Friday, November 22, 2002
If you want to know how my dad is doing then you can just talk to me. E-mail, AIM, phone, whatever.
For something to read, here is the Presbyterian stance on abortion.
"Abortion
Presbyterians have struggled with the abortion issue for more than 25 years, beginning in 1970 when a General Assembly statement declared that "the artificial or induced termination of pregnancy is a matter of the careful ethical decision of the patient, . . . and therefore should not be restricted by law . . ."(1) The latest major statement on abortion by a Presbyterian General Assembly came in 1992. Here's an excerpt from that position statement:
. . . There is [both] agreement and disagreement on the basic issue of abortion. The committee [on problem pregnancies and abortion] agreed that there are no biblical texts that speak expressly to the topic of abortion, but that taken in their totality the Holy Scriptures are filled with messages that advocate respect for the woman and child before and after birth. Therefore the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) encourages an atmosphere of open debate and mutual respect for a variety of opinions concerning the issues related to problem pregnancies and abortion.
Areas of Substantial Agreement on the Issue of Abortion
•The church ought to be able to maintain within its fellowship those who, on the basis of a study of Scripture and prayerful decision, come to diverse conclusions and actions.
•Problem pregnancies are the result of, and influenced by, so many complicated and insolvable circumstances that we have neither the wisdom nor the authority to address or decide each situation.
•We affirm the ability and responsibility of women, guided by the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit, in the context of their communities of faith, to make good moral choices in regard to problem pregnancies.
•We call upon Presbyterians to work for a decrease in the number of problem pregnancies, thereby decreasing the number of abortions.
•The considered decision of a woman to terminate a pregnancy can be a morally acceptable, though certainly not the only or required, decision. Possible justifying circumstances would include medical indications of severe physical or mental deformity, conception as a result of rape or incest, or conditions under which the physical or mental health of either woman or child would be gravely threatened.
•We are disturbed by abortions that seem to be elected only as a convenience or ease embarrassment. We affirm that abortion should not be used as a method of birth control.
•Abortion is not morally acceptable for gender selection only or solely to obtain fetal parts for transplantation.
•We reject the use of violence and/or abusive language either in protest of or in support of abortion . . .
•The strong Christian presumption is that since all life is precious to God, we are to preserve and protect it. Abortion ought to be an option of last resort. . . .
•The Christian community must be concerned about and address the circumstances that bring a woman to consider abortion as the best available option. Poverty, unjust societal realities, sexism, racism, and inadequate supportive relationships may render a woman virtually powerless to choose freely.(2)
In a subsequent action, the 209th General Assembly (1997), while refusing to call for a ban on the late-term procedure often called "partial-birth" abortion, did offer the following "moral guidance" regarding this procedure:
That the 209th General Assembly (1997) offer a word of counsel to the church and our culture that the procedure known as intact dilation and extraction (commonly called "partial birth" abortion) of a baby who could live outside the womb is of grave moral concern and should be considered only if the mother's physical life is endangered by the pregnancy.
In addition to offering personal counsel, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has a long history of public policy advocacy. This tradition includes public stances on the abortion issue. The 1992 policy statement included these public policy recommendations:
There is diversity of opinion in the church as to whether or not abortion should be legal and on the extent to which the government should be permitted to regulate or prohibit abortions. The church acknowledges that many of its members find fault with the philosophical basis of Roe v. Wade and its division of pregnancy into three trimesters, preferring that the state be permitted to regulate and even prohibit abortions throughout the pregnancy, rather than just at the stage of viability. Others feel that Roe's framework effectively safeguards the constitutional liberties of pregnant women while also recognizing the state's interest in protecting the unborn child and the woman.
The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) also recognizes that if fetal development is no longer the standard by which the government measures the extent of its involvement in abortions, then our lawmakers must find some other acceptable standard by which the rights of the mother to terminate her pregnancy will be balanced against the state's interest in protecting the unborn child. Based on prior experiences of the courts and legislatures, it will not be easy to present a standard that will balance the competing interests in such a manner that will not lead to additional litigation. Courts and legislatures have not always well represented the interests of the economically disadvantaged, the undereducated, and women. Some among these groups historically have had greater difficulty in circumventing the obstacles posed by restrictive abortion legislation than have the more affluent.
The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) concedes that we cannot respond definitively to every legal aspect of the abortion issue in a manner that will garner consensus among the church constituency. We believe that in the shaping of the future law, the following affirmations are of vital consideration.
a. The state has a limited legitimate interest in regulating abortions and in restricting abortions in certain circumstances.
b. Within this context of the state's limited legitimate interest, no law should impose criminal penalties against any woman who chooses or physician who performs a medically safe abortion.
c. Within this same context of the state's limited legitimate interest, no law should deny access to safe and affordable services for the persons seeking to terminate a problem pregnancy.
d. No law or administrative decision should provide for a complete ban on abortion.
e. No law or administrative decision should
(1) limit access to abortions;
(2) limit information and counseling concerning abortions; or
(3) limit or prohibit public funding for necessary abortions for the socially and economically disadvantaged.
f. No law should prohibit access to, nor the practice of, contraceptive measures.
g. No law should sanction any action intended to harm or harass those persons contemplating or deciding to have an abortion.
h. No law should condone mandatory or forced abortion or sterilization. Such laws should be abolished where they do exist.(3) "
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
For something to read, here is the Presbyterian stance on abortion.
"Abortion
Presbyterians have struggled with the abortion issue for more than 25 years, beginning in 1970 when a General Assembly statement declared that "the artificial or induced termination of pregnancy is a matter of the careful ethical decision of the patient, . . . and therefore should not be restricted by law . . ."(1) The latest major statement on abortion by a Presbyterian General Assembly came in 1992. Here's an excerpt from that position statement:
. . . There is [both] agreement and disagreement on the basic issue of abortion. The committee [on problem pregnancies and abortion] agreed that there are no biblical texts that speak expressly to the topic of abortion, but that taken in their totality the Holy Scriptures are filled with messages that advocate respect for the woman and child before and after birth. Therefore the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) encourages an atmosphere of open debate and mutual respect for a variety of opinions concerning the issues related to problem pregnancies and abortion.
Areas of Substantial Agreement on the Issue of Abortion
•The church ought to be able to maintain within its fellowship those who, on the basis of a study of Scripture and prayerful decision, come to diverse conclusions and actions.
•Problem pregnancies are the result of, and influenced by, so many complicated and insolvable circumstances that we have neither the wisdom nor the authority to address or decide each situation.
•We affirm the ability and responsibility of women, guided by the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit, in the context of their communities of faith, to make good moral choices in regard to problem pregnancies.
•We call upon Presbyterians to work for a decrease in the number of problem pregnancies, thereby decreasing the number of abortions.
•The considered decision of a woman to terminate a pregnancy can be a morally acceptable, though certainly not the only or required, decision. Possible justifying circumstances would include medical indications of severe physical or mental deformity, conception as a result of rape or incest, or conditions under which the physical or mental health of either woman or child would be gravely threatened.
•We are disturbed by abortions that seem to be elected only as a convenience or ease embarrassment. We affirm that abortion should not be used as a method of birth control.
•Abortion is not morally acceptable for gender selection only or solely to obtain fetal parts for transplantation.
•We reject the use of violence and/or abusive language either in protest of or in support of abortion . . .
•The strong Christian presumption is that since all life is precious to God, we are to preserve and protect it. Abortion ought to be an option of last resort. . . .
•The Christian community must be concerned about and address the circumstances that bring a woman to consider abortion as the best available option. Poverty, unjust societal realities, sexism, racism, and inadequate supportive relationships may render a woman virtually powerless to choose freely.(2)
In a subsequent action, the 209th General Assembly (1997), while refusing to call for a ban on the late-term procedure often called "partial-birth" abortion, did offer the following "moral guidance" regarding this procedure:
That the 209th General Assembly (1997) offer a word of counsel to the church and our culture that the procedure known as intact dilation and extraction (commonly called "partial birth" abortion) of a baby who could live outside the womb is of grave moral concern and should be considered only if the mother's physical life is endangered by the pregnancy.
In addition to offering personal counsel, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has a long history of public policy advocacy. This tradition includes public stances on the abortion issue. The 1992 policy statement included these public policy recommendations:
There is diversity of opinion in the church as to whether or not abortion should be legal and on the extent to which the government should be permitted to regulate or prohibit abortions. The church acknowledges that many of its members find fault with the philosophical basis of Roe v. Wade and its division of pregnancy into three trimesters, preferring that the state be permitted to regulate and even prohibit abortions throughout the pregnancy, rather than just at the stage of viability. Others feel that Roe's framework effectively safeguards the constitutional liberties of pregnant women while also recognizing the state's interest in protecting the unborn child and the woman.
The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) also recognizes that if fetal development is no longer the standard by which the government measures the extent of its involvement in abortions, then our lawmakers must find some other acceptable standard by which the rights of the mother to terminate her pregnancy will be balanced against the state's interest in protecting the unborn child. Based on prior experiences of the courts and legislatures, it will not be easy to present a standard that will balance the competing interests in such a manner that will not lead to additional litigation. Courts and legislatures have not always well represented the interests of the economically disadvantaged, the undereducated, and women. Some among these groups historically have had greater difficulty in circumventing the obstacles posed by restrictive abortion legislation than have the more affluent.
The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) concedes that we cannot respond definitively to every legal aspect of the abortion issue in a manner that will garner consensus among the church constituency. We believe that in the shaping of the future law, the following affirmations are of vital consideration.
a. The state has a limited legitimate interest in regulating abortions and in restricting abortions in certain circumstances.
b. Within this context of the state's limited legitimate interest, no law should impose criminal penalties against any woman who chooses or physician who performs a medically safe abortion.
c. Within this same context of the state's limited legitimate interest, no law should deny access to safe and affordable services for the persons seeking to terminate a problem pregnancy.
d. No law or administrative decision should provide for a complete ban on abortion.
e. No law or administrative decision should
(1) limit access to abortions;
(2) limit information and counseling concerning abortions; or
(3) limit or prohibit public funding for necessary abortions for the socially and economically disadvantaged.
f. No law should prohibit access to, nor the practice of, contraceptive measures.
g. No law should sanction any action intended to harm or harass those persons contemplating or deciding to have an abortion.
h. No law should condone mandatory or forced abortion or sterilization. Such laws should be abolished where they do exist.(3) "
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
