I can understand the pov of those who feel abortion is a moral choice, provided that the fetus is not [yet] a person. I don't agree with it, but I can understand it.

The reason I don't agree with it is largely a practical one: if a fetus is not fully a person, then personhood is subjective and relative. Provided that this is true then how can my life, or the lives of my family and friends, have any value? If personhood is subjective, it is also fluid. So it becomes possible for me to lose my personhood and be reduced to an object, like a potato (and who cares when a potato is chipped?)

If personhood is subjective, then by what standards and what authority is it determined? Age, development, "viability"?

I believe that human life and personhood begins at conception, so I cannot conclude that abortion is ever morally licit. Granted, it is morally permissible to take the life of an aggressor in an act of self-defense, but a fetus is not an aggressor. So even in order "to save the life of the mother" abortion is an immoral choice.

That's my argument against abortion and while I believe that God is the author of life, my argument against abortion is not a religious one. Its perfectly understandable that religious people are concerned about abortion, but that doesn't mean abortion is a "religious" issue and I find some of the jabs here at Catholics and our faith to be cheap shots. The issue at hand is life & choice, not creed.

Meg1 “No offer of money to help her KEEP the child, Col?”

Remaining pregnant was an option the lady considered and rejected, therefore, helping her keep it was not an option available to me (her body, her choice).

I never suggested a 8 ½ month developed foetus had no rights.

I do believe, however, any rights a 8 ½ month foetus has are subordinate to the rights of the pregnant woman in whose body it resides.

Again another attempt by you to put words into my mouth which were never said, not a good or ethical debating tactic.

“you better hope your children don't want your estate enough to use the same rational when 'debating' your worth in your dotage”

I know it must be hard for you but try to stay away from your “lowlife scumbag troll comments” or I will be unable to resist a more appropriate response.

The “contradictions” of reason come from your side of the debate not mine.

Anomie “Col Rouge – you reveal hidden wonders. All praise.”

I acted as I believed I should. I seek no acclaim for doing what anyone else with understanding to the circumstances, opportunity and compassion would have most likely done. I recalled the event here to challenge Meg1’s sanctimonious question.


Credo “So even in order "to save the life of the mother" abortion is an immoral choice.”

But you do not have the authority to impose your choice on people who do not share your viewpoint on what is and what is not “an immoral choice”.

The debate is about who gets to make the choice, the pregnant woman or someone else. My personal stance is, regardless of my view on the merits or otherwise of an abortion in any circumstances, it is not my body, it is someone else’s body and thus someone else’s choice and not my choice.

The issue of “sovereignty” of the individual is paramount and more important than deciding to have an abortion. The issue of “individual sovereignty” is what distinguishes free men and women from being considered chattels, serfs and slaves.

Credo, a person has a functioning human brain. A dead person is no longer a person, its a corpse. A fetus is an organism, not yet a person. Tell me where the semantics of that is wrong.

I think that even you have to admit that the Catholic Church has a worldwide agenda regarding, contraception, abortion, etc. etc.
The following is a website from the Philipines, promoting more
kids, despite their overpopulation problems.

http://www.prolife.org.ph/page/contraception

It would be hard to deny that most of that is simply Catholic religious dogma being promoted, with a few groups of other hangers on.

Why won't the Catholic Church address the issue of sustainability
of the human population? Arn't you guys aware of what happened
in places like Easter Island? Don't other species have a right
to some of this planet too? Without biodiversity, there won't be a
humanity.

RE: Yabby, regarding respect and ignorance…your article is a classic example of lack of respect and unsubstantiated hot air and hyperbole.

Yabby wants, “respect for other people and their rights to decide their lives for themselves, free of religious dogma. You would object if the Muslims tried to force their theology onto you, so why should we not object when the Catholics try to do the same to us?”

Surprise, surprise Yabby, the Church doesn’t make you pay for abortions through medicare (taxes)…but you and the anti-lifers force me to do so …that obliterates your argument totally. Catholics are entitled to live their religious beliefs without discriminatory and ignorant assertions from embittered people burdened with paranoia, conscience attacks or whatever…but that would be an ideal world, wouldn’t it?

No one tells you to support the Catholic church, or any of the other religions of the world…get on with your own life you might even start to enjoy it.

As for Darwin’s ‘theory’, it is still just that…unsubstantiated fantasy and theory - I still exercise freedom of thought and choice!

And of course, Col Rouge adds his QUOTE: “lowlife scumbag troll comments” to discredit himself completely, but still no rational thoughts.

Col: “The issue of “individual sovereignty” is what distinguishes free men and women from being considered chattels, serfs and slaves.”

Individual sovereignty doesn’t allow the mutilation/killing of another…you argue the mother has the right to choose that an 8 ½ month old unborn be brutally killed despite its viability at that age…you retain no credibility whatever! You argue that killing at will is ok for any reason – until the baby is born. What about a newborn who is found to be disabled, should the mother have the right to kill it also?

Your spurious lack of reason is unbelievable and your attempt at bullying doesn’t scare me Col.

If any one thing returns women to the position of chattels, serfs or slaves…use of this drug has to come close.

With RU486, the issue of late term abortions is irrelevant. RU486 is designed to return abortions to the ‘backyard’ – at home, out of sight, out of mind - with NO medical care and the resultant risks.

This ‘morning after pill’ is designed to be taken after a night’s misadventure before pregnancy tests are possible. There are serious risks to the mother, and the child either dies, or in some cases is seriously damaged and survives despite the drug. The risk of haemorrage, infection and death of the mother – all without medical supervision, are documented.

NO woman’s life will be saved through the use of this drug. That is not its purpose. There is no argument on that score.

Meg1, I must admit that I disagree with most of what you posit in argument, however your comment "If any one thing returns women to the position of chattels, serfs or slaves…use of this drug has to come close" leaves me wondering just where you are coming from. Are you proposing that the women who elect to take this drug rather then have a surgical procedure have no minds? On the contrary I consider that to deny a woman abortion is to return her to the position of a chattel, serf or slave.

If a drug negates the need for surgery then in fact your precious taxes that you are so concerned about will be reduced. On that note please don't feel it is only you who pay tax in areas of no use to you. Those of us who have do not support any 'church' also pay taxes for those of you who do by way of all the tax free benefits and reduced utility charges given to churches.

Col Rouge, your posts on a whole continue to be a fair and equitable account of the right to choose and the reasons for such rights.

Some of the posts in reply to this article are highly insensitive to those women, who have for reasons that remain their business, have elected to terminate their pregnancy. Many such posters have been less then charitable or christian in their criticisms, whilst at the same time doing so in the name of God. Shame....but then a few minutes with a priest and all is forgiven! Nevermind about the fallout from those you have dammed and mentally tortured. The priest may well forgive you - I doubt that God will.