Why Were Christian Constitutional Conservatives So Wrong About Abortion??

[basquebromance]

 

[BULLDOG]

I don't know about anyone else, I was a child then and my people didn't participate in politics. That doesn't address the obvious trolling in which the OP engages.

Asking a legitimate question is not trolling. It is a legitimate question. There was a concerted effort by politically motovated religious leaders and unethical right wing politicians to turn a non issue into a wedge to divide the country.

 

[kaz]

The great damage being done by back alley abortions was well known at the time. Nobody with even a small amount of compassion could deny the need for abortions in many cases. That horror has been forgotten over the last 50 years. I fear it will return after that partasan court ruling.

Yeah, man. Legal abortions make them nice and clean and acceptable to kill the fetus. You have lost your mind, Cowboy. Oh, and you're also a racist

 

[eddiew37]

Wardrobe change​

 

[surada]

Interesting that lefties quote Ayn Rand but not Margaret Sanger who founded the "eugenics" movement that included racial purification that nazis and democrats embraced during the 20th century. Eugenics morphed int Planned Parenthood. As far as the Constitution goes, their is little doubt that the original RvW decision was so faulty as to be laughable. Abortion will be up to the people to decide. Why do democrats fear democracy?

Lol. Sanger did not found the eugenics movement. What is wrong with you?

 

[surada]

Yeah, man. Legal abortions make them nice and clean and acceptable to kill the fetus. You have lost your mind, Cowboy. Oh, and you're also a racist

Check out the young women and infants in old cemeteries.

 

[Dragonlady]

That would be credible if you were to take that stance with everything the government demands you do or not do with your body. Do you?

Well that depends. Does it involve a lifelong commitment to feed, clothe, and shelter another human being, or just something simple like get a vaccination shot, or treating others with respect?

 

[hadit]

Well that depends. Does it involve a lifelong commitment to feed, clothe, and shelter another human being, or just something simple like get a vaccination shot, or treating others with respect?

Irrelevant. The man already faces that lifelong commitment if she wants it, whether he does or not. I'm just wondering if your outrage over being told what to do with your body extends beyond just this one area or not. In most of the interactions I've had with liberals, this is pretty much it. They don't care if the government tells them what to do, in fact they seem to like it, but just not here.

 

[Dragonlady]

Irrelevant. The man already faces that lifelong commitment if she wants it, whether he does or not. I'm just wondering if your outrage over being told what to do with your body extends beyond just this one area or not. In most of the interactions I've had with liberals, this is pretty much it. They don't care if the government tells them what to do, in fact they seem to like it, but just not here.

Well then the man should learn to use his own birth control or have a vasectomy if he doesn't want children, now shouldn't he. He also has the option of keeping it in his pants.

 

[Lesh]

Simple question.....thru-out the 60's and 70's -- why did so many Christian Conservatives who professed love for the Constitution; get it so wrong about abortion??

"White evangelicals in the 1970s did not mobilize against Roe v. Wade, which they considered a Catholic issue. They organized instead to defend racial segregation in evangelical institutions, including Bob Jones University. The historical record is clear. In 1968, Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelicalism, organized a conference with the Christian Medical Society The historical record is clear. In 1968, Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelicalism, organized a conference with the Christian Medical Society -- they concluded: “Whether the performance of an induced abortion is sinful we are not agreed,” the statement read, “but about the necessity of it and permissibility for it under certain circumstances we are in accord. Carl F. H. Henry, the magazine’s founder, affirmed that “a woman’s body is not the domain and property of others,"

The Religious Right and the Abortion Myth

White evangelicals in the 1970s didn’t initially care about abortion. They organized to defend racial segregation in evangelical institutions — and only seized on banning abortion because it was more palatable than their real goal.

www.politico.com

How could someone like the Christian Medical Society get it so wrong?? Did they not know Jesus is against abortion? The same Bible they used to condemn abortion now is the same Bible that existed then...how could they claim abortion is a necessity and permissible? Did they not care about the children? But it gets worse.....

"Meeting in St. Louis in 1971, the messengers (delegates) to the Southern Baptist Convention, hardly a redoubt of liberalism, passed a resolution calling for the legalization of abortion, a position they reaffirmed in 1974 — a year after Roe — and again in 1976. When the Roe decision was handed down, W. A. Criswell, pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas and sometime president of the Southern Baptist Convention, issued a statement praising the ruling. “I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person,” Criswell declared."

Again, what Bible were these people looking at?? Abortion is murder and mothers should be put to death for such an abomination....why was there so much ambiguity on this?? No such wishy washy language existed when they were using Biblical justifications to call for executing gays or railing against the evils of desegregation and miscegenation -- why not that same heat for abortion?? but wait, there's more....even Ronald Reagan, the second coming of Jesus himself, signed into law a big pro-abortion bill...was he not a conservative then?? Did he not love Jesus?

"When the issue surfaced in the first months of his governorship, Reagan was unsure how to react. Surprising as it may seem today, in 1967 abortion was not the great public issue that it is today. Reagan later admitted that abortion had been “a subject I’d never given much thought to.”

Reagan’s Darkest Hour | National Review

As president, Ronald Reagan was an unflagging champion of unborn human life. “Today there is a wound in our national conscience,” Reagan told a joint session of Congress in his 1986 State of the Un…

www.nationalreview.com

How could he have never given much thought to it, but then signed the most liberal pro-abortion bill in the country that year? Hell, even the great superhero Libertarian Conservative, Ayn Rand said this about abortion.....

View attachment 662093


I mean I know she is an Atheist and you right-wingers give her a pass because she hated black folks and other shit as much as you did -- but even for a Jesus-hating atheist, this is pretty twisted stuff from her.....how did these Conservatives get it all wrong -- and then all suddenly in the span of a few years -- suddenly launch a crusade against abortion and women's health rights??

Oh, I remember......racism......

"After several decades of research, I can state without fear of contradiction that evangelicals mobilized politically in the 1970s not, as commonly supposed, in opposition to the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling of 1973, but rather in defense of racial segregation at Bob Jones University and at all-white “segregation academies,” many of them church-sponsored. The durability of what I call the abortion myth, the fiction that opposition to legalized abortion was the catalyst of their movement, can be attributed to the founders of the Religious Right themselves."

Column: Race, Reagan and the rise of the Religious Right

The overwhelming white evangelical support for Donald Trump is a puzzle that will occupy historians for generations. How can the Religious Right, a movement that trumpets its fidelity to “family values,” throw its support to a vulgar, thrice-married...

www.vnews.com

Like how Ronald Reagan campaigned in 1980 to defend the right of universities like Bob Jones to racially segregate....I guess that is how Bob Jones was able to get away with banning interracial dating on their campus all the way up to the year 2000....Or how the founder of the Religious Right, Paul Weyrich was pissed that the IRS were planning to rescind the tax-exempt statuses of religious institutions that instituted segregation....in the papers he wrote; he essentially admitted: "Now, Falwell and other leaders of the Religious Right had a “respectable” issue, opposition to abortion, one that would energize white evangelicals — and, not incidentally, divert attention from the real origins of "our movement."

Paul M. Weyrich papers - Archives West

Archives West provides access to descriptions of primary sources in the western United States, including correspondence, diaries, and photographs. Digital reproductions of primary sources are available in some cases. Archives West was formerly known as the Northwest Digital Archives (NWDA).

archiveswest.orbiscascade.org

So once abortion is banned at the federal level, because that is definitely next -- what more red meat can you offer to the rabid evangelical base?? Because the beast will have to be fed.....can't be abortion anymore....Contraceptives?? Yea, that may hold them off for a moment....but sooner or later, you are going to have to throw them a bone and do something about their first love....segregation....at least bring back the whole separate but equal doctrine and use that to get your segregation rocks off....it's definitely coming...people like me have been right about the religious right so far.....even when so-called "small government Conservatives" were assuring us "relax bro, you are just overreacting, no one is asking for that" -- when it came to banning abortion, same-sex marriages, epealing Lawrence v Texas; and ultimately attacking the very concept of the 14th amendment....oh, but when that pendulum swings back in the other direction....I doubt many of the reactionary right-wingers will be able to handle it...they are far too fragile to deal with an ounce of the oppression they love seeing inflicted on others...because for a right-winger, equality feels like oppression...always have been....

Cynical Republicans seized on this and MADE it an issue

Look up Paul Weyerich

 

[Lesh]

When Francis Schaeffer, the intellectual godfather of the Religious Right, tried to enlist Billy Graham in his antiabortion crusade in the late 1970s, Graham, the most famous evangelical of the 20th century, turned him down. Even James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family who later became an implacable foe of abortion, acknowledged in 1973 that the Bible was silent on the matter and therefore it was plausible for an evangelical to believe that “a developing embryo or fetus was not regarded as a full human being.”

 

[hadit]

Well then the man should learn to use his own birth control or have a vasectomy if he doesn't want children, now shouldn't he. He also has the option of keeping it in his pants.

Absolutely a man should keep it in his pants if he doesn't want to get a woman pregnant. Likewise, a woman should keep her pants on if she doesn't want to get pregnant. See how that works?

But that doesn't address the question I gave you, does it?

 

[Dragonlady]

Irrelevant. The man already faces that lifelong commitment if she wants it, whether he does or not. I'm just wondering if your outrage over being told what to do with your body extends beyond just this one area or not. In most of the interactions I've had with liberals, this is pretty much it. They don't care if the government tells them what to do, in fact they seem to like it, but just not here.

I hadn't noted the government "telling me what to do"

I was living in Toronto in 2003 and working on Bay Street during the SARS outbreak. The entire city shut down because an unknown disease was making us sick. The government didn't do this, the people did, because it was how you respond to infectious disease. SARSTOCK - the big Rolling Stones Concert in Toronto that summer was the first big event in the city all year. Performers, tourists, everybody was afraid to come. And we weren't going out.

When corona virus hit, my first thought was to stay home, and keep safe, just like SARS. That the government mandated lockdowns was neither here nor there. Masks and lockdowns where what were doing in 2003, because that's smart behaviour in a pandemic.

 

[jc456]

So I am sure since Rightwingers are now trying to claim that abortion should be a states rights issue -- you will oppose any effort by Republicans to ban abortions federally huh?

Mike Pence Calls for National Abortion Ban

Former Vice President Mike Pence called for a national abortion ban following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

www.rollingstone.com

what rights will be stripped from women? explain it for me.

 

[jc456]

Well then the man should learn to use his own birth control or have a vasectomy if he doesn't want children, now shouldn't he. He also has the option of keeping it in his pants.

maybe don't have sex if you don't like the consequence?

 

[jc456]

I hadn't noted the government "telling me what to do"

your prime minister certainly is telling you what to do. You're buried in the sand if you don't know that. Now that was fking hilarious as hell. Mandating is his middle name. Then he'll confiscate your money, house and car if you don't listen to him. Are you really that out of touch with your own country?

 

[Dragonlady]

Absolutely a man should keep it in his pants if he doesn't want to get a woman pregnant. Likewise, a woman should keep her pants on if she doesn't want to get pregnant. See how that works?

But that doesn't address the question I gave you, does it?

Sex between consenting adults isn't just to create babies. It's also necessary for the good health and well being of adults. The majority of abortions are performed on married women, not single women. Are you seriously suggesting that married couples not have sex unless they want to have a baby? That didn't work for Catholics or anyone else.

 

[Dragonlady]

maybe don't have sex if you don't like the consequence?

That especially holds for men.

 

[jc456]

The entire city shut down because an unknown disease was making us sick. The government didn't do this, the people did, because it was how you respond to infectious disease.

then why have you changed your mind and insist that government now tell you what to do? BTW, you just said you hadn't noted the government telling you what to do? that's odd.

 

[jc456]

Sex between consenting adults isn't just to create babies.

sure it is. how else you think it happens? the fact that you don't know that having coidus creates babies is sad. It's every time that stick enters the odds are there for one. why do you ignore it?