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

41 - 50 of 75 Comments

  1. Rob
    3 years ago

    Larry, your post is spot on and scary to contemplate. The sense I get from a lot of posters is that the government is driving society. All the ills in society are the sole fault of the government and if we could only change government, society would be healed. There may have been a time that was true. However, today, I believe that our politicians are merely a product of what society has become. A new law, regulation or repealing the same, is not going to change a person's heart. We have to attack the social ills at their source and that's with all those around us. It's great that we focus so much energy on politicians, but I think if we were as passionate about evangelizing to our brothers and sisters around us, our families and our co-workers, perhaps we'd change from the bottom up. And this is further complicanted by the fact that today our politicians are for sale to the highest bidder. Our concerns are never going to have the cash behind them. Heck, we can't even get a parish to have 100% in tithing let alone compete with the phramceuatical industry or planned parenthood who bring real dollars. Sadly, it's all they know today. But I do believe that if we work on our own, that is less they have for a revenue stream later and less money for political influence. We've fought the government for 40 years and quite honestly it only seems to be getting worse. Time to re-think the attack, or at least fight it on another front.

  2. Beth
    3 years ago

    Martin - Although you are clearly pro-life and make several good scientific observations, I have to question your use of the term "parasitic" in describing the relationship of the unborn child to his/her mother. I believe the term "parasite" is used to describe an organism that is harmful to - and of a different species from - its host. The unborn child is neither harmful to the mother (except in very rare cases where there exists some type of pathology, but this would be abnormal), nor is it a different species from her. The female human body is beautifully designed to provide nourishment and safety to the unborn child. Pregnancy is a natural condition, not a disease (as those who support abortion "rights" would often have us believe), and while there are sometimes complications associated with pregnancy and childbirth, both pregnancy and breastfeeding are generally beneficial to women's health. (Low fertility rates are associated with increased risk of breast cancer, for example.) We have to be careful the language that we use, because the term "parasite" has been used by those who would dehumanize the unborn child in order to justify abortion.

  3. Raphael Barousse
    3 years ago

    I am as close yo being a "cradle Democrat" as is possible. I upheld Democratic principles for most of my life--81 years of it--until the democratic Party open;u espoused the killing of infants in the womb and . ore recently,other socialistic principles.. I resent being called a member of the "extreme right" as the Congresswoman does. It is quite obvious to me that a woman has exercised her "right to choice" when she chooses to have sexual intercourse, the primary purpose of which is the conception of a human being

  4. Oregon Catholic
    3 years ago

    Wasserman says ""To American women, their reproductive health and choice is an intensely personal and private issue between themselves, their families, and their doctors...."

    Notice Who she leaves out of the equation? She has to - because if you bring God into it you can't justify her position or any other except that personhood begins at conception.

    I believe the Personhood movement will ultimately succeed where others have failed because it gets to the whole Truth about life. Any position other than protecting the life of a person beginning at conception is just a concession designed to win 'points' in the law and is at it's core hypocritical and false. It's time for the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth so help us God.

  5. JeanCatherine
    3 years ago

    We need to get back to Jesus Christ and His commands. We need to read a little more and understand our faith dont you think? How can we engage a confused world if were ignorant of Jesus Christ? As the church teaches through the Magisterium, we only have to read a little bit of the Bible a day to feed our thoughts. Its literally food for thought the bible.

  6. techwreck
    3 years ago

    Ms. Wasserman-Schultz has given us a vivid example of the ability of humans to delude themselves when they we are guided by our own egos instead of God's word. Our prisons are full of people who can testify that they rationalized killing when they were ego-driven, but turned to God with genuine remorse when the justice system made them realize the effect of their actions on others. Wasserman-Schultz will have to explain her actions to God sooner or later. Let's pray that she comes to know the true God and changes her ways.

  7. Kathy
    3 years ago

    I became a Catholic this year, at Easter Vigil. I have always been a Christian, and pro-life, but, as I became a Catholic, and sought God on a higher level, it has become very apparent to me, the enormous crimes against human life and against all that God stands for. I saw a video this past week on Cardinal Bernadine, his words were so profound. If we live in the presences of God on earth, then our passing will be just that, passing from this life to the life of eternal glory. Sadly, people who live in this life without God, whether they be Catholic or Protestant, are unable to fully understand what life really means.

  8. tafur
    3 years ago

    Schultz contradicts herself. Children in the womb are not persons. If it is a child, it is a person.

    I can be at fault in a car accident tomorrow and injure a woman and the baby she is carrying. The mother can sue me for injuries to her and her unborn child, that child has until age 21 to sue me for injuries that I caused in that accident. This child as an adult will have legal standing to file such a suit.

    So, how can this not be a person with Constitutional protections like that?

  9. Brian D.
    3 years ago

    Read the article, read the comments. Dan said it so well: How could any Catholic in good conscience vote for the likes of Wasserman Schultz, Barack Obama? Face it my fellow Catholics who happen to be Democrats- your party is not only the party of marxism/socialism but also the party which desires to contnue the murder of unborn babies. Outside ot town council elections, how can you stay a Democrat?

  10. Taylor
    3 years ago

    While I agree with the Personhood amendment...It is difficult to have a law which forbids the termination of the result of promiscuity while the government also permits and supports promiscuity (sex outside of marriage, aka, fornication). The government also needs to support the morality of sexual relations only within heterosexual marriage and promote this general value.

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

Saint of the Day

March 27 Saint of the Day

St. Rupert
March 27: Bishop and missionary, also listed as Robert of Hrodbert. A ... Read More