In Depression era Newfoundland my maternal grandmother was pregnant and abandoned by the father of her child. She had her daughter, my sainted mother, and worked to support her while her mother, Nanny Barry, raised my Mom. My Mom recalled her maternal great grandfather, an Irish immigrant who came over in a coffin ship, taking her to Mass. They stood in the back and knelt on the stone floor, her great grandfather scorning pews as a Protestant innovation. Each Saturday evening my Mom and her mother, Alice, each had a cookie and each drank a glass of milk while they listened to the radio, the high point of my mother’s week. Alice later met and married Dyke Moore, a tough and funny longshoreman who was a favorite of the two sons my Mom eventually had, and who was the best of fathers to her. All of this would have been lost if my maternal grandmother had listened to the counsel of despair and hopelessness which is ever at the core of abortion, that Satanic attack on the gift of life, that essential gift by which God brings us into His world in which our love for Him and each other makes all the difference.
Beautiful testimony Donald.
Life is a gift that spans time, timeless and fruitful in ways seen and unseen.
Our name, Nachazel, means foundling in Czech. It could also mean founder. In looking closely at the former meaning of Nachazel I see an unwed mother leaving her illegitimate child at the door of the Church. Not a name associated with great nobility and family crest’s that display honor, bravery and conquest.
A sinner. [?]
A mistake.
A poor choice possibly.
Then the decision that changed the course of history. The chance at Life.
The nobility and honor for the future generations to partake in sharing in Christ’s mission. The mission to love, forgive others, lift the downtrodden. To minister to the pregnant, unwed mother. To share Hope and see others as Christ. To see with Christ’s eyes.
To be a Nachazel is to be Pro-Life.
My identity.
The foundling and the unwed mother.
Abortion is the ultimate Cancel Culture.
Mr. McClarey, as a lawyer I hope you can explain something for me. Since the leak, Schumer and others have been talking about “codifying abortion.” What does that mean and how would it be different than how things have been since 1973? Pro-Choicers have always said Roe is “the law of the land.” Would codifying it, (whatever the means), put it beyond the authority of the Supreme Court?
They mean to put into law abortion till the time of birth. They have already tried this during the present Congress and failed.
So the only difference is that there would be no consideration of viability or gestational age? I’m sure a case would be brought before the Supreme Court immediately. Or would that not be subject to the authority of the Supreme Court? If not, why not? If it would be, what’s the difference besides the viability?
Such legislation would doubtless be challenged before the Supreme Court on various grounds.
I could be way wrong about this, GH, but it seems to me that the Democrats want to enshrine abortion rights into federal law, making abortion on demand legal in all 50 states. Of course, the Supreme Court could still find such a law unconstitutional.
I could be way wrong about this, GH, but it seems to me that the Democrats want to enshrine abortion rights into federal law, making abortion on demand legal in all 50 states
Which means they’d have to pass a law which aspired to coercively restrict state governments from exercising their general police power. Appellate courts have allowed Congress and administrative agencies to get away with murder for 80-odd years; that still isn’t a delegated power.
Beautiful. There’s that stage in the unplanned pregnancy, where the woman feels in crisis and if she hears the right voices around her, that’s enough to give her the courage to continue.
I saw this doing the round yesterday:
https://mobile.twitter.com/i/events/1470858513656135681
I’m not sure it’s entirely true. That the typical woman having an abortion is already a mother..
A new born child is no more capable of living without parental support than is an unborn child. In the vast majority of cases it is the abortion that is the threat to the viability of the unborn child. Strange that pregnancy is not viewed as being prenatal health care for the unborn child. Child support is child support whether in or out of the womb.
Bruce Dickinson’s mother tried to abort him but the abortion was botched. If the pro-choice movement had their way there would be no Iron Maiden. You see this coming up in some of Dickinson’s lyrics, most notably Two Minutes to Midnight and the Accident of Birth album.
https://www.facebook.com/amnestyusa
You ever notice that Amnesty International seems to get grosser every year?
Yeah, they went wackdoodle on abortion some time ago:
https://righttolife.org.uk/news/amnesty-international-calls-for-universal-right-to-abortion#:~:text=Amnesty%E2%80%99s%20shift%20in%20abortion%20policy%20is%20a%20shocking,broadened%20to%20include%20a%20wider%20human%20rights%20remit.