Comments for The “No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Act” at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 6 out of 6 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Fri, 24 May 2013 17:53:52 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-no-taxpayer-funding-of-abortion-act.html#comment-8334 My comment is that with the fact that women are taking this up in such a way as to make the poor woman feel that there is not an answer as to whether she is to complete the life that she holds within her is too awful to even think about. People should be regarding Life as a truly remarkable thing. Now what if their mother had even thought of getting rid of them. If the person is young and it would put a burden on the family to add just one more to the table, there are millions out there who would be more than willing to adopt. And the fact that Moses was put into a little wicker basket with a large leaf over to make it float down the river until the queen found it is an ancient Good Story that every Christian must remember. God has a reason for every life that he allows on this earth. It is what we do with this life that we will have to account to the Almighty God for everything and we shall be held accountable! - Nesta (Kainz) Callahan Thu, 29 Sep 2011 20:37:18 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-no-taxpayer-funding-of-abortion-act.html#comment-6744 On a second look I was tempted to change that passage that caught Mr. Topfer's eye. I was writing on the Dornan Amendment on the funding of abortions in the District of Columbia. I saw later how it might have been misread. I'd prefer to say "on the funding of abortions," but we'll keep "de-fund," not my favorite word, since it's been put in. On the matter of the pro-life Democrats: the want of space kept me from noting that they were now an endangered species. Prof. Kainz points out the attrition they suffered in the election,and the survivors seem an implausible lot. Our friends at the Conference of Bishops urge us not to demean them, for they stand with the pro-lifers, against their own caucus. And yet there is something a bit off in pro-life congressmen who seek to become members of the majority by putting into power a party utterly hostile to their pro-life principles. - Hadley Arkes Tue, 10 May 2011 14:50:10 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-no-taxpayer-funding-of-abortion-act.html#comment-6738 Prof. Arkes wrote [emphasis mine] "…or the Dornan Amendment, to FUND abortions in the District of Columbia." With apologies to the good Professor, I believe he meant that to read "…defund…." Pax et bonum, Keith Töpfer EDITOR's Note: CORRECTED - Martial Artist Tue, 10 May 2011 07:54:41 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-no-taxpayer-funding-of-abortion-act.html#comment-6737 Professor Kainz makes readers aware of the ever-present danger of "unintended consequences" in human affairs, even those most well-intentioned. - Ars Artium Tue, 10 May 2011 07:04:55 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-no-taxpayer-funding-of-abortion-act.html#comment-6735 Re: the "dwindling pack of pro-life Democrats": DFLA (Democrats for Life in America) reported that 14 of their Congressional members were defeated in the last election. So their "dwindling" is not just the result of a lack of interest among Democrats in pro-life issues. - Howard Kainz Tue, 10 May 2011 05:55:01 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/the-no-taxpayer-funding-of-abortion-act.html#comment-6733 Slaughter! How's that for an apt verbum? - Yezhov Tue, 10 May 2011 03:31:21 +0100