Skip to main content

Debbie Wasserman Schultz says Children in the Womb are Not Persons Comments

Human rights are based on the natural law inscribed on human hearts and present in different cultures and civilizations. Removing human rights from this context would mean restricting their range and yielding to a relativistic conception. Not only rights are universal, but so too is the human person, the subject of those rights (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) Continue Reading

11 - 20 of 75 Comments

  1. Beth
    2 years ago

    Juneau - Not quite sure what the disagreement is, but yes, fertilization is a process and not a definitive moment. "Conception" might be a self-limiting (or self-defining, depending on how you want to look at it) word, since it means "the beginning" of something, right?... In any case, at the moment in which the process of fertilization achieves its goal, you have a genetically-unique, individual organism that is living. In the case of human reproduction, you have a human organism - at this stage called a "zygote". Is this human organism a person? THAT is the question. One can quibble about the precise instant in which this happens, and about what that instant should be called, but for the purposes of the law this would be all but a moot point - because it has clearly happened when an embryo has been created for the purposes of implantation or experimentation, and it has definitely happened well before any woman would contemplate having an abortion, or before an IUD or "Plan B" dose of birth control could interfere with implantation (at which point the embryo is typically a hundred or more cells in size, definitely alive...) Make no mistake - science is on the pro-life side. The more we learn about human embryonic development, the more we should shake in our shoes as we contemplate destroying human life in its earliest stages. Quibble all you like about the use of the term "conception", but what is meant here is the point at which the union of the mother's and father's gametes has produced the naturally-intended outcome - the beginning of a new human person, one cell in size, with a full and unique complement of human DNA.

  2. Juneau Alaska
    2 years ago

    Hi Judy, please don't make accusations about "befuddling, disorientating, confuse and rattle" that you cannot possibly support (claiming as thinking they are true). Present them as cautious opinions if you feel you must. I'm personally offended at your remarks, though to be fair, you could not have realized who I am. Nevertheless, that should not matter. Please be very careful with your accusations.

    I think its time to move on from this discussion. See you around the boards.

  3. vance
    2 years ago

    Juneau Alaska, Bio 699+ or any other reference does not change the process of Conception. One can call conception by another term but the Process is still the same for all life forms.

  4. Judy
    2 years ago

    Juneau: Thank you for your response. It was nice of you to request Clarification. If I may, i would like to first address your reply with the word, "Clarify", using your own words. "Personally, I'd rather not second guess an author's private thoughts". I, nor you, or anyone else posting their opinions, do Not have the luxury, as you know, of an author. Point: An author's work is checked, re-written, checked, re-written, like a broken record. ONLY until it has Absolute Clarity, can it be released to the public. There is also, usually a large Bibliography to help support the writer, and the Clarity of their work. I have graduated college, and the only time to second guess is when it is a theory or an opinion. And Believe me when I say, that Is the One Big thing I learned, (among other things of course,) is that Everyone Has One!!! Even those w/Biographies! Another time to "second guess", in my opinion, is if one has the time and wants to. Then of course, there should be a credibility in that. Here is where my minor comes in. Psychology. But really, who cares? (I am not asking you a question.) Just as: "Really???" I do however apologize, if you misunderstood on abortion and Gay Marriage. I thank you for explaining to others that did not know. But one of the questions you missed, was, what the Vatican thought on Gay Marriage, Not marriage. Or am I missing something??? Or did I misunderstand, because you did not specifically answer my question?
    As for: "Who is his light and the way?" I agree w/you, if you are saying, he is being technical, thus, using scientific jargon... His science is his light and his way. Mine, as Christ's, is Truth. However, it is True, I think, that his words indeed were his particular thoughts, and he meant them to be two-fold. One, he really believed science was his light and his way; two, that he meant to befuddle, confuse, rattle, dis-orient, while at the same time welcoming, encouraging, struggling young minds into his web. On the question of: "Why Do You Think That Is? I again merely asked for your opinion. Because, as I said before, Everybody Has One. And... I was Trying to Open the Doors of Imagination. (Didn't do a very good job!) The Vatican, in all its gathered minds of knowledge and minds of science, do not oppose evolution. But, they do oppose Abortion and Gay Marriage. That is ALL I was saying. That is when i asked you the question: "Why is that?" I hope i Clarified somewhat. No one checks my work. And I must say it has been a while since I wrote a paper for exact clarification. Especially when I have so many thoughts and not enough time to put all of them down here. Blessings always...

  5. Fr William E Bauer PhD
    2 years ago

    When the Supreme Court ruled on Roe vs. Wade, it asked two questions: Is an unborn child human. The court's answer then was YES. The second question: Is the unborn a Person Under the Law? The court's answer was, WE DON'T KNOW.
    Thus, the court did not rule that the unborn child was a Person (under the law).
    The feminists chose to see that the court ruled that an unborn child is NOT a person.
    Do you see the difference in the shading of the words?

  6. Juneau Alaska
    2 years ago

    vance,

    Well, I think I see your obstacle. I would suggest BIO 699+ instead of BIO 101 texts to understand the facts of the quote. :)



  7. vance
    2 years ago

    Juneau Alaska, I guess the editors didn't like my reply to your "Moment of Conception" post. So I'll try one more time again. Your evolutionary biologist reference sounds highly suspect. I would simply refere you to any Biology 101 textbook and there you will discover that ALL life forms reproduce new life at the "Moment of Conception". All life forms will not happen unless there is "Conception". It is your post that got laughed out of the room.

  8. JeanCatherine
    2 years ago

    Faith

    If you get the chance look up Dr. Nathanson and his biography and also check out the biography and website recently on Norma McKorvey. Also if you get the chance check out the Priests for Life Website. I did and became more educated regarding the Pro-Life movement. I used to be Pro-choice until later on I remembered the dream I had when I was 13. I dreamed of a dead child who had been aborted chemically. When I was 13 I didnt know what an abortion was but I dreamed of it and was disturbed by it for 3 days and nights. I remembered it later through the grace of God and came back and chose life as my issue of the day.

    Dr. Nathanson was the co-founder I believe of NARAL who eventually became Pro-Life. He aborted his own son. He also said that if the Catholic Church and many of our churches had been more vigilant we never would have had Roe v. Wade or its companion case.

  9. Faith
    2 years ago

    I felt encouraged when I read this article; but sense a struggle across our nation at all levels from what I gathered from this. As a woman, I can see the feminist side; but as a mother and grandmother, I feel empathy for the child in the womb whether cells of the unborn child are just forming or the baby is at full-term, ready to be born. Each of us can find something wrong with our religious dogma at times, so heavily pointing at our churches, ministers, priests, etc. and their pasts is not necessarily going to help people move forward as a whole whether we are talking about deeper spiritual evangelism, abortion, Pro-life or any other topic that is of moral/ethical value. It seems that possibly, grassroot endeavors could help in that looking at what is best for everyone in all circumstances, would be a starting point. Though we already have Roe Vs. Wade, we have many people who believe that the beginning of the embryo signifies a human being. I for one, believe in that concept; but that is my own "personal belief" and because our country is so great, I do not believe that we have a "right" to push our personal beliefs on others as far making it a criminal offense to have an abortion. Granted, as with any law, there will be amendments to it so that those who are medically unable to carry a child to full-term would have the option of ending the pregnancy; but this subject seems to important an issue to just pass a law and say this is "written in stone". Life is precious whether a person is young or old. What seems to need to be done is to start our children at an early age, to respect life, be responsible for life and see if less abortions are chosen to be done. That will take years to manifest and it seems some people want a quick fix to a problem that has existed for many, many years.

    Anyway, I felt this article at least opened the doors to more communication about abortion, Right-to-Life and the ethics behind it all. In the end, love is what holds the key in the majority of situations. Love of life, love of family, love of children; but I believe the idea has been shown for what it is. Personally, I would like to see the end of most abortions, except for those where the mothers' and childs' life are endangered. Yet, to make it a crime seems a little too harsh of a sentence. We cannot sentence someone who has committed suicide or their loved ones, which is another form of taking a life; so making abortion a crime at this stage seems somewhat counterproductive. It is one way of possibly stopping the overuse of abortion procedures, which would be a good thing; but do we want to put women in prison or even make them criminals when we already have overcrowded jails and justice systems?

  10. Juneau Alaska
    2 years ago

    Judy,

    Your questions to me are, "Really???,"Who is his light and the way?" and "Why do you think that is?" Before all else, I would like to make an open invitation for you to specifically address any sentences I may have written if you are challenging what I would likely call facts.

    Now, permit me to reply to your questions. I presume the first one is rhetorical. If it isn't, I don't understand and request clarification. Who is his light and the way? Presumably that concluding sentence finds ample support in his book which is a technical one; not a layman's book. Personally, I'd rather not guess an author's private thoughts. And lastly, you seem to ask me why the Vatican is against gay marriage and abortion. Regarding abortion among many of the reasons one can give, it is not incorrect to state that the Vatican follows the tradition found in the Didache regarding the killing of infants and the unborn. Judy, Marriage is expounded upon in John Paul II's book, Love and Responsibility. It exhaustively explores the facets of interpersonal love as only found in his understanding of authentic marriage.


Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment


Newsletter Sign Up

Daily Readings

Reading 1, Acts 10:34, 37-43
Then Peter addressed them, 'I now really understand', he said, ... Read More

Psalm, Psalms 118:1-2, 16-17, 22-23
Alleluia! Give thanks to Yahweh for he is good, for his ... Read More

Gospel, John 20:1-9
It was very early on the first day of the week and still dark, ... Read More

Reading 2, Colossians 3:1-4
Since you have been raised up to be with Christ, you must look ... Read More

Saint of the Day

April 20 Saint of the Day

St. Marian
April 20: When St. Mamertinus was Abbot of the monastery which St. ... Read More