I don't want to start a political commenting war; I genuinely just want to ask people's honest opinions. Does first thing = first priority?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- Lois E. Lane
- Flying by the seat of my pants, playing by heart, cooking with no recipe — just a full-time wife and mommy masquerading as a part-time writer. In no particular order, my favorite things are my husband, Jesus, my baby, morning tea, green, my wonderful family, words, my iTunes "Autumn Thoughts" mix, good journalism, theology, and the idea of sitting down to read.
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
3 comments:
Oh, I get it, turn America into something it's supposed to be like a nation of baby killers.
i have never enjoyed the cutting up of speeches that omit the context of what was actually said. as i learned in grad school "context is key."
this is a very complicated issue and not one that can be summed up in one statement... although to get to the root, one cannot be a proponent of polarization. the question should be - What can we do to limit abortions in the US?
as opposed to making blanket generalizations that "we are a nation of babykillers" which polarizes the issue. instead we should strive to come together to solve the moral issue of mother's feeling they have no other option than to abort. what is the root? and how can we as Christians help mothers choose adoption, or other options rather than abortion?
it must be a concerted effort to stop abortions at the community level, not a governmental ban, as this targets the way in which people have abortions and not the root of why.
just some thoughts.
As always, thanks for your thoughts, Sam! I assume they were directed more to everyday anne than to me? I agree there are deeper issues at stake here, issues that need to be dealt with by communities and (hopefully) Christian individuals.
I realize the speech was spliced and I'm typically not a fan of that, but there was only one blip I wanted to highlight: the first thing he'll do in office. Does "first thing" = first priority? That's the question I wanted to pose. But since you bring it up, it's my understanding that the Freedom of Choice Act would in fact *do away with* restrictions already set by state and local governments -- which seems like the kind of community vs. government control you advocate. Am I misunderstanding its intent? I'm certainly not an expert on the issue.
Post a Comment