3 September 2010

Memories of old Ireland

I just saw a Downs Syndrome bloke, alive, walking down Becket Street, right here in Oxford.

7 comments:

Sean said...

Are you having a go?

Nathaniel said...

No, he's just being Fr Hunwicke. It's a reference to statistics of societies with accessible abortion concerning foetuses with conditions such as Down Syndrome being aborted.

(I'm pro-choice, since I believe a woman should have as much control over her own reproductive system and body as possible. This would be in conjunction with fully available birth control and comprehensive sex education, including educating men that rape is utterly unacceptable and that it is within their power to stop it. One need only look at the historical treatment of women, unwed mothers and sexuality in Christendom, since this is a Christian blog, to see that a policy such as Ireland's doesn't work. If a woman believes it is morally wrong to abort or even to use birth control, then that is her right. Eugenics should not be the reason for an accessible abortion policy. Although I respect Christians who can maintain a pro-choice position, since Christians as a whole have adjusted themselves so willingly to things of the world such as usury, war and exploitation, I'm not presenting this on the basis of Christian arguments)

Fr LR said...

Wow, Nate, that's one big fat parenthetical!

Fact is God is "pro-choice". He says: It’s your choice to kill a baby as it’s your choice to go to hell. Heaven is life, hell is death.

Sean said...

Nathaniel,

I know. Father has posted before on the topic. Poor attempt at a joke on my part.

Here (in America) I only ever people with Down's syndrome in church (RC myself).

stuarta said...

Nathaniel,

Given we live in a culture where more and more women are being turned into genderless/androgynous wage-slaves chained to the desk and many men believe them unworthy of a life-long commitment, I think your judgement on Christianity's effects on women to be a little skewed.

It was Christ himself who decreed that women were not to be cast aside by proscribing divorce. This has assured countless women, many of whom have been poor and with little hope of the lifestyles many of our leading feminists enjoy, security and something of the respect due to them. Quite logically, orthodox Christianity extends this protection to the unborn, another vulnerable group. In fact the most vulnerable of all.

In opposing these principles, you make the position of both extremely untenable. There is dangerously little respect for women, or for sex. They and the unborn are cast aside by some like rubbish after the cheap, infantile thrill is over and the "consequences" must be "dealt with". The irony is that in giving women "control" over their bodies, you have denied their God-given vocation to motherhood, dignity and of being worthy of lifelong commitment and love. Are strip-bars and on-the-tap prostitution really your idea of women's lib'? Extreme as it may seem, they are symptoms of the same disease.

Added to this is the death of over 200,000 unborn children a year in this country alone. The shackles of a blood-stained conscience enchain many women in our "liberated" society. May our Lady of Walsingham pray for them and for us.


Stuart

Little Black Sambo said...

"I believe a woman should have as much control over her own reproductive system and body as possible."
And over other people's bodies, even to the power of life and death, evidently. Did the Lord send you to this blog to learn better?

William Tighe said...

so, Nathaniel, belying his own name (Deusdedit) insults the Giver of Life by opining that mothers should be able to have their own children slaughtered like sheep or pigs for their convenience. How sad.