Right Left Whatever

John Kerry was quick to fall back on his Catholic and "alter boy" status when asked in the recent presidential debate about his abortion views. It's assuring to know that he was brought up with moral teachings and now has outgrown them. He "totaly respect"s the questioners views. He doesn't respect her, He doesn't respect his own church's views.
Respect = deference, esteem, fealty, admiration, reverence, honor.
I don't beleive for a second that's the way he feels about Pro-lifer's. If he truly did have respect, then he fails for his lack of conviction. A trate we normally seek in a president.

Kerry claims he can't legislate his conscience. If elected he won't have to! His liberal judge appointees are already prone to legislating.

"It's assuring to know that he was brought up with moral teachings and now has outgrown them."

Interesting assumption that the only way a person can be moral is to be anti-abortion. I know LOTS of folks who don't believe they could decide to end a potential life themselves but also strongly feel that a person has the right to search their own conscience to make that decsion for themselves. Not one of these people is PRO abortion. All are highly moral individuals. I believe that John Kerry is in the group that would not decide to have a fetus aborted due to his personal beliefs. I see no contradiction in his stance that in this free country, others can search their own conscience and act accordingly.

There is a big difference between a person who, holding no political office, will not have an abortion but supports those who do, and a politician who has the same viewpoint, but controls the government purse and is willing to use it to pay for abortions conducted all over the globe. If Kerry would support my freedom of conscience, he would also not fund the UNFPA, but he has said that he will do so. His statement that he will respect peoples' consciences is false.

The moral ambiguity of disliking abortion but allowing others to legally have them is meaningless. The unborn child is either a living being or he/she is not. In the former case, abortion is a horrendous crime, a violation of the first right, the right to life. In the latter case, it is no different than having one's tonsils removed, and there is no reason to be "personally opposed".

My position is the former, that abortion is killing innocent life. John Kerry would have voters believe that he respects life, but by being unwilling to pass even one common sense regulation to restrict the most egregious method of abortion, partial birth abortion, and by being unwilling to consider an unborn child as a victim in cases of the murder of a pregnant woman, he has betrayed his true sentiment as that of the latter, that having an abortion is just as harmless as removing a set of tonsils.
His rhetoric of being personally opposed but respecting other's consciences is nonsense.

"Being a victim of violence is not a virtue."

That is often the case, but not necessarily true. Christ and the Christian martyrs' death supposes that being a victim can under some circumstances be a virtue.

I find it very intersting that George Bush hasn't been able to use his own moral authority to persuade his wife, Laura, who opposes overturning Roe v. Wade.

"The unborn child is either a living being or he/she is not."

And if it were really as black and white as this, then there would be no debate about it. But for many of us there is a big, big difference between a life and a potential life. If a woman, with God and her Doctor, decides she cannot properly nurture her fetus to birth then she can decide to end a potential life. I object to being labelled as "immoral" for holding a different belief. I am glad that John Kerry can hold more respect for people who believe differently than he does. And, a potential human life is WAY different than tonsils. I think that attempt at relegating Kerry's stance in this way is way out of line and disrespectful.

"I think that attempt at relegating Kerry's stance in this way is way out of line and disrespectful."

"Out of line" Are you serious? Have you been watching the campaign? All I've done is given a thoughtful criticism of Kerry's judgment. I've used no derogatory words, I've used no ad hominem attacks. I haven't called him a "drunk" or a "retard", I haven't fired gunshots into his campaign workers' offices, I haven't stolen any of his campaign signs, I haven't vandalized any cars with his name on a bumper sticker. Seems to me that I've shown quite a bit of restraint compared to others, even by declining to state which political party is guilty of all of the above.

"Disrespectful" Well, yes. I don't respect his position, and again, I stated why I don't. I'm glad I spoke clearly.

I stated “moral teachings” in my comment, perhaps I should have been more specific referring to the Catholic moral teachings or catechesis. This systematic subject is based on logic, ethics, and religious study. Mr. Kerry ascribed to his own Catholic beliefs and upbringing in answering a question. HE set the stage. I pointed out the hypocrisy, and I DO see it as a contradiction.

I also realize there are other philosophies. Should I call Machiavellian and Nietzean views immoral? Is a little selfishness good? How about a lot? Is every moral question reduced to a matter of personal perspective? Hence, lawlessness.

But you stated yourself the key to the abortion debate is whether the “unborn child is either a living being or...” I agree; but I would rephrase: Is “he/she” a living - human - being? I hold that this three part question IS investigate-able and answerable by logic and science and not a matter of personal perspective.

I agree, Joe, my point of view is better expressed by the phrase "an unborn child is a living human being", and their inherent worth and dignity comes from God, just as it does for all of us who are outside the womb.

"All I've done is given a thoughtful criticism of Kerry's judgment. I've used no derogatory words..."

It's a matter of judgement. John Kerry will not make his own beliefs the law of the land. He will not make abortions illegal for others. Saying that he considers fetuses to be equivalent to tonsils is incredibly derogatory. He has never said anything that can justify that characterization of him.

A fetus is NOT exactly the same as a living human being. At some point during gestation, the fetus truly becomes an "unborn child". Exactly what point that is is pretty hotly contested.