Wednesday, May 04, 2022
A Message from New Christine
[Image by Ronnie Santana]
It's pretty rare (other than with haiku) that I lift something from the comments section to the main floor here, but I feel compelled to do exactly that with New Christine's comment on yesterday's post re the Dobbs case and the legacy of Roe v. Wade. Here it is:
As a life long Catholic, a very outspoken and often very critical
Catholic, I have maintained a position that the Church’s advocacy for
‘Life’ and the continued efforts to outlaw abortion were mostly
misguided . . . as is much of the Pro-Choice movement.
Decades of debating when life begins, ‘personhood’ and the many other nuances of both the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice movements have, more often than not, done little to provide safe and secure homes to feed, clothe, shelter and educate the children’s lives that their contentious ‘Advocacy’ professes should be ‘Cherished’ . . . cherished while in the womb and often ‘unseen’ once outside the womb.
Amongst a large segment of our citizenry that advocates ‘not’ for universal health care, paid family leave, early pre-school, affordable day care, the dignity of work, affordable housing, expanded nutrition programs and more . . . it’s time both the Catholic Church and the Pro-Choice movements come together to ‘step-up’ their game . . . cast down their placard printed slogans and march into the communities they profess to serve and practice what they preach . . .
From Matthew 25:
`Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'
[42] for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
[43] I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.'
[44] Then they also will answer, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?'
[45] Then he will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.'
Across the walls that divide, often only ‘talking points’ of both the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice movements are heard . . . hearts and hands unseen and concealed.
It’s time to ‘tear down’ the walls that separate, look into each other’s eyes, ‘See’ our brothers and sisters for who they truly are, join hearts and hands . . . and come together for the benefit of ‘All God’s Children’ . . . –
Decades of debating when life begins, ‘personhood’ and the many other nuances of both the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice movements have, more often than not, done little to provide safe and secure homes to feed, clothe, shelter and educate the children’s lives that their contentious ‘Advocacy’ professes should be ‘Cherished’ . . . cherished while in the womb and often ‘unseen’ once outside the womb.
Amongst a large segment of our citizenry that advocates ‘not’ for universal health care, paid family leave, early pre-school, affordable day care, the dignity of work, affordable housing, expanded nutrition programs and more . . . it’s time both the Catholic Church and the Pro-Choice movements come together to ‘step-up’ their game . . . cast down their placard printed slogans and march into the communities they profess to serve and practice what they preach . . .
From Matthew 25:
`Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'
[42] for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
[43] I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.'
[44] Then they also will answer, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?'
[45] Then he will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.'
Across the walls that divide, often only ‘talking points’ of both the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice movements are heard . . . hearts and hands unseen and concealed.
It’s time to ‘tear down’ the walls that separate, look into each other’s eyes, ‘See’ our brothers and sisters for who they truly are, join hearts and hands . . . and come together for the benefit of ‘All God’s Children’ . . . –
Comments:
<< Home
Yes, I agree, although I'd argue that the anti-abortion forces are typically more to blame in terms of ignoring what happens to all the children once they're born. They are the ones who want children born to women who've been raped, to women who are going to give birth to a child with impossible disabilities or medical conditions, yet for the most part their concern stops at birth. In general, those who are advocating for the ability to choose are already concerned with how to support the child after it would be born; in most cases, that is why they need to have an abortion.
Please see this, from Michele Norris in the Washington Post yesterday: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/03/children-women-roe-leak/
and
https://www.inquirer.com/news/abortion-anti-abortion-pro-abortion-poverty-federal-budget-cuts-trump-children-20190520.html
The Democratic majority--pro-choice on the whole--passed the $3,600 Child Tax Credit in 2021 for the purpose of bring children out of poverty. Programs such TANF, while not perfect, have been passed in administrations which on the whole supported a woman's right to choose.
According to the Philadelphia Inquirer article, quoting Vox,, the Trump administration, on the other hand, "in his proposed 2020 budget several cuts to programs that help children and their families" including
— $1.5 trillion in cuts to Medicaid over 10 years, implementing work requirements and eliminating Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act.
— $220 billion in cuts to SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) over 10 years, also implementing work requirements. SNAP, according to the New Yorker, is “the single biggest reason why malnutrition has largely vanished from the United States.” Trump would replace much of SNAP with so-called Harvest Boxes of food sent to people, an idea widely denounced as impractical.
— $207 billion in cuts to the student loan program, as well as nearly $4 billion taken from Pell Grants, federal money given to college students in need.
— Overall cuts of 9 percent to programs such as WIC, subsidized housing vouchers, and Head Start."
My point is that in this case, we can't just say both parties are to blame. The hypocrisy of the anti-choice Republicans has been tangible, while the results of the pro-choice advocates have been real. Pro-choice advocates on the whole have voted for those who implement programs to help poor women and children. That is the truth. I hope those who are anti-choice can take a hard look at themselves and practice what they preach.
Please see this, from Michele Norris in the Washington Post yesterday: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/03/children-women-roe-leak/
and
https://www.inquirer.com/news/abortion-anti-abortion-pro-abortion-poverty-federal-budget-cuts-trump-children-20190520.html
The Democratic majority--pro-choice on the whole--passed the $3,600 Child Tax Credit in 2021 for the purpose of bring children out of poverty. Programs such TANF, while not perfect, have been passed in administrations which on the whole supported a woman's right to choose.
According to the Philadelphia Inquirer article, quoting Vox,, the Trump administration, on the other hand, "in his proposed 2020 budget several cuts to programs that help children and their families" including
— $1.5 trillion in cuts to Medicaid over 10 years, implementing work requirements and eliminating Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act.
— $220 billion in cuts to SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) over 10 years, also implementing work requirements. SNAP, according to the New Yorker, is “the single biggest reason why malnutrition has largely vanished from the United States.” Trump would replace much of SNAP with so-called Harvest Boxes of food sent to people, an idea widely denounced as impractical.
— $207 billion in cuts to the student loan program, as well as nearly $4 billion taken from Pell Grants, federal money given to college students in need.
— Overall cuts of 9 percent to programs such as WIC, subsidized housing vouchers, and Head Start."
My point is that in this case, we can't just say both parties are to blame. The hypocrisy of the anti-choice Republicans has been tangible, while the results of the pro-choice advocates have been real. Pro-choice advocates on the whole have voted for those who implement programs to help poor women and children. That is the truth. I hope those who are anti-choice can take a hard look at themselves and practice what they preach.
# posted by 
: 10:21 AM
: 10:21 AM
Amy - so well said, and very true. The examples you have shared represent acts of concern, charity and proposals advocated by those who have offered and given of their 'hearts and hands' to those in need of being 'seen' and requiring the assistance you describe.
Too many progressives often 'look on' while their inner cities continue to burn. In a way, 'small town' America has their individualized struggles and challenges - though often many inner city residents face different work schedule and housing quality & cost challenges that place undo stress on the fabric of families more acutely.
My 'unequal' criticism is directed to those leaders (including politicians) who speak with indignation advocating for policy, convinced they have done their part, while often 'sitting' on their hands and claiming to speak from their hearts, hearts that seldom experience neither the suffering they advocate alleviating or experiencing the tender embrace of appreciation after giving more completely of themselves.
Don't get me wrong, reclaiming and revitalizing the underpinnings of an envisioned healthy and more equal society (that arguably could previously be described as offering more opportunities for all of our citizenry) that, each in our own way, we have paid insufficient attention to is a daunting challenge we must 'all' confront collectively - even if a large portion of society is aggrieved and acts like they do not give a 'damn'.
Those who give generously of themselves will always be invited to contribute even more. To those who much has been given - much more will be required . . . as is intended . . .
Post a Comment
Too many progressives often 'look on' while their inner cities continue to burn. In a way, 'small town' America has their individualized struggles and challenges - though often many inner city residents face different work schedule and housing quality & cost challenges that place undo stress on the fabric of families more acutely.
My 'unequal' criticism is directed to those leaders (including politicians) who speak with indignation advocating for policy, convinced they have done their part, while often 'sitting' on their hands and claiming to speak from their hearts, hearts that seldom experience neither the suffering they advocate alleviating or experiencing the tender embrace of appreciation after giving more completely of themselves.
Don't get me wrong, reclaiming and revitalizing the underpinnings of an envisioned healthy and more equal society (that arguably could previously be described as offering more opportunities for all of our citizenry) that, each in our own way, we have paid insufficient attention to is a daunting challenge we must 'all' confront collectively - even if a large portion of society is aggrieved and acts like they do not give a 'damn'.
Those who give generously of themselves will always be invited to contribute even more. To those who much has been given - much more will be required . . . as is intended . . .
<< Home
