Comments on: March For Life 2005

By: Annie B.

Annie B. — Thu, 27 Jan 2005 23:59:01 +0000

Great point, Chris Roberts. I’ve often said that no oneâ€™s â€œrightsâ€ overrule a pre-born infantâ€™s right to live. With the right to drive, people must drive responsibly and consider other human beings on the road. With the right to drink, they must drink responsibly and not drive or otherwise put other human beings in danger. There are laws governing these responsibilities: with all rights, we must still honor the rights of other human beings to life.

“Reproductive rights,” today, are the only rights that donâ€™t come with this same responsibility to our fellow human beings.

That will change.

By: Chris Roberts

Chris Roberts — Wed, 26 Jan 2005 02:45:43 +0000

Pondering this on the ride home while hearing of Hillary’s exploits. The pro-abortion rights crowd has it all wrong. We shouldn’t call it reproductive rights, but rather reproductive responsibilities.

This use of the word “rights” absconds the responsibilities of engaging in sexual intercourse. But that’s the whole point.

By: ProLifeBlogs

ProLifeBlogs — Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:53:09 +0000

Thousands March for Life
Thousands of pro-life demonstrators yesterday rallied on the frozen, snow-covered Ellipse, and then marched to the Supreme Court as part of the 32nd annual protest against the high court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion. – Washing…

By: birdwoman

birdwoman — Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:41:52 +0000

I am not a pro-life, and though I am not plugging for hits, I do explain why fully on my own website back in early January.

I do, however, honor and respect the right of those who are to gather and protest and keep bringing up the arguments on the side of the unborn. People have to see all the sides of the problem so that real, informed discourse can be had.

(*)>

By: James C. Hess

James C. Hess — Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:03:22 +0000

I am glad and please to hear of such event. But it angers me that Hillary Clinton is now trying to use the abortion issue to gain traction for her forthcoming Presidential run: She wants to achieve common ground between ‘abortion foes’ (her words, not mine) and ‘abortion rights activists’.

I have a suggestion for Clinton, but I won’t verbalize it here.

By: The Mulatto Advocate

The Mulatto Advocate — Tue, 25 Jan 2005 07:43:11 +0000

Not So Happy Anniversary
Today, people of conscience took to the streets to mark mourn the 32nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade. I mourn with them. I won’t even get into the argument, since I think Ambra does it better in this post. Just…

By: Evon Bachaus

Evon Bachaus — Tue, 25 Jan 2005 03:24:02 +0000

La Shawn Because I once belonged to Minnesota St. Joan Community, a Catholic feminist group with ecumenical membership, I thought you might like to read the life statement the group came up with. The group was founded by the my friend, the late Mary Kennedy Lamb. There is a Social Action Award in her name from the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis.

“LIFE STATEMENT:

“We, as Christians, wish to re-affirm our belief that the presence of God is expressed in all of creation. Therefore, all of life has value and is worthy of respect and care.

“We believe that human life especially expresses this divine presence, and, therefore, all human persons, regardless of age, sex, mental or physical ability, have the right to life, to the freedom to discover their own meanings in life, to develop their own potentials and to be treated with dignity.

“Realizing that life involves many ambiguities—many forms of suffering and anxiety—and acknowledging our limitations as human beings, we, nevertheless rededicate ourselves to working for the formation of a society which is most supportive of the biological, psychological, and spiritual growth of all its members.

“Those who are Christian feminists have a special responsibility to speak out in favor of the sacredness of life. Since some members of contemporary society assume that there is an automatic opposition between being for the right to life and for women’s rights, we need to assert that both of these convictions arise from the same Source, and both deserve our concern and attention.

“Women must not relinquish those human inclinations which have resulted in their traditional preservation of life for the unborn, for children, for the physically disabled, for our retarded sisters and brothers, for the poor, for the shunned, for the emotionally sick, for the war-injured, for the abused, for the elderly and for the terminally ill. Nor should they misuse freedom by repeating that recurring mistake of history, the tendency of the powerful to destroy the weak and the helpless. The new feminists must insist on an ethic based on a response to the most profound instincts we human beings possess.

“But women will not assume this burden alone. Men must share the responsibility for the creation of a new social order characterized primarily by its concern for the powerless. Those who are the leaders of the Church founded by Jesus Christ, who loved all equally, must especially support life in its entirety and fullness of life for all.

“We believe that extending equality of opportunity to all persons in the Church is the best sign of authentic and consistent belief in the value of life.

“We further believe, that, when inequities on the basis of sex are removed, the strong Voice of the Church, speaking in tones of justice on moral issues, will again be heard with respect.

“When these beliefs and convictions seem to be in conflict with traditional assumptions, we can turn to St. John’s Gospel for inspiration. Prior to the raising of Lazarus, Jesus announced to Martha: “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me will live even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.” In spite of her incomplete understanding, she is asked to believe in the Lord’s ability to reconcile the apparently irreconcilable, the transition from death to life. Martha’s affirmative answer reveals a faith required of us as we try to reconcile the apparently irreconcilable between the “life” and “equality” issues. When we falter, we can receive assurance from the question asked of Martha at the time of the miracle: “Didn’t I tell you that you would see God’s glory if you believed?” (John 11:40)

“Our reward for believing is eternal life, now.”

MINNESOTA ST. JOAN COMMUNITY

For my Reformed theology, this statement is too optimistic about human nature but I still think the statement is beautiful. I worked on it.

Evon

By: Myopic Zeal

Myopic Zeal — Tue, 25 Jan 2005 01:47:16 +0000

March for Life
President Bush called in to the 32nd annual “March for Life” today. Here is a transcript.

Interesting fact (HT: LaShawn Barber).

Minority women constitute only about 26% of the female population (age 15-44) in the United States, but they under…

By: OKIE on the LAM - In LA

OKIE on the LAM - In LA — Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:54:22 +0000

March for Life in D.C.
I didn’t know that the March for Life Fund’s event was happening today until I saw footage of it on FOXNews during lunch and then looked at La Shawn Barber’s Blog. CNSNews.com has this story on it.

March for Life Brings Pro-Life Demonstrators to …

By: Scylla

Scylla — Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:19:44 +0000

Thanks for drawing attention to this, Ms. Barber! Unlike the “March for Women’s Lives” (a.k.a. Children’s Deaths) on the mall this summer, this pro-life march has largely slipped under the radar. Were it not for the president’s call of support this morning (see fox and cnn for a mention), it would likely have gone unnoticed altogether. For more comment, see my blog, Sanity Fair (sfair.blogspot.com). It’s an outrage!