Comments for The First Freedom and the First Right at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 12 out of 12 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Mon, 20 May 2013 02:44:06 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3337 Of course, rape is always held out as the hard case. Ok, you can have abortion for rape, incest and to save the life of the mother. That would reduce abortions in America from 1.2 millon to about 20,000. Of course, then we would work to close that loophole, too. What would I do if it were my daughter? I would help her deal with the rape and to welcome the new life into the world, not kill the baby which would only further wound my daughter. - Austin Ruse Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:56:11 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3327 It's all so black and white for you isn't it? What if your daughter or wife was raped and wanted an abortion. Do you have the right to keep her from making that decision. What if keeping a pregnancy meant she would die? Now how come I never hear people of your ilk talking about the injustices of 100,000 Iraqii deaths and 400 dead Americans for an unjust war based on lies but fought by all sorts of so called Christians? How about all the people of "faith" that are selling alcohol &tobacco? - Patrick Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:27:20 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3307 When a person's rights not to follow any faith encroach on the rights of the faithful to practice theirs, then the first amendment has been violated. When religious symbols are forcibly removed or prohibited from public display, then the concept of religious freedom has become a mockery. When the U.S. Constitution is trampled--as it has been for decades--in the name of the freedom of a few cranks and radicals, then liberty itself is gone, and our country in jeopardy. - Bill Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:53:01 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3306 Chris, I think you have succumbed to what Mary Ann Glendon called "rights talk". And this thread, sadly, has veered off of the purpose of my column which is considering why the unborn are not considered rights bearing creatures by the human rights establishment of both left and right. - Austin Ruse Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:32:15 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3303 The founders of the United States communicated to us why people have rights...because those rights "are endowed by their Creator'. Because of God, even the dead still have rights...among these: the right to have their legal wills executed as they directed in life, the right not to be defamed, the right not to be falsely accused, etc. - Chris Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:05:08 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3302 That is a very good question....and i dont have a very good answer except that we do not know much about the interior lives of the comatose except that one exists and perhaps mixed deep inside there are obligations that are met or not met. Perhaps, the obligation to go on living. Moreover, I suspect i am wrong is asserting that the only reason the dead do not have rights is becuase they do not have obligations. That was too glib. - Austin Ruse Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:15:52 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3301 Unless the obligation of the comatose person or fetus is to live, would you tell me what obligations a comatose person or a fetus would have as opposed to a dead person and thus enabling rights. I am a bit confused with the meaning of obligation as it relates to one's rights. - Willie Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:42:11 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3300 howie, Having a voice is not the prerequisite for having rights. In fact, someone in a coma who has no voice and no way to communicate certainly has rights. The dead do not have rights because they do not have obligations. - Austin Ruse Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:57:48 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3298 "The dead do not have rights"...because the dead do not have voices. The living, who speak for the dead are just a few of the voices in the crowd, the few whose views are necessarily eschewed by the crowd once it deems them to be at cross-purposes with the will of itself. The will of this age, as expressed by the living is, apparently, sex unbridled from its procreative purpose. The dead do not have rights, nor voices, nor sex. The living do. For a while, anyway. God help us. - Howie Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:49:36 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3299 Joseph, Certainly freedom from religious compulsion is a part of religious freedom. The Church recognizes that. This is one of the great developments of Vatican II. - Austn Ruse Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:45:21 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3297 Wading through Augustine's City of God, I note that the Bishop of Hippo makes exceptions for murder, such as soldiers acting under authority and "special" divine messages, i.e. Abraham about to slay his son on God's command. Abortion is clearly murder, as the innocent are the victims; but where the argument gets muddy is in the case of the "guilty," or those whom authorities decide are deserving of death. Some would argue that freedom FROM religion is just as important as freedom OF. - Joseph Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:53:08 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-first-freedom-and-the-first-right.html#comment-3296 The right to life is a hallmark of our becoming a nation. The present denial of that right by this government seems to be a contradiction. If the government is in the business of defining personhood one must wonder where that right came from. If the human fetus is not a person then what is it? If the government continues to define personhood in various states of existence, we may someday be in trouble, The rights of the mentally compromised are surely to be denied next. Is this tyranny? - Willie Fri, 30 Oct 2009 06:59:38 +0100