Speaker of the House: When Life Begins Should Have No Impact on a Woman's Right to Choose
14 comments | Permalink
From Sunday's "Meet the Press":
Brokaw: …“I if [Obama] were to come to you and say ‘help me out here, Madam Speaker, when does life begin,’ what would you tell him?
Pelosi: “I would say that as an ardent practicing Catholic this is an issue that I have studied for a long time, and what I know is over the centuries the doctors of the Church have not been able to make that definition. And St. Augustine said three months. We don’t know. The point is it that it shouldn’t have an impact on a woman’s right to chose.”
posted by JT at Monday, August 25, 2008
14 Comments:
I do agree. Though of course it doesn't make sense to allow people to abort 6 month old fetuses.
Which make more sense?
"I don't know if it is alive or not so I am going to assume it is alive until I know for sure otherwise."
"I don't know if it is alive or not so I am going to kill it."
...it shouldn’t have an impact on a woman’s right to chose.
I think we owe Nazi Germany an apology.
Nah; just Pelosi, and all Dem enablers.
That is just sad. Putting the woman's right to chose over one of the inalienable right mentioned in the Declaration of Independence: life! What's even more sad is that she was elected by the masses and represents their beliefs.
If Nancy would look at an eleven week old baby in the womb, I suppose she would say, "Hmm, I'm not sure if that is life. It does have a head, arms, hands, and legs, and even a heart and eyes. And at one time I looked just like that. But, I'm just not sure. If you want to rip apart, that's fine and legal, because we just don't know."
The Catholic Church has been very clear in their position that abortion is morally wrong. Mrs. Pelosi, is neither "ardent" nor "practicing" in her "Catholicism"- insert Neo-Protestantism, where she decides which official Catholic positions she will and will not submit to. By picking and choosing what she will and will not believe as a Catholic undermines the whole system. You might as well hand her a mallet, a nail, and list of her disagreements with the Magisterium on this issue and call her Nancy Pe-Luther!
I'm sure it has been said elsewhere, but Pelosi is virtually bullet proof as an outspoken hyper-liberal elected official. In her district in the San Francisco area these sorts of comments are probably not give a second thought in terms of criticism. Or at least those voices of opposition are so few that her continued election in the face of these outrageous postions is a virtual certainty. And unfortunately, it will take something like incapacitation, scandal, or her choice to not seek the position as speaker in order to move her out of that role.
And Obama was following this logic to the natural end of infanticide. Evil ideas have evil consequences. Hitler would be tickled to see how his depraved views of human personhood are almost globally recognized.
A woman's right to choose what, Nancy? It changes the question from "Does a woman have the right to destroy unliving tissue" to "Does a woman have the right to murder her own child"? That is the point.
David, though well-intended, I don't think your statement is accurate. Pelosi didn't put the "right" to choose over life -- if she had said that, it would've been much less heinous. She said that there's no correlation whatsoever.
This article is devastating, I think:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/155564/output/print
Isn't it interesting how Democrats often accuse Republicans of being anti-science or of placing religion before science, but Pelosi here chooses to favor a 3rd-4th century bishop over the clear determination of contemporary science that an organism with its own DNA is biologically alive?
Jeremy Pierce,
Interesting indeed. Excellent point.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home