I don’t think progressives in the faith community are overlooked at all, whether evangelical, mainstream, Catholic… we’re there/here; maybe we are so much a part of the landscape we just blend in to help get done what needs to be done.

The two webtorials at the public face EFC (not their main website) site by Cryer and Hutchinson were predictable and the second one was quite sloppy, the EFC executive isn’t going to tick off the Epps.

I’ve seen just one Catholic group speak up in favour of C- 484.

I dunno JJ, individuals who care who are remotely up to speed, would write their MP’s on this one. I agree it would be interesting to see if groups feel the need to go public.

I’d be very interested to hear the take on this from other progressive people of faith — I think they’re too often overlooked in the political arena because the more strident voices of the right-wingers tend to drown them out. (And possibly because they believe in keeping faith out of politics?)

The commenter you quoted has the right idea: those who oppose abortion would do better to work on changing minds but also affecting change to the situations that make abortion seem like the only choice. That, and education (so unwanted pregnancy doesn’t happen in the first place) would do more to reduce the overall number of abortions than just forcing the issue through laws that legislate our private lives.

I guess the next step would be, as you say, to encourage the committee members who voted No to share the reasons for their vote with the ones who voted Yes. At least the bill could be amended to the point where there’s no possibility of threat to abortion rights. As it stands right now, we’re looking at the equal personhood of the fetus, which makes abortion rights vulnerable to attack.

Round Two, here we come!

The question is not whether we set up some sort of artifical demarkation between the “innocent” and the “guilty,” but how much grace we believe should be given toward all groups of people.

Using the popular labels of the day, you could call me “pro-life”: anti-abortion, anti-war, anti-capital punishment. I believe that Jesus modeled on the cross a grace that gives value to even the most guilty of persons.

I would much prefer to be precise with my language than to engage in the vilification of people who do not agree with me through my choice of labels.

I am personally opposed to abortion and believe that we should be working to change the hearts and minds of people with regard to this issue. I also believe that the church and our society should make greater strides toward eliminating the conditions which make abortion attractive - a fear of poverty, lack of adequate childcare for single mothers, abusive families which threaten pregnant mothers who are discovered, and a lack of adoptive families for orphaned children, among other things.

And so I would prefer to work on hearts and minds, where I believe we can make a difference, rather than working to change laws which will largely be irrelevant.

In the end, I refuse to take up either label (”pro-life” or “pro-choice”), as they add no light to the discussion, only heat (and hate).

(edited for clarity to assist this C-484 discussion - BD)