Sentences with phrase «thinking on abortion»

How has your thinking on abortion changed and evolved through the years?

I also thought that jknapp brought up an interesting point that the political thinking in the book somewhat mirrors the current elections and the brouhahas caused by thoughts on abortion.

Near one of the mansion's four fireplaces, the cross-eyed governor had served decaffeinated coffee in beautiful old buffalo - themed china and asked Walters his thoughts on abortion, the death penalty, and whether he believed adhering to the actual language of the law and the original meaning of the Constitution.

Not exact matches

If you think eating animals is murder, or if you feel abortion before 24 weeks is murder, thats fine, but leave your feelings at home along with your buckets of cow blood you planned on throwing at people who don't share your «feelings».

I think your position is the position of most pro-choice supporters, my issue with the religious pro-life side is they do not want to support the very things that have been shown to have to largest impact on reducing abortion, s.e.x education and contraception.

If you think these ideas are outdated or irrelevant, I suggest you take a look at the damage that has been wrought on society by rampant divorce, abortion, our of wedlock pregnancy, falling birth rates, and a general view that life is NOT sacred, family is NOT important, and that children are more a burden to be avoided than anything.

Another thought, on another blog, I read the comment that if men could become pregnant, abortion would become a sacrament.

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.

They're objecting to contraceptives on the grounds that * they *, in their oh - so - medically - informed - opinions, think they equate to abortion.

So, with those considerations in mind, I think it's safer to say that while legal restrictions on abortion might put a dent in the abortion rate, they won't put an end to abortion as we know it, and, most importantly, they won't do a thing to alter the number of unwanted pregnancies.

We've had blue laws imposing Christian beliefs on businesses, Prohibition, laws criminalizing sodomy, laws banning birth control, abortions, gay marriages, interracial marriages and more simply because arrogant Christians thought they needed to impose their «personal knowledge» of what God wants on our entire society.

I don't think you can be a pro-life feminist and argue that women need to be condescended to and «informed of what they're doing» as though they don't already know (cf. laws that institute mandatory waiting periods so they can «think it over,» which puts an untenable burden on those who have to travel for abortion procedures and do not have the money to do so).

And in truth, egregious fibs like the spurious mammogram claim mostly stem from wishful thinking on the part of defenders of the abortion giant, rather than from its own publicity materials.

I guess I feel the same way about a liberal agenda that say that to get out of debt we have to spend more, or that my tax dollars have to pay for something I think is morally wrong (Obamacare sets up a fund to pay for late term abortions) or a government that confiscates kids lunches, or tells me how much soda I can drink, or uses my tax money to choose winners and losers (mostly losers but Obma doners) in energy production that produces no energy yet we are sitting on more coal and oil than any other nation on the planet.

In an article on Think Progress, Zach Beauchamp cites a study by political scientists Thomas Carsey and Geoffrey Layman which shows that over time, people often change their abortion attitudes to match the political party they generally support.

As for the law, I think opposing abortion on principles (religious or other) but as long as no church is forced by the state to preform a ceremony.

Don't want an abortion, don't have one but don't think your personal belief trumps the laws that you must bide by in this world and please don't think they deserve respect when obviously they are being use to step on other peoples rights to freedom over their own body.

Of course, as my beliefs changed, you would think my stand on abortion would change.

Statistics indicate that Americans, especially younger Americans, favor some restrictions on abortion, and a record number of millennials think abortion should be illegal altogether.

By the time such women have completed their «analytical odyssey,» to use Stephanie Moussalli's pompous term («Abortion on Second Thought,» December 1991), they are often beyond the normal years of childbearing.

Farron was quizzed again on whether he thought abortion was wrong during an ITV interview last week.

The Hawaiian court has thus set itself on the same course of action as the misguided Supreme Court in 1973 when it thought that laws about abortion were merely an assertion of the rights of a living mother and an unborn fetus.

But as his thinking on the morality of abortion gradually changed, he began to see the fetus as a very important being whose life ought not to be ended except under extraordinary circumstances.

However, what they thought may have been inaccurate on numerous occasions, just as the guy who shot the abortion doctor thought God told him to do it.

I think, though, that the section on abortion would be greatly strengthened if teachers (and therefore students) were further reminded of the seriousness of the crime of abortion in Catholic teaching and their obligation to resist it.

In the end, however, Feezell's moderate view (which leans toward the «conservative view») is not too much different in practical effect from my or Hartshorne's moderate view (which leans toward the «liberal view») in that I am only delivering a carte blanche for abortion in the early stages of pregnancy and pointing out that the fetus in the later stages of pregnancy has a moral status analogous to that of an animal, a status which I think deserves considerable attention on our part.

I think this statement captures the basis for his highly utilitarian view of the abortion issue, and I think it is a fundamental error which misdirects Hartshorne away from his own emphasis on love.

Throughout Hartshorne's work love has been the standard by which decisions are best determined, yet he fails to think as broadly on abortion as he does on most other philosophical questions.

Despite the timeliness of the abortion question, and the relevance and potency of Hartshorne's views, no scholarly work has been published on this area of his thought.

Stanley Hauerwas, an American theologian who has thought deeply about disability, wrote an essay on abortion that joins up biblical convictions to arrive at this conclusion: «The church is a family into which children are brought and received.

On the contrary, one enthusiast, admitting that such activity could be increased said that she didn't think that this was necessarily harmful - she spoke instead of the value of removing taboos and seeing sex as «valuable and life - enhancing», an odd expression to come from one associated with provision of abortion.

How would the President encourage pro-life pastors to think about the President's views on abortion?

Abortion rates have fallen 12 percent since 2010 according to a recent survey, and 49 percent of Americans think abortion is morally wrong, much higher than on other life -Abortion rates have fallen 12 percent since 2010 according to a recent survey, and 49 percent of Americans think abortion is morally wrong, much higher than on other life -abortion is morally wrong, much higher than on other life - issues.

The mere fact that people are allowed to pay for their OWN abortion coverage, without federal money, is just too much for these people, which leads one to believe that people like the «Susan B. Anthony» List are malicious liars, though a fair amount of idiocy is involved in their thinking no one will call them on their lies.

If you believe abortion is ok on one hand and God is evil on the other, then I think you may be confused.

On the other hand, the polls show that most people still think abortion is wrong, and, as Lincoln said of slavery, «Like every other wrong which some men will commit if left alone, it ought to be prohibited by law.»

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.

It's that line of thinking that I see as consistent with my views on abortion.

Those who are willing to base their argument permitting abortions entirely on the plurality - of - views doctrine should ask themselves questions like the following: Suppose some people thought it permissible for mothers to kill their disobedient five - year - olds (cf. Deut.

I used to think that abortion was chiefly an issue dividing Catholics and Protestants, but this is not the case — though the top Catholic authorities are today more adamant on the subject than are the leaders of other denominations.

3 Incidentally, questions about abortion should not, I think, enter in at all here, since the question as to whether abortion is right or wrong depends on whether one believes that killing is ever justified.

Those who are involved in small groups often claim that these groups have influenced how they think on political and economic issues — for example, raising their interest in questions of peace and social justice or, in the case of conservative religious groups, generating ire about abortion and gay rights.

In 1968, he won the award for best editorial of the year from the Catholic Press Association» Catholics liked giving awards to a Lutheran in those days; they thought of it as being bravely trendy and ecumenical» for an essay on abortion, and he cried, «The pro-abortion flag is being planted on the wrong side of the liberal - conservative divide.»

He puts his finger on what I think explains the approval gap: «Unlike same - sex marriage, there is a clear, suffering victim in abortion.»

I think a lot of people get hung up on the political views of the members (Abortion... gay marriage... etc) but from what i've seen, they largely are just trying to help people in need from all walks of life.

Non-white religious conservatives will need to confront their constituencies on issues thought to be «Republican,» such as abortion and religious freedom.

Writing on the website Spiked, Ann Furedi, the head of BPAS (the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, a euphemism similar to «Planned Parenthood»), notes that «most people who think of themselves as liberal and modern - thinking believe that rape, incest, youth, poverty or even general «unwantedness» are «good reasons» for doctors to approve abortion; and they think «sex selection» is a bad reason, which should be stopped.»

«I don't think we will ever reach the middle on abortion... without a demonstrated commitment to human dignity at all stages.»

The point of entry came through an essay by Paul Ramsey that had made a powerful and decisive impression on me when I first began to think seriously about this matter of abortion more than forty years ago.

Moreover, I carefully pointed out that ethicists on this issue can basically be divided into two camps: those that view aborted fetuses as cadavers of a medical procedure and think that some good should come from abortions, and those that view aborted fetuses as victims of oppression, sin, and thoughtlessness, and therefore think that these victims should not be further exploited» especially under the guise of a «good cause.»