<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: All Conservatives Are Actually Pro-Choice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://appeal2heaven.com/2009/02/20/all-conservatives-are-actually-pro-choice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://appeal2heaven.com/2009/02/20/all-conservatives-are-actually-pro-choice/</link>
	<description>"Let Facts be submitted to a candid world"</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 03:48:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Reisiger</title>
		<link>http://appeal2heaven.com/2009/02/20/all-conservatives-are-actually-pro-choice/#comment-146</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steven Reisiger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appeal2heaven.com/?p=109#comment-146</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree on all points above and would like to comment on what we do in the case of the mother&#039;s health being in danger, in which the child in the womb rarely has anything to do with the mothers life.

I would argue that, if the mother needs surgery or some medical treatment that can save her life, it would be ethical to proceed with it, as long as the intent is not to kill the child in the womb and efforts are made to save the child if possible. If it happens that the child dies as a consequence of the surgery or treatment, then there is nothing we can do about that.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree on all points above and would like to comment on what we do in the case of the mother&#8217;s health being in danger, in which the child in the womb rarely has anything to do with the mothers life.</p>
<p>I would argue that, if the mother needs surgery or some medical treatment that can save her life, it would be ethical to proceed with it, as long as the intent is not to kill the child in the womb and efforts are made to save the child if possible. If it happens that the child dies as a consequence of the surgery or treatment, then there is nothing we can do about that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Destructive Political Discussions: &#8216;Shibboleths&#8217;, and Moral/Religious Imperatives &#171; Appeal To Heaven</title>
		<link>http://appeal2heaven.com/2009/02/20/all-conservatives-are-actually-pro-choice/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Destructive Political Discussions: &#8216;Shibboleths&#8217;, and Moral/Religious Imperatives &#171; Appeal To Heaven]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 19:43:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appeal2heaven.com/?p=109#comment-44</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] people use religion, or moral imperatives to relate political issues. When I wrote about abortion, (All Conservatives are Actually Pro-Choice), I didn&#8217;t need to point to specific Biblical scripture to make my argument. Rather, I tried [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] people use religion, or moral imperatives to relate political issues. When I wrote about abortion, (All Conservatives are Actually Pro-Choice), I didn&#8217;t need to point to specific Biblical scripture to make my argument. Rather, I tried [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

