn thing about breast cancer for 30 years while raking in huge mountains of cash — as a result they have sadly become a tragic joke.

Additionally, here’s some background info on how Komen has actually been fighting against women’s health needs in America, and how they’re nothing but rightwing corporate shills.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 9, 2012 4:28 PM
Comment #335966

Full support for finally having the ability to easily obtain contraceptives:
Students At Catholic Colleges Protest Lack Of Access To Birth Control
Article also discusses how contraceptives can also be a serious matter concerning their health — and that this doesn’t necessarily having anything to do with having sex.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 10, 2012 3:05 AM
Comment #335967

Oops, that should read “have anything to do with…”

Posted by: Adrienne at February 10, 2012 3:07 AM
Post a comment