I was stunned by what was not in the letter from 50 Catholic groups asking the Pope to reconsider the church position opposing contraception. They argued that failing to promote contraception "has had a catastrophic impact on the poor and powerless around the world, endangering women's lives and leaving millions at risk of HIV."
Those are important points but if you're trying to convince the Pope (or traditional Catholics in general) wouldn't the strongest argument be that promoting contraception would reduce the number of abortions?
Have liberal Catholics become so allied with progressives in general that they couldn't go there less they anger pro-choice allies? Or have liberal Catholics become so pro-choice themselves that were uncomfortable including this powerful argument?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
anon: If indeed a woman is a believer hook, line and sinker, in the Catholic doctrine and isn't using contraceptives, then she gets pregnant...probably as often as is possible. She wouldn't consider an abortion. Would make Benny proud. However if a woman is a Catholic who thinks for herself, but really doesn't want to be barefoot and pregnant her whole reproductive life, then she will use contraception...and if there is an accidental pregnancy might or might not have an abortion. An interesting point...Italians use artificial birth control...and Benny is in Italy. Smart women.
The article however was aimed at poor women in poor countries, who have been convinced that the RCC is THE WAY to believe and they are the ones who are getting Aids, and STD's and having children they can't afford. By allowing "artificial" birth control, (condoms) there wouldn't be children or as much spreading of STD's and Aids. Thus: contraception=fewer unwanted pregnancys (and STD's)= fewer abortions.
"Do you really think Repubs want high level of abortions to give greater weight to a pro-life plank? About 700,000 to 800,000 babies are aborted each year in the U.S. You actually think pro-life advocates would be LESS committed to the plank if there were, say, ONLY 500,000 abortions per year?"
Republicans want the pro-life issue to be firmly in the minds of their grass-roots voters every two years. Why else would they have failed to even make an effort to push the Human Life Amendment when they had control of both Houses of Congress?
The record is clear. The GOP would rather have an issue come election day than live babies.
One reason may be that many of the most common methods of contraception are classified as abortion by the Church, including the pill and any sort of implant or injection. The idea is that those methods may possibly (Russell's golden teapot comes to mind.) prevent a fertilized egg from implanting. So if you're talking to the Vatican nincompoopocracy, arguing that contraception prevents abortions won't convince anybody.
they won't site abortion because it is just not important when compared to the scourge of infectious disease, and the deepening poverty incurred by unwanted pregnancies. this is a non-issue.
There are now 5.8 billion human beings on the planet according to the United Nations.In a world that currently wrestles with such serious problems as global warming, the thinning of the ozone layer, increasing crime rates, toxic chemicals in our food, and starvation in developing nations, each of which is at least partially due to growing world population, it's hard to imagine anyone opposing restraints on population controls.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.