McKenna links their preparedness to accept the Democratic Party's adoption of an unambiguous pro-abortion policy in 1980 to four further causes: (i) an inferiority complex towards their «secular humanist» «soul mates (in) the civil rights movement» who «dismissed (Catholic) concerns about
killing unborn children.»
The argument is that Christians are contradicting themselves because they are against
killing unborn children, yet we apparently believe that we are commanded to kill people for other reasons.
God DOES allow free will, which is precisely why
killing unborn children is currently legal in the US.
So if those human beings feel that flying airplanes in to buildings, or torturing other humans, or
killing their unborn children is right, they can.
But when that manifestation of disoriented tenderness occurs again as dissipated by an almost universal acceptance of abortion, Mother Teresa is right to say (as Percy quotes her): «If a mother can
kill her unborn child, I can kill you, and you can kill me.»
Believe it or not, the ultra liberal look just as foolish (seriously: set the lab mice we are testing cancer treatments on free, but
kill the unborn children because their mothers deserve not to have their lives ruined by stressful bundles of joy)
What sense does it make to
kill an unborn child to prevent future mistreatment?
In 1 BC, a Roman citizen wrote to his wife telling her to
kill her unborn child if it turned out to be a girl.
When one party has elevated lifestyle libertinism to the first of constitutional principles (and is prepared to
kill unborn children, jettison free speech, and traduce religious freedom in service to hedonism), while the other is prepared to nominate a fantasist who spun grotesque fairy tales about an alleged connection between an opponent's family and Lee Harvey Oswald shortly before he closed the deal?
God killed all those people for a reason, the expectant mother
kills her unborn child for a reason, do you think they are both evil?
From the news coverage this has received, you'd think that one of the most pressing issues in America is that women who want to
kill their unborn child have to endure the horrific inconvenience of pressing a button on their smartphone and using Google to search for the location of the nearest abortion mill.
She has reasons for her decision, do you think she is evil if she chooses to
kill her unborn child?
The left applauds when the courts uphold a woman's right to
kill an unborn child.
Catholics think it is wrong to use contraceptives and that it is wrong to
kill unborn children.
It is AMAZING to me that a woman can choose to
KILL her unborn child because she doesn't want responsibility... but a woman who desires to flee from the environment in which she (and quite possibly her baby) was traumatized and has a tragedy occur... then she's just a negligent murderer.
Instead, it lies in changing hearts and minds such that
killing an unborn child becomes as unacceptable as killing any other human being.
Again, who gives you or any woman this right, or in your terms this «option,» to abort which is
kill an unborn child?
In order to make this journey more perilous, screenwriter Carlos Kotkin inserts a new «villain» presence — an evil henchman sent by King Herod to track down the couple and
kill the unborn child, who Herod sees as a threat to his throne.
Do I acccept this (i.e. a woman's right to
kill my unborn child)?
Not exact matches
At his sentencing today, Scott Roeder - the man who
killed Kansas abortion provider George Tiller last year - gave a long, scriptural - laden defense of the slaying, arguing that he was protecting
unborn children and obeying a higher law by
killing the doctor.
i think the basic belief is that
killing another human is wrong, whether it is an
unborn child, and abortion doctor, or a murderer on death row.
Unborn female
children are
killed mainly due to the one
child per family official policy, and the desire to have male
children.
Suppose your
unborn child was determined in the first trimester to be grossly malformed, unlikely to live, possibly to
kill you during pregnancy; and if if it did live without
killing you, to have a life of severe pain and suffering with the hope of nothing resembling, or even close to, normal life.
«Are we acquiescing to the
killing of the
unborn child in our country?
His defence of human life in Evangelium Vitae rallied the Church to the cause of defending the vulnerable and opposing the
killing of
unborn children and the frail and weak.
As long as our country allows the
killing of the
unborn child, we will continue to witness the collapse of moral life, particularly among families.»
As is the
killing of
unborn children to be condemned.
Healing, and building bridges??? Really??!! Where these terrorists concerned about healing and bridge building when they blew up the building that
killed my cousins (firefighters) and best friend (and her
unborn child)??? Please - how about what the people of NYC want and all of the families that were affected by this tragedy around the nation?
Then five - year - old Ryland Ward was part of a Sunday morning service at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs in which a gunman stormed in and
killed 26 people, including an
unborn child.
Here, for instance, is Judge Richard Arnold of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals explaining why states can not ban the
killing of a «living
unborn child» while it is in the process of being delivered.
But with Obama we will be
killing more of our
unborn children
Additionally, the r ape argument is always used to obfuscate the real reason that
unborn children are
killed, namely — convenience.
and yet the Christian god
kills millions of
unborn children every year via miscarriage.
That our laws permit the
killing of
unborn children is already a sign of the barbarity which arises from radical individualism, albeit it dressed as virtue in the claim to be ensuring the «right to reproductive health».
They know that abortion is the
killing of an innocent,
unborn human being, a
child who is recognisably such.
Many readers will remember the full - page signature advertisements feminists took out in the early days of the abortion movement, telling the world that they had
killed their own
unborn children.
And so I stand with the young woman in the above video in defense of modesty, chastity, and piety, just as I stand with Muslims like my dear friends Shaykh Hamza Yusuf and Dr. Suzy Ismail against the
killing of
unborn children and the evil of pornography, and with my equally dear friend Asma Uddin of the Becket Fund in defense of religious freedom.
«The
killing of an
unborn child through abortion via abortifacients or any other means is an intrinsic evil, a sin that goes against God's plan for our salvation.
For the record, prejudices can
kill, and suspicion can destroy, and the thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all of its own: for the
children, and the
children yet
unborn.
However, I feel that the statement «I will not have my money go to
kill a
child, born or
unborn» is uninformed.
I will not have my money go to
kill a
child, born or
unborn.
Foreign groups blame the one -
child policy for encouraging couples who want sons to abort female
unborn children or
kill baby girls.
We can't call ourselves Catholic, and then simply stand by while immigrants get mistreated, or the poor get robbed, or
unborn children get
killed.
Say: «Come, let me convey unto you what G - D has [really] forbidden to you: «Do not ascribe divinity, in any way, to anything (or anyone) beside HIM; and [do not offend against but, rather,] do good unto your parents; and do not
kill your
children (born or
unborn) for fear of poverty --[for] it is WE who shall provide sustenance for you as well as for them; and do not commit any shameful deeds, be they open or secret; and do not take any human being's life -[the life] which G - D has declared to be sacred - otherwise than in [the pursuit of] justice: this has HE enjoined upon you so that you might use your reason; and do not touch the substance of an orphan — except to improve it - before he comes of age.»
God ordered the murder of women and
children and
killed all of the rest of them, including presumably
unborn children still in the womb during the great flood.
There are those
killed in fights over turf, innocents caught in cross fire, citizens terrified of city streets, escalating robberies,
children fed free crack to get them addicted and then enlisted as runners and dealers, mothers so crazed for a fix that they abandon their babies, prostitute themselves and their daughters, and addict their
unborn.
The
killing of an
unborn child due the
child's mother being physically injured does not contend one nowadays to seek wanton and sigh, legal abortion upon the mother's will to wantonly abort.
Recent revelations that Planned Parenthood is trafficking in human organs — obtained from
unborn children killed in the organization's abortion clinics — have prompted a righteous outrage from many commentators.
There were Hiroshima and Nagasaki where nuclear bombs
killed thousands of people in a flash: not only soldiers, but also women and
children and
unborn infants.
Paul J. Hill, convicted of
killing an abortionist and his security guard in Pensacola, Florida, has advanced the following rationale for his action: «Whatever force is legitimate in defending a born
child is legitimate in defending an
unborn child.»