Quantcast
Opinion

George F. Will: Debate over abortion brings out pro-life intolerance

Comments

Return To Article
  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 10, 2013 12:03 p.m.

    Counter Intelligence
    Salt Lake City, UT

    You made no sense
    But regardless; protecting human life IS everyone’s business
    (after all - if abortion is unrestricted and homosexuality is genetic - you could snuff me out and call yourself "tolerant")

    12:23 p.m. April 9, 2013

    ===========

    1. My Mother and my wife have both been in life threatening situations during pregnancy and delivery. I was thankful that my Mother and my wife and their Doctors had all resources availabele to make the best decisions possible without having to face criminal charges in life or death decisions and without being victims to political ideology.

    It's nobody's business.

    2. My younger brother is gay. We love him, and would NEVER had an elective aboration based on that.

    3. Ironically, the same one who are against gays, are also against abortion -- so I'm not the one in the catch-22 dilemma. That would be a pure hate crime, based on bigotry - not based on rape, incest, life/health of the woman, or viability of the fetus - which is how I interpret my being Pro-Choice.

    4. Yes, I am indeed tolerant, brother.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    April 9, 2013 2:51 p.m.

    Re: "I'm not seeing people on the right beg women to NOT have abortions and offering to help them in any way possible."

    Unlikely.

    Or, to be charitable and ecourage diversity, maybe you're just not looking.

    The "sidewalk counseling" that is so threatening and hateful to Johns Hopkins' [and all academe's] "diversity" crowd is that very thing.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    April 9, 2013 1:43 p.m.

    CI..no tolerence for your outdated belief based opinion..yes. And my response was to you acusing me of not tolerating campus discussion when I simply disagareed with you. I didn't make any comments about that part of the article..stay on topic. Yes, sometimes laws are unjust..but again you bring nothing new to the discussion outside of your beliefs. The overturning of unjust civil rights laws happened because of facts not religious beliefs.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    April 9, 2013 12:23 p.m.

    pragmatistferlife
    "Then you make the leap of logic and insinuate that some here want to ban some univeristiy groups. That leap makes no sense."

    Um - that was what the article was about: violating free speech and banning a pro-life group at John Hopkins University under the phony guise of tolerance - did you not read it before condemning others?.
    AND you didn’t respond to my point - that laws are sometimes unjust - you merely lapsed into typical uniformed left wing bully format to obfuscate the question.

    However, thank you for that little moment of clarity when you admitted you really have no tolerance.

    airnaut
    You made no sense
    But regardless; protecting human life IS everyone’s business
    (after all - if abortion is unrestricted and homosexuality is genetic - you could snuff me out and call yourself "tolerant")

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    April 9, 2013 11:19 a.m.

    Counter Intelligence
    Salt Lake City, UT

    Open MindedMormon
    Telling people that human life is "none of your business" is spectacularly close-minded

    1:27 p.m. April 8, 2013

    =============

    If I'm not mistaken - you once mentioned that you are gay.

    So, don't you think telling other people how to live their life --
    while telling others your situation is "none of your business" is spectacularly hypocritical?

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    April 8, 2013 10:43 p.m.

    counter intelligence..believe what you want, say what you want, but the law is the law, and it is the result of this same debate and you bring nothing new to the discussion. You have no new facts, no new evidence just your same old beliefs. That's the point. If you had something new to add to the discussion we could show you tolerence and have an open discussion but you don't, so I tolerate your right to believe what you will, but I'm not going to tolerate listening to your opinion you have nothing of value to say I haven't heard before. Then you make the leap of logic and insinuate that some here want to ban some univeristiy groups. That leap makes no sense.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    April 8, 2013 1:27 p.m.

    pragmatistferlife
    "that argument took place thrity years ago and resulted in Roe v. Wade, that is now the law."
    The Real Maverick
    "The issue of abortion was resolved like 30 years ago."

    The Supreme Court also once agreed that blacks were not fully human - that did NOT resolve the dabate - it merely prolonged the hate

    Regardless: Are you actually supporting campus censorship? Then why should I ever have any respect for your ironic brand of "tolerance"?

    Open MindedMormon
    Telling people that human life is "none of your business" is spectacularly close-minded

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    April 8, 2013 1:20 p.m.

    @the old switcharoo
    "I'm not seeing people on the right beg women to NOT have abortions and offering to help them in any way possible." Then you are not paying attention. There are thousands of pregnancy counseling centers (who don’t enjoy Planned Parenthoods government leach status) and there are adoption clinics run by charities AND there are also a lot of "right-wing' parents who try to convince their children to be sexually responsible so as not to need an abortion in the first place.
    Abortion: More than any other issue brings out the bigotry of left-wing bullies who are completely intolerant of any one else’s choice and simply demand that others pay for, prescribe or perform their abortion regardless of the other person’s choice: Pro-choice has devolved into militant hypocrisy.
    Posters who support the banning of a pro-life group from campus merely verify that the left is morally vapid and has become the consummate censors and extremists

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    April 8, 2013 9:29 a.m.

    Rape, Incest, Life and Health of the Woman, Viability of the Fetus.

    No aborations ever, not for any reason, not for any circumstances is "irresponsible"

    I stand with the LDS CHurch on this matter.

    Aboration is legal, and the choice is between the woman, her family, her Doctor and God.

    To the rest of you, it's really none of your business.

  • Star Bright Salt Lake City, Ut
    April 8, 2013 9:13 a.m.

    I think every one who supports/or doesn't support sit in a room together and watch an abortion up until the day before birth and then discuss what they have seen. A Dr is on trial because he killed babies who were actually born alive and then understand that obama held up a bill in Illinois that said a Dr must give live saving help to babies born alive even though they were aborted. In Illinois they were leaving them in a closet until they stopped fighting for life and died.
    It's a small step from devaluing an infant to doing the same to the elderly.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    April 8, 2013 8:44 a.m.

    The main point of the article is this - Newton's 3rd law of motion is alive and well in American politics.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 8, 2013 8:37 a.m.

    "However, why would a moral, responsible adult disagree with those things being reinforced at school?"

    The problem is the grey areas. And there are many.

    I believe that ETHICS should be taught in school, not morals.

    I imagine that in most schools the ill of lying, cheating and stealing are reinforced at school.

    What is a teacher talked about the responsible use of alcohol in a high school class?
    That would not sit well with many. That is a moral issue (for some) but not an ethical one.

    Would some teachers overstep their bounds and tell kids that drinking coffee is morally wrong?

    Ethics can and should be reinforced in schools and I am confident that they are.

    But that is not what many want. They want their morals taught.

    That is where we get into problems.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    April 8, 2013 8:02 a.m.

    Liberal & progressive thinkers: I agree. All the things I mention should be taught at home. However, why would a moral, responsible adult disagree with those things being reinforced at school? In the absence of these things being taught at home, then why hold me accountable for the consequences of those things not being taught in the home and/or at school? To be specific, getting the federal government out of anything not specifically mentioned in the constitution, or even if they not, I don't believe I am responsible for any federal program such as welfare, or any others, that don't help people understand the connection between decision and accountability. Life is hard! Progressives and liberals just don't get it, but want everyone to pay for the things that they don't understand!

  • Joan Watson TWIN FALLS, ID
    April 8, 2013 7:53 a.m.

    I am personaly thankful that I have lived, that my mother did not use an abortionist who would have yanked/torn me out of the womb and who would have no mercy if I were still a living human being. What is the difference between ancient civilizations sacrificing their babies to idols and what we are doing today in sacrificing our unborn children for convenience sake - that has become the god of today?

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    April 8, 2013 7:44 a.m.

    Red State, you say you would respect a logical argument from those supporting a womans right to choose, and that those who support that position should respect the opinions of those who oppose any and all abortions. I'm sorry but I don't believe you, simply because that argument took place thrity years ago and resulted in Roe v. Wade, that is now the law. A comprimise was found between the positions, a comprimise that is supported by over 70% of Americans. Why do we need a new reasonable discussion, what new information do you have to bring to the discussion. Only that a small vocal group of conservatives now believe that the second an egg and a sperm meet a child is formed..sorry that's not new nor is it widely believed. It was the discussion thrity years ago. When you have something new then it will be time for a new discussion, until then you need to live with the results of our republic and act with the tolerence your prophet asks you to have.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    April 8, 2013 6:19 a.m.

    Banderson, why do you equate the word "liberal" with irresponsible? my vieews are liberal or progressive and I taught my children all those things. You are painting with a sloppy broad brush there banderson and that is "irresponsible".

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 8, 2013 6:01 a.m.

    Red,

    I have never met anyone who is pro abortion.

    You say that we should "respect the people making the anti argument and not just dismiss them as right-wing crazies."

    one thing to note. In a recent WSJ/NBC poll concerning Roe V Wade

    "70 percent of Americans want the landmark abortion rights ruling to stay. "

    Self proclaimed Republicans in the poll were evenly split on the issue.

    It is not a winning issue, even for Republicans.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 8, 2013 5:53 a.m.

    Banderson,

    All those things you mention are good things for kids to learn. AT HOME.

    School should be for Reading, Riting and Rithmetic.

  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    April 7, 2013 7:58 p.m.

    I'm not seeing people on the right beg women to NOT have abortions and offering to help them in any way possible.

    You DO actually care about the baby right? Or is it just a theoretical hypocritical political position?

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    April 7, 2013 8:01 p.m.

    Hutterite: I agree, lets be adults about this. Since children, including teenagers, don't understand the ramifications of being unchaste, how about requiring public educators to give them basic information, such as: Sex before marriage is wrong; having a child before marriage is irresponsible; and getting an education before getting married is the best place to start. Unfortunately, it is politically incorrect to teach kids the truth because we have liberal irresponsible parents that don't want those things taught and who can't or won't teach their children some of these 'basic' truths.

  • red state pride Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 7, 2013 7:26 p.m.

    I think the point of Mr Will's column is that there is complete hypocrisy from the allegedly "tolerant" American left. They are tolerant as long as you fall in line with all the "correct thinking" people. It's scary quite frankly. They do not care what your opinion is if it does not align with theirs and they do not want to discuss it. Johns Hopkins is a case in point.
    Instead of making rational arguments they seek to shame people (at least for now) into silence if they disagree. Not far in the future your opinions will be criminalized. It's happening already - in Canada and in Europe. In all the socialist utopias we should allegedly aspire to be like it's already happening.
    As far as I'm concerned if you're pro-abortion that's your prerogative and if you can make a rational argument why you are I'll listen. But I expect you to be able to consider the other perspective and respect the people making the anti argument and not just dismiss them as right-wing crazies.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 7, 2013 6:26 p.m.

    Samhill.

    Here "may" be an example of what Blue Devil is referring to.

    How can one be anti birth control and anti abortion?

    I do understand the point that many want abstinence only birth control, but we just may need a more realistic solution based on real world scenarios.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    April 7, 2013 4:00 p.m.

    Repubs.

    The issue of abortion was resolved like 30 years ago. That ship has sailed away. Time to argue about relevant things. Time to wake up and get back in touch with America for else face extinction.

    Lastly, why don't repubs use their gun mentality for abortion? Creating more laws and regulations won't stop abortion. Folks who want abortion will still get it, right repubs?

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    April 7, 2013 3:05 p.m.

    "The two are not mutually exclusive, "

    and yet they seems to be. Your own comments show more desire to attack, to argue, to take extreme positions by declaring "hypocritical mockery of concepts like "diversity" and "intolerance" while leaping through tortuous logical hoops in their defense of infanticide."

    I can see it now.... "Hey hypocrite.... lets work together on this problem". From my years doing business development across countries, cultures, and belief systems, very seldom does insulting the other party provide a solid foundation for creating positive dialog and solutions.

    Perhaps your experience differs.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    April 7, 2013 2:51 p.m.

    Maybe we should get to a new place, where we acknowledge that we desire sex, it's not 'dirty', and that unintended pregnancy can be prevented. It's time to become adults about it.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    April 7, 2013 12:39 p.m.

    Up until now we've had the religious right, i.e. Pat Robertson, the Eagle Forum. But now we have what we could call the "Scary Right", Planned Parenthood, Barbara Boxer, etc. Killing the politically weak because it is convenient.

    If viability is the definition of when a person is alive, what about the fuzzy line about maybe viable, 5 1/2 months in a pregnancy? A person who was not viable in 1982 is viable now with improvements in prenatal care. If someone is in a coma, then they are not viable then we can disconnect the life support, But can we still abort them anyway? or make a hole in their brain? What if they are bedridden, then they aren't viable. Can we make a hole in their brain then too?

    Mother Teresa said once that abortion is the biggest threat to world peace. "If a mother can kill her child then what will stop us from killing one another?"

  • samhill Salt Lake City, UT
    April 7, 2013 12:17 p.m.

    Yet another clear-as-a-bell indictment of the whole pro-abortion mentality that makes a hypocritical mockery of concepts like "diversity" and "intolerance" while leaping through tortuous logical hoops in their defense of infanticide.

    Similar to the obfuscating "logic" employed by "UtahBlueDevel" when instructing us as follows, "Let us stop arguing about abortion, and start working more towards eliminating those situations that make abortion even a factor."

    As if "...working more towards eliminating those situations that make abortion even a factor." requires us to, "...stop arguing about abortion...". The two are not mutually exclusive, particularly since the ethics of abortion, the crux of the abortion arguments, are the main reason we should be "...working more towards eliminating those situations that make abortion even a factor."

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    April 7, 2013 11:15 a.m.

    What brings intolerance is the arguments from either side that refused to agree to work on those things they both agree upon, but rather yell at each other from the sides.

    I do not agree with abortion.... but realize that there are parts of the argument that will not be resolved by further arguing and debate. What I do see though is great and vast areas of mutual agreement on both sides. Let us stop arguing about abortion, and start working more towards eliminating those situations that make abortion even a factor.

    Lets teach our young women to not get themselves into situations where they would ever need to make such a horrific decision. Lets teach our young men to not put these young women into having to make these decisions. And lets teach these young people how to deal with their "mistakes" honorably.

    If you want to stop abortion, stop the conditions that make abortion an option to be decided upon.