My Hall of Shame

Jason Altmire                                   Dale Kildee

Dan Boren                                        Daniel Lipinski

Jerry Costello                                    Jim Matheson

Mark Critz                                        MIke McIntyre

Henry Cuellar                                  Collin Peterson

Joe Donnelly                                    Nick Rahall

Tim Holden                                      Mike Ross

Marcy Kaptur                                  Health Shuler

Democrats who voted Yes on HR 3

These are the 16 Democrats who want to return America to a nation of back alley abortions.  They want to use the tax code to restrict the use of insurance companies, Health Savings Accounts, and individual funds for abortion.  They don't want to provide exceptions for rape or incest. 

I am ashamed to call these people Democrats.  Abortion is a matter of conscious, and is best left to the woman, her physician and her pastor or spiritual mentor.  What do these people have to do with that decision?  Especially the men. 

I have volunteered at Planned Parenthoods where people who picketed in front of the driveway opposing abortion, come in for an abortion, because "it was an accident, I didn't mean to get pregnant."  They often further rationalize it by saying that "I am not using abortion for birth control."  And not just the picketers, but daughters of prominent Right to Life (RtL) members have come in for abortions, fathers and mothers, and grandfathers and grandmothers of RtL members have brought their daughters and granddaughters in.  

It is interesting when you are on the other side, isn't it?  When you are the one presented with an unwanted or troublesome pregnancy.  Have some heart and soul people, no one, no one, is in "favor" of abortions. 

Even the most diehard supporters of abortion rights, think it is a bad alternative.  Every child should be a wanted child but unplanned and troublesome pregnancies happen too many for a variety of reasons. 

Abortion should be safe, legal and rare.  We need to work together to promote family planning, contraception, and public awareness. 

I am a professing Christian, a follower of Jesus Christ, who on religious grounds is pro-choice on abortion.  Most mainline Protestant Christians and their Christian denominations, along with Reform and Conservative Jews, are pro-choice, with their denominations issuing pro-choice proclamations over the last thirty years. 

Fetus as a "person" or as a "human being" has never been a settled question within Christianity of Judaism.  There are large segments of the Judeo-Christian world that, historically and currently, see the embryo or fetus as a potential human life, but not as fully human until birth or until some stage of fetal development well past conception.  I and many religious leaders have an understanding that human life or personhood begins at birth. 

There is nothing in the Bible about induced abortion.  Notta, zero, nowhere.  The first mention and the beginning of the Jewish position is in Exodus where the person harming a pregnant woman so that she has a miscarriage, and no further harm follows, the one responsible is only fined what the women's husband demands and the judge determines.  A fine only, no punishment for homicide.  Using this passage, rabbis argue in the Talmud that a fetus is not adam (human) and has no legal or religious standing as a person.  Under Jewish law, killing a fetus is not murder and is not treated that way.  The mainstream Jewish position historically and through today is that human life or personhood begins at birth, when we take our first breath.  Many rabbis also cite many passages in the Bible that connect breath and human life, beginning with the creation story in Genesis 2:7:  "The Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being." 

Historically, the Catholic Church believed that one did not become a human being or person until well after conception.  St. Augustine followed Aristotle believing the soul did not enter a fetus until 40 - 90 days after conception.  St Jerome emphasized human shape and stated that abortion did not constitute killing until the individual elements have acquired their external appearance.  The late 4th Century Apostolic Constitutions allowed for abortion if it was done before human shape and when the soul had entered.  St Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century agreed, and Pope Innocent III earlier in the same century as Aquinas, emphasized that life began at quickening, when the mother begins to feel fetal movement.  Pope Gregory XIV affirmed this test in 1591, which he said began on the 116th day, or sixteenth week. 

Only with Pope Pius IX in 1869 did the great reversal in Catholic thought begin.  He assumed ensoulment at conception and by 1917 Catholic Church canon law had been revised, dropping the prior distinction between "animated" and "unanimated" fetuses. 

Here in the US, abortion didn't become criminal until the latter part of the 1800s.  Common English law, the basis for American law, long held that abortion before quickening was not an indictable offense.  Abortion of a "quickened" fetus was generally not criminal under common law, and was at most a mere misdemeanor.  Roe v Wade used these religious and common law threads and references to explain why the word "person" as used in the US Constitution does not include the unborn.  The decision states "There has always been strong support for the view that [human] life does not begin until live birth.  This was the belief of the Stoics.  It appears to be the predominant . . . attitude of the Jewish faith...  It may be taken to represent . . . a large segment of the Protestant community." 

We have to remember that the nine months of pregnancy is very important in the development of the baby-to-come.  Fetal development starts with the zygote at conceptions to embryo in about 14 days, and then to a fetus at 3 months.  During the first two weeks, it is not clear the zygote will become an embryo, much less a full human being.  Over 65% of the time, nothing more happens, and the zygote doesn't become anything more at all.  Sometimes it develops into a tumor, or it sometimes becomes an embryo that splits into twins or more.  As an embryo, it take a long time, another 22 weeks or more before it reaches any form of viability or where it may survive outside of the womb. 

After much reflection, over the years, working for a Catholic State Representative who was pro-choice, based primarily on his belief supported by the Biblical and church stories above, I think that the Supreme Court got it right in Roe v Wade.  During the first trimester, where abortion can occur spontaneously, or with an IUD, a morning-after-pill, RU-486, the regular birth control pill, or with minor surgical procedures, the state has a right to protect the life of the mother, absolutely.  (And in fact, these days, less than 10% of the abortions occur after the first trimester.) 

In the third trimester, I think the state does have some interest in protecting the fetus, as its viability to live outside the womb is greatly increased.  But the state still needs to protect the life and health of the mother. 

Despite being avidly pro-choice, which means that as well as supporting a woman's right to have an abortion, I also support the right of the woman to have the baby, and keep it or put it up for adoption.  I truly believe that is the woman's choice, to be made with her doctor, her family, and her spiritual advisor.  I also support the need to greatly reduce the incidence of abortion.  As President Clinton used to say "Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare."  That means that abortion should not be a stopgap because we in the US don't have a widespread family planning, contraception, education.  We should instead have widespread comprehensive family planning, which should include education and contraception.  We should also never put woman in the position that they feel that they have to have an abortion because of a lack of health care, child care or parental leave.  I join with President Clinton, and many women's groups within the Judeo-Christian community that are working for social and cultural changes that will reduce the incidence of abortion, but also stop the scapegoating of women who have abortions. 

All in all, what I am trying to say is that there are strong religious grounds, historically and modern, to defend a woman's right to chose an abortion.  That is a basic tenement of the national Democratic Party, confirmed by platform at convention after convention.  And that is why I am so ashamed of the Congressional reps listed above that voted to severely restrict a woman's right to chose.   

If one of these Democrats is your Congressional Representative, call them, email them, send a snail mail letter.  Let them know that you agree with me, and that you believe that they violated their public trust with you, with the people of their district, with all Americans, and with the Democratic Party.  Tell them that there behavior is unacceptable.  They did not have to vote; they could have let this terrible piece of legislation pass with only Republican votes.  But instead they chose to abandon their supporters, their Democratic beliefs, the beliefs of many believers, and they shall be remembered for their shameful vote.