« Three women who make a difference | Main | Supreme Court Travesty »

Wednesday, April 18, 2007



On Thursday the United States Office of food and medicines approved for use in the United States pill RU-486, which provides for abortion and an alternative to surgical abortion.


There is one idea in this message that is correct: People of faith who resort to violence in their attempt to rid the world of a grave moral evil such as abortion are no different than the abortion providers. However, every other assumption and claim is false. The destruction of innocent human life (including the 47 million-plus abortions since 1973) is not made more acceptable because of "the ones" who "started it all." Finger-pointing and refusal of blame only creates more animosity. Yes, we are all responsible for attempting to put an end to violence. But, shouldn't it begin with you making a decision not to commit violence against innocent humanity? You, and all abortion providers, are in my prayers.


"but if there is no objective right or wrong and no objective God, then what in the world does one base one's consideration that '...humans and other sentient beings to be creatures worthy of being protected and helped.' "

Compassion for their suffering, perhaps? A person or other sentient being who is suffering is suffering whether there is a God or not. And if there is no afterlife, no justice in the end, if the universe and each other are all that we have, then the need to help one another becomes all the more pressing because any harm done is permanent, not corrected in the afterlife.

To look at it a different way, if life is only a small part of existence and God will make everything right, why worry about what you do at all? It's not like you're going to inflict any real harm on anyone--even if you murder someone they just go to Heaven and God will sort it all out. You might get a lower "grade" on your life, but that seems relatively trivial compared to doing real harm.

Sean in Denver

"I also feel a huge fear for my children. I know and am reminded that I cannot protect them anywhere." [Not even in the womb!] And... "When the school shootings started, Columbine and the rest, where did people think these kids learned their hate and their skills and the belief that is was ok to kill people." [Would these "kids" be the few survivors of the abortion holocaust of the last thirty years? Gosh, I wonder who could have taught them "that is [sic] was ok to kill people"?]

John Thayer Jensen

Understood, DP. but if there is no objective right or wrong and no objective God, then what in the world does one base one's consideration that "...humans and other sentient beings to be creatures worthy of being protected and helped." How do we get from that 'is' to 'ought?'

John Thayer Jensen

Understood, DP. but if there is no objective right or wrong and no objective God, then what in the world does one base one's consideration that "...humans and other sentient beings to be creatures worthy of being protected and helped." How do we get from that 'is' to 'ought?'


Apologies. The first paragraph in my last post was supposed to be in italics, but apparently either this interface doesn't allow HTML tags or I screwed up. Be that as it may, the first paragraph is quoting Mr. Jensen's words in a preveious post.


And I must say that if that is the way things really are - God is just my image or yours or anyone else's, but not an objective Fact - then I certainly don't see how abortion is wrong

Really? So it doesn't matter whether an embryo or fetus is conscious and capable of suffering or not? It doesn't matter whether the pregnant woman wants an abortion or not? The only thing that matters is whether or not there is a god or gods who are exactly as you imagine him/her/them to be? Strange way to look at the world, in my opinion.

But then, my opposition to forced pregnancy is based on the belief, supported by data, that an unwanted pregnancy is dangerous to the pregnant woman and that there is little or no chance that a fetus (except, perhaps, in the third trimester) has any self-awarness, consciousness or ability to suffer from an abortion, any more than a sperm has an ability to suffer from not penetrating an egg or an egg has the ability to suffer for not being fertilized. One can be moral without a diety if one simply considers humans and other sentient beings to be creatures worthy of being protected and helped.


What a bunch of baloney


Mr. Jensen, I clicked on your link and enjoyed reading your story of how your became Catholic.
You might be surprised to hear that I`m Catholic, too -- a "cradle Catholic," though, not a convert, which probably explains my heretical opinions (my support of legal abortion being just the tip of the iceberg).

Elaina Lewis

Are we not all incredible creature? Always thinking of the physical. If we cannot see touch or feel then it is of no significance. If one does not believe that all life comes from God now then one day they certainly will. There is only one Man who came into this world to die and that was Jesus. He came DOWN from Heaven and went back UP. We are not born to die but to LIVE - FOREVER. We will be held accountable on how we loved. We can only love by taking up our cross daily andfollowing Him. That is The Truth. Truth is a person not a thing. Truth is God Himself and as I said one day you will believe it.

John Thayer Jensen

"Well, gravity isn`t quite an "objective fact," because its effects depend on where you are ..."

Very, very true - and very interesting. Gravity's effect on me is relative to where I stand in relation to the mass that is its source (if that is the right word).

If I am in the neighbourhood of a large mass, and am not resting my weight on it, but am, let us suppose, suspended in space, gravity will have the effect of accelerating me toward the centre of that mass.

OTOH when I then encounter that mass at a high speed, something else - not gravity but the rapid change in my momentum - will have a very different, and perhaps disastrous, effect on me.

Now if I rest my weight on that mass, and do not try to get too far from it - remain "down to earth" in a rather literal sense - then perhaps I am going to be happier in the long run. Falls can be a problem.

There is, of course, an amusing, and perhaps instructive, allegory here, which may safely be read to the reader (if any).


Well, gravity isn`t quite an "objective fact," because its effects depend on where you are -- I mean, hey, look at the guys jumping around on the moon. I and many others disagree that abortion is absolutely wrong, all of the time -- but somehow I doubt that many people think it`s absolutely right, all of the time, either.

John Thayer Jensen

Ah. OK. Then this isn't really like the gravity thing at all. This is just something all in my head. And I must say that if that is the way things really are - God is just my image or yours or anyone else's, but not an objective Fact - then I certainly don't see how abortion is wrong. Or right. Or anything else. All is desire and power. Nietzsche wins.

Indeed, I suppose from that POV there is as much justification in the State outlawing abortion as legalising it - or, indeed, requiring it.


The concept of what is a "right" is as relative as what is a "gift."

And indeed, if the hypothetical giver of life is God, it doesn`t matter whether anyone believes in Him or not. For the record, I happen to believe -- or at least, I give it my best try. But I think "my" God is created just as much in my image as I am in His (Hers?) and probably bears as little resemblance to many other people`s Gods as the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

John Thayer Jensen

A PS to my own comment - I mean, if - as as clear - this hypothetical Giver is God, does it matter whether anyone believes in Him or not? I mean, does it matter to the actual truth? If I am falling out of an aeroplane without a parachute, I may or may not believe in gravity. I guess it may make my trip down more anxiety-free. But the end seems likely to depend on whether gravity actually exists, not on whether I believe in it.

John Thayer Jensen

Thanks for the link :-) I especially appreciate it as I spent seven years of my life (grad school) in Honolulu, and most of my family farm in the Big Island.

But to that other question...

If life is a gift from an unknown giver, it almost seems to me indistinguishable from life's not being a gift at all - something that 'just is.' In that case I find it odd that life - or human beings or anyone or -thing else - has rights.

OTOH, if there is a real Giver...


The Flying Spaghetti Monster gives us all life.

Seriously, many believe that God gives us all life -- but many others do not believe in any God. For many, life is a gift from an unknown giver.

John Thayer Jensen

Just curious - if life is a gift, who is the giver? If it's my parents, where did they get it from?

Just wondering...


I agree that "pure Love" "never requires lustful appetites," but let`s just say it doesn`t preclude them, either.

And my society doesn`t view killing as "vile" -- definitely, as undesirable, and hopefully as something to be avoided in the first place, but should certain drastic circumstances arise (war, self-defense, personaly bodily integrity, etc.), my "society" views killing humans as justifiable. I have no intention of ever "murdering" any of my (or anyone else`s) children, born or unborn, but there are certainly circumstances in which I would kill.

H West

To try and justify killing any innocent baby, no matter whos, is the most "immature solution" on earth!
To have a good end (in your mind) never justifies a rotten means.
You can never reverse the act of intentional abortion, you can never bring that child back to life so who are you to condemn that baby to death!
"Pure Love" never requires lustful appetites. Of course, if you have never experienced "True Pure Love" you would not know anything about it.


And that's the point, L: you would do something completely illegal and that society views as vile - killing your children. You've just provided the reasons for why "pro-lifers" should be correct in U.S. and international jurisprudence. Because if you justify abortion with illegal "procedures" like murdering you your children with full intent, then where's the wall between abortion also being illegal and simply a personal preference for you in terms of breaking the law?


"Women who don't value their own offspring sicken me."

Judith M., would it surprise you to hear that I am a stay-at-home mother of three? Not all pro-abortion rights supporters focus only on "your career and your things." If another pregnancy ever threatened my life/health, and therefore my ability to care for my born children, I would end it.

H.West, you speak as if happily married people who respect each other have no "lustful sexual appetites."

And by the way, some of us DO believe that embryos/fetuses are human beings, and we still support the legal right to kill them, to kill our own children, if drastic situations warrant our doing so. In fact, I would euthanize my BORN children in certain drastic situations, because I love them enough to do it (and of course I hope I am never called upon to do so).


I think I've read a week's worth of pro-life rhetoric in the last few posts. Abortion isn't about "punishing", or "devalueing(rejecting the gift of) life", or "selfish, arrogant women" or a "culture of death". It's a hard choice for women, as hard as deciding to give up a baby for adoption. The women who decide to terminate their pregnancy are making the choice they feel is right for themselves at that particular moment in time. And believe it (or not, as you prefer) they are just as moral and human as women who decide to go to term.

And those who work in abortion clinics, counsellors (like Bon and Lou), nurses, doctors, escorts do their darndest to help these women who are sure carry that decision out. They are also just as moral and humane as those who work in CPCs.
It's so easy for you pro lifers to sit there on your moral high horses, to just curl your lips and sneer, judge, condemn, moralize, and lecture. But instead of taking the rhetorical easy way out, climb down and meet some of these women, and men.

You will also be humbled.

H West

In reading all the comments, it became obvious to me, that the women who are determind to do as they please, are so arrogant and selfish. These women and men have bankrupted morals and very slow learners. They have blinders on and would not recognize the Truth,if it stared them in their face. The men and women that do not think that the baby from conception is a human-being, just like they once where, are the problem in societies around the world. Especially, in our society
it is very clear that their obsession with their lustful sexual appetites,they feel free to be irresponsible.The attitude seems to be that they can kill an innocent human-being at will. The main "reproductive right", that the women have is not to go to bed with every Tom, Dick, and Harry. Sex is not a sports event it is a Total Love Event between a man and a woman that is Married and have "Respect" and "Real Love for each other.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment