tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post2791567255945092333..comments2023-10-25T08:46:20.242-05:00Comments on The Distributist Review: "Pro-Life" or Just "Anti-Abortion"?John Médaillehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16463267750952578888noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-45860981647078757402008-12-08T19:31:00.000-06:002008-12-08T19:31:00.000-06:00I appreciate and agree with this post but I think ...I appreciate and agree with this post but I think it's incomplete. You start from a language consideration of the term "pro-life" (which I think is important and wish more people would consider). Then you outline a set of positions that could properly be called "pro-human-life." But many more beings live than just humans. For this party platform to be "pro-life," rather than just "pro-human-life," it would also need to contain some pro-environment planks (which benefit all life, including humans).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-62988174762712421072008-10-03T08:41:00.000-05:002008-10-03T08:41:00.000-05:00I have only recently discovered this blog and am v...I have only recently discovered this blog and am very pleased I have. Here in the UK there is no distributist movement to speak of and the pro-life movement is weak and without real political influence. One consequence of this is that there is very little output in terms of distributist and pro-life thought - no blogs, no (contemporary) books, no discussion of the issues. On socio-political matters the main fare of the Catholic Church in England is a failed 1970s social justice agenda that is deeply influenced by the left-liberalism of the hierarchy, and how irrelevant it all is! How refreshing, then, to read this micro-manifesto for a pro-life society. Too often distributism can be (mis)represented as a rather negative jeremiad against the woes of contemporary Western society. Here, however, it is avowedly positive (pro-this, pro-that), setting out what we want to achieve not just what we want to change. <BR/><BR/>I would take issue with your last anonymous contributor who dismissed it all as "mere leftism". Try setting out this manifesto in <I>my</I> country and see how many people brand you as a lefty. Take it from me, if you argue the case for the Christian family in Britain, you'll convince very few people that you're not some kind of reactionary.George Carmodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15988026122498233526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-60954018862617499472008-09-27T16:38:00.000-05:002008-09-27T16:38:00.000-05:00Pro-life is a term representing a variety of persp...Pro-life is a term representing a variety of perspectives and activist movements in bioethics. It is most commonly (especially in the media and popular discourse) refers to opposition to abortion and support for fetal rights. The term describes the political and ethical view which maintains that fetuses and embryos are human beings, and therefore have a right to live. Less commonly, it can be used to indicate opposition to practices such as euthanasia, the death penalty, human cloning, and research involving human embryonic stem cells.On the issue of abortion, attempts by pro-life campaigners to pass laws against abortion are opposed by pro-choice campaigners who argue that the central issue is a completely different set of rights: the human rights of the pregnant woman to choose to terminate her pregnancy or carry it to term. The pro-choice view believes that a woman should have complete control over her fertility and pregnancy, and that this entails the guarantee of reproductive rights.<BR/>-------------------<BR/>james wilkins<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.drivenwide.com" REL="nofollow">Link Building</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-78051529727610585912008-09-22T09:44:00.000-05:002008-09-22T09:44:00.000-05:00I am still trying to be open-minded, but this look...I am still trying to be open-minded, but this looks more and more like Mere Leftism, not considering but merely mimicking the sort of we're-all-deathly-afraid-of-Rupert-Antichrist-Murdoch fearmongering that- well- that really cannot be taken seriously by anyone who would stand apart from mainstream ideological propagandizing.<BR/><BR/>And so a writer who apes such nonsense cannot be taken seriously either.<BR/><BR/>Alas.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-63469175792401149922008-09-14T01:45:00.000-05:002008-09-14T01:45:00.000-05:00This article expresses the current problem with a ...This article expresses the current problem with a Catholic voting in the current political system beautifully. This post was well done. I do agree that it is a major problem for a priest to be giving political opinions, thought there are a lot of problems with Obama. (unfortunately most Catholics are on either spectrum, either with Obama or with McCain). <BR/>A true centrist party would be a great innovation in America but the media seems to have a lot of problems with having anyone that has a different ideal. This includes the not so different Republican and Democrat parties. (as we noted with Ron Paul.) Catholic Social Teaching and the teaching of Pope John Paul II would be a great heart of teaching to apply to America. The only problem is that people have to care to see that the current system is not working. <BR/>But enough of my rant, job well done on the article.<BR/><BR/>Peace,Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-88417418100421132462008-09-11T08:51:00.000-05:002008-09-11T08:51:00.000-05:00Julian, excellent points. I could have (and should...Julian, excellent points. I could have (and should have) extended the analysis to include openness (at least) to the family farm, the small businessman and manufacturer, subsidiarity in politics, etc.<BR/><BR/>As for a vote for Obama, there are any number of grounds to vote against him. None of them, however, add up to a vote for McCain. If you exclude voting on the basis of abortion, they are both supporters of abortion, to one degree or the other. <BR/><BR/>What I am protesting is the subversion of the issue to narrow partisan goals, when it should be the basis of broad--and broadly Catholic--goals.John Médaillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16463267750952578888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-82513842794235381382008-09-11T07:17:00.000-05:002008-09-11T07:17:00.000-05:00spot on. well, almost... I'd quible over whether a...spot on. well, almost... I'd quible over whether any one could justify a vote for Obama. 3rd party - sure, but the most radically pro-abortion politician to come along as a party leader, and one who will do minimal good in the areas of a pro-family wage, pro-natalist, pro-(Marian) feminist, pro-education and even pro-just war, (my guess is that we will just end up trading injust war for injust war)...Obama is a poster-child for the Brave New World. I do understand the concern about the priest overstepping his authority and that does merit some thought. but anyway, the main point - that the pro-life message in America, as a political movement, is badly fractured, is well taken. <BR/><BR/>Also, I would add that a pro-life agenda would be pro-agrarian or pro-farmer. We're so ignorant about life that we're jeopardizing healthy dirt, air and water that is vital to eating. We've industrialized our food to the point that is manufactured more than it is produced or grown. We don't even know how to eat anymore, we consume.Julianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09413790364582417620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-75592841253340590882008-09-09T18:56:00.000-05:002008-09-09T18:56:00.000-05:00Thanks all. Mary, I can't recall what you say abou...Thanks all. Mary, I can't recall what you say about Reagan, but I do know that congress was not going to pass such a bill, so that such a request would have been little more than grand-standing, the same kind of thing that has been going on for 40 years. I do know that Reagan could have vetoed the California abortion bill, and didn't. The libertarian conservatives did not consider abortion problematic at that time.John Médaillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16463267750952578888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-46163259546507478902008-09-09T13:38:00.000-05:002008-09-09T13:38:00.000-05:00Yes, great article. I wish I'd written it.I agree ...Yes, great article. I wish I'd written it.<BR/>I agree with your assessment of the Republican party though would say about Reagan that it was my understanding that he told the Republican congress that he would sign a bill defining life as beginning at conception. Congress refused to send him such a bill. I also read somewhere that he signed the bill legalizing abortion in CA because he thought it would help reduce the number of abortions. Of course this didn't happen but I don't know if his decision making was as cynical as you make it out to be. His SCOTUS decisions were terrible.Mary E.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16861009810460417819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-46717950889286612442008-09-09T12:54:00.000-05:002008-09-09T12:54:00.000-05:00Ditto.tom LaneyDitto.<BR/><BR/>tom LaneyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-2761888994914120112008-09-08T21:55:00.000-05:002008-09-08T21:55:00.000-05:00paleocrat is correct. Thanks, John, for laying it ...paleocrat is correct. Thanks, John, for laying it out so magnificently.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-58563606582110642612008-09-08T20:17:00.000-05:002008-09-08T20:17:00.000-05:00Attempting to overrate the value of this post woul...Attempting to overrate the value of this post would be a fool's errand. Any and all who wish to advance a holistic culture of life must take very serious the content of this entry. Blessings, John.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com