Cognitive Dissonance?
By Mitch Berg
Michelle Malkin noticed something that I’ve been pointing out for years and years:
And while Democrat Party chair Howard Dean excoriates the Republican Party as the “white” party, I saw only one-non-white agitator among the pro-abortion gaggle. (This goes for the rest of the Recreate ‘68 populace, too. It’s as pale and colorless as a Colorado snowfall.) Across the street from the Planned Parenthood event, however, were many incensed black- and brown-skinned moms. Incensed, that is, that an abortion mill had been built right across from the park where their children practice football and swing on the playground set.
One of the moms, Priscilla said bluntly: “I don’t want a f**king abortion clinic in my neighborhood!” A Hispanic mother added: “It’s against the Catholic Church.” (Are you listening, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi?) When asked about her views on abortion, another black mother of three I spoke to while sitting in her minivan told me simply: “I don’t believe in it.”
Education, free enterprise and – eventually – social issues like abortion are going to be the ones that drive the Dems up on the rocks, especially with minority and immigrant voters. It won’t scupper them this election; it might take a generation.
But it’ll happen.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:14 am
There are several theological issues that the democrats never seem to want to bring up when discussing abortion, since they’d rather not think about the consequences of the act. Understanding that life begins at conception and looking at this act from a Catholic perspective of original sin, any un-baptized child would be bound for hell. Since an aborted child (or miscarriage) wouldn’t have the opportunity to receive baptism, one can only assume that he or she will end up like shrimp on a BBQ, through no act of their own. Of course some of YOU NEW AGERS might want to think that they all go to heaven; once again, through no act of their own free will; while the rest of us are branded sinners by the mere act of being born. Preventing their ascension at this point seems like an act of petty jealousy.
It doesn’t matter, however, whether you’re talking about them going to heaven or hell; because either way you’re still talking about predestination. God makes the divine proclamation to save or damn the little bug eyed prawn, without them ever having to make a decision or choice of their own.
In the end it all comes down to this…if you believe that the unborn have a soul then you also have to believe in some manner of predestination. Of course if it’s predestined, then it doesn’t matter what you do. God or fate has already spoken.
One could make an argument for the existence of “limbo”, in which the child would be given a chance to make a choice concerning its salvation; but in this situation, the actions of the mother would still be irrelevant.
A child must be independent from the womb in order to be an agent of free will. Prior to this he or she can only exist as an extension of the mother: the mother eats—the child eats; the mother drinks too much—the child drinks too much; the mother does drugs—the child does drugs; and if the mother dies—the child also dies unless it is separated and breaths life of its own accord.
My dad once wisely told my sister, “seems to me…it ain’t bread ‘til it’s baked.”
–Rev. John M. Bradley