Comments for Spitzer on Roe v. Wade at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 6 out of 6 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Wed, 22 May 2013 20:40:03 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/spitzer-on-roe-v-wade.html#comment-8880 Supposedly, if we're not sure an unborn baby is a person, we can kill her because she's invading my property. If my body is my "property," well, so is my land. I'm a hunter. If I'm not sure that brown thing moving slowly through my cornfield is a person, I can kill it. After all, it's my property! If it turns out to be another hunter, and not a deer, well, he's still unwanted. Reason enough to off him. I got my rights! - Christopher Manion Tue, 15 Nov 2011 09:34:09 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/spitzer-on-roe-v-wade.html#comment-8879 I am very grateful that Fr. sptizer was President of Gonzaga U for the whole four years that my son was there becuase I believe it was his leadership that allowed the school to retain its Catholic identity. I fear that after he left some who had ben waiting in the shadows opened up the door to such gratuitous conformity to the world as allowing pro-aborts to speak on campus. I wish that he could at least monthly mount the pulpit or St. Aloysius Chapel and remind everyone what Holy Mother Church inerrantly teaches. - Thomas C. Coleman, Jr. Tue, 15 Nov 2011 09:24:05 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/spitzer-on-roe-v-wade.html#comment-8876 Both Father Schall and Father Spitzer grant too much to the "intelligence" of the justices voting for Roe. Could it have been something much more simple, like, let us say, one of the majority having to send his daughter out of the country to get an abortion. - Yezhov Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:24:38 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/spitzer-on-roe-v-wade.html#comment-8875 After constantly being labeled "anti-science" on all sorts of issues, Conservatives/Christians need to point out that science is on the side of Pro-life. - stanley Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:18:30 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/spitzer-on-roe-v-wade.html#comment-8874 I will have to read this one. The common-law treatment of the unborn is widely misrepresented, as this review hints. The common law certainly did countenance wrongs, both criminal and civil, against the unborn. Yet because of the state of science at the time and the resultingly intractable problems of proof the system faced, it enforced certain bright-line rules for standing, to prevent unprovable claims. Thus, for instance, a child could not assert a claim, even for an injury sustained in utero, unless and until he was born alive: not because he was not "human" until then, but because the law did not have a mechanism to adjudicate his claim until then. If the common-law rules about the unborn's rights were remembered and revived, they would do much to deflate the hysteria that secularists stoke as the only alternative to Roe. - Titus Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:02:02 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2011/spitzer-on-roe-v-wade.html#comment-8873 Thank you Father Schall! A wonderful exposition of the dark age the professori call the enlightenment. Mother Teresa said "a civilization that kills its own unborn children is not worth saving." - Achilles Tue, 15 Nov 2011 03:36:01 +0100