Allow me, if you will, to ask a question. It’s not a question that can be answered easily I’m sure, and in some respects it’s a can of worms that most would probably rather keep well closed. Certainly I don’t expect more than a handful of comments from the 100 people who currently subscribe to this little Xanga of mine. It’s not escaped my attention that my posts on political subjects tend to attract very little interaction wheras a post about bubble bath or tootchache always seem to get far more attention. I’m not complaining though. I do at least know from certain statistics this little Xanga of mine enjoys quite a few page views a day.
So the question… my not very easy to answer political question… my opening of a can of worms… is this…
President Bush is against abortion right? I mean that was a fairly big wallop of his election campaign right? In a comment I had the other day someone mentioned that fact and how many people had voted for President Bush based in no small part on his standing in that regard. So, quite genuinely I ask this; How many babies has President Bush, or his administration at least, saved since he took office?
I honestly haven’t Googled this subject at all, so I swear this is a genuine question and I am genuinely interested. How many unwanted children have been saved by President Bush, and I suppose a natral follow on to that question would be to ask where they are now and who is looking after them?
It’s easy for me as an Englishman, or dare I even say as a ‘European,’ to dislike the President. He’s hugely unpopular across the world as far as I can see, and his fogien policies seem to involve more fingers of triggers rather than hands of peace. But I’m willing to accept the fact that when it comes to his domestic policies I’m in less of a position to judge the man than those who feel the effects of his decisions at home and in their bank balances. Heck, unpopularity is a trait that some of histories most reveered figures had to live with when they were alive. Martin Luther King Jr., and Jesus Christ himself to name but two!
Wrote the following comment on Feb 14, 2006 at 8:38 pm
This doesn’t answer your question at all, but I have seen a couple of references to Bush loving fetuses, but as soon as they are born into poverty, no longer giving a damn about them. In practice, that would seem to be true.And to semi-address your question, I don’t think he has “saved” one fetus yet, but his machinations regarding the Supreme Court may eventually change that.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 15, 2006 at 2:25 am
From someone who is not a supporter of Bush’s administration, I will tell you that the biggest way in this country for presidents to have an impact on things like abortion, is through the appointing of Supreme Court Justices. These 9 positions are lifetime appointments, not the lifetime of the administration but of the appointee. Since most of the laws governing abortion find their seat of decision at the Supreme Court level, this is where the action is, so to speak. Not only for those decisions but many other high-impact rulings. Also, since Bush will have been responsible for appointing at least two positions in his presidency (a thing which rarely, if ever, happens) and our Supreme Court, before his administration, was fairly moderate or slightly liberal however you count it, this is his chance to appoint two more conservative judges who could swing the consensus more conservatively.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 14, 2006 at 7:58 pm
I’m much more comfortable seeing Dubya’s name along side Hitler’s than MJKjr’s.
How many unwanted children have been saved? Since abortion isn’t illegal, regardless of whether he’s against it or not, I’m guessing none. And his government can’t keep track of the unwanted children already in the foster care system, let alone those unborn.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 15, 2006 at 3:23 am
And even if abortion was illegal, you know there’d still be people out there doing it. People drank more during Prohibition than during normal times, just because it was forbidden. Abortion was going on before Roe v. Wade, and it will go on even if God himself comes down from Heaven and says “I will strike you down if you do that!”
It just seems to me that we’re going backward instead of forward. The war, this abortion issue, trying to deny women birth control, and the imposing-of-your-own-ideas-onto-everybody… they seem to me like things that used to happen decades ago. But we get past them, and they are being brought up once again.
Like the song says: “What are we fightin’ for?”
I don’t enjoy politics and that’s why you will not see me comment in most posts of that kind. But these are a few things that I feel are important. Now, I’m Catholic. I would never get an abortion… but I believe it should be an option. Because I know not everyone thinks the same way I do. And denying birth control? Are they insane? “You can’t have an abortion, but you can’t prevent pregnancy either.”
This is an insanely long comment =P And I didn’t even answer your question! Beware that damn can of worms ^_~
Wrote the following comment on Feb 15, 2006 at 4:42 am
G.W.’s support of the Right to Lifers has given rise to an upsurge in antiabortion legislation on the the State level. Several states have passed laws that will make abortion illegal…IF Roe v. Wade is overturned.
The appointment of Alito to the Supreme Court may just accomplish that.
No actions by the Right to Lifers will ever save an unwanted fetus. Their actions will only insure the demise of desparate women with unplanned pregnancies.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 15, 2006 at 4:14 pm
In all honesty, Bush is simply just another politician playing the game. He touted the ‘pro-life’ line in order to bring in the votes of those single, hot button issue voters. The man had no intention of doing anything about the abortion issue. I do not believe for one minute that Roe Vs. Wade will ever be overturned, conservative judges or not. There would be rioting in the streets.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 15, 2006 at 9:09 am
Okay, I will comment on the subject of abortion being a birth control issue. This is a Death Warrant issued to a child (not a piece of tissue) as the lie has been told to So many women, and Yes, they have believed it. Truth seams to be avoided in our society to-day.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 15, 2006 at 6:14 pm
Some very interesting comment, and the worms remain well within the can too I feel :-)
You’ll have to forgive me for not knowing about Roe vs. Wade. I have now read up on that.
So let me get this right. Abortion in the United States can happen within any period of a pregnancy? According to about.com “The conclusion held that a woman’s right to an abortion falls within the right to privacy protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The Roe v. Wade decision gave women the right to abortion during her entire pregnancy and defined different levels of state interest for regulating abortion in the second and third trimesters.”
Abortion is clearly an emotive subject, a can of worms. But not one which I have really looked into or formed opinions on. I think I feel like a woman should have the right to have the pregnancy terminated within a few weeks, but not at anytime. Researching that exposed me to some truly horrific pictures of what looked like full or very near to full term babies in hospital trash cans. Horrid stuff indeed, I pity the souls who work there.
Lori suggests above that some people use abortion as birth control, yet logic tells me this must surely be only the smallest most badly educated segment of those who have abortions.
Nenaluli commented about birth control being denied to women, but I can find no evidence of this so a link would be handy.I do find it interesting that there seems very little support here for the pro-life argument. Of the 100 subscribers I am wondering if people either don’t care about this, don’t want to show their colors for risk of getting into confrontation, or perhaps they simply don’t like commenting? But nonetheless, no one apart from Lori seems to be in the pro-life camp.
So then I have a further question. Assuming that the President wasn’t really just playing politics, and he really is serious about outlawing abortion altogether… then what?
By that I am asking what you feel would happen. Lets forget the ‘back ally abortionists’ and concentrate on the practicalities. Should abortion actually be outlawed what happens then to all those children who would otherwise have been terminated before birth.
Also, as a further question to the pro-lifers who might read this (not that they wish to speak up) I ask this: Are you happy, in regard to abortion, with what has happened since President Bush took office. In other words, do you feel the pro-life President is saving the lives of enough children?
I also want to say that I would very much like to hear anyones opinions, not only in this, but in all blog entries that I write and you have an opinion on. No opinion here is unwelcome or unwanted. You should feel completely free to say whatever you wish, however long and thought out, or however emotional or silly that might be. I enjoy reading all comments, as do others. So please, tell me what you’re thinking.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 15, 2006 at 8:10 pm
To answer your question: The avg number of abortions since G.W. Bush took office has decreased by 500,000 per year. I am happy whenever the number of abortions are reduced, who wouldn’t be? In fact, as I think this through I wonder this. Does anyone disagree with the premise that it is a good thing that abortions are on the decline in the U.S.?
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2006 at 5:25 am
For clarification sake, I am definitely “Pro-Life”. I do not think that abortion should be funded or supported by the US government in any way, as it is not the governments place to do so. I think we have gotten far too spoiled in this country and everything tends to be about “convenience” and “self”. Even at the expense of an unrealized life or perhaps one that is too dependant upon others (elderly, the disabled, the terminally ill, etc.). That goes for the man on the street as well as the upper echelon of our government.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2006 at 5:28 am
Oh and, Simon, did you see the photos of Partial Birth abortions? Those are truly horrific, though they all are equally despairing.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2006 at 5:59 am
Yes I did see those terrible pictures. Those were the ones I was referring to. So in America, I am correct in assuming that you can terminate a pregnacy at any point? That truly is a hidious notion. Though once again I will state that I believe that abortion should not be outlawed, but instead should be something that can only be done in the very early stages of pregnacy.
I’m not entirely sure how it works over there because you huys don’t have a national health system funded by the state like we do. But I would be VERY against abortion clinics being run by anyone other than the government in the UK. The reason being, imagine if abortions were being performed for profit, like most dentistry is.
I will state though, that to use abortion as birth control is something that should simply not be allowed. Perhaps there should be a limit placed upon the amount of times one can have the proceedure done in a given time period, say ten years?
What I am surprised to read is that since Bush became President abortions have been reduced by such a dramatic number. Is there anyplace online where I can read this? I scanned around yesterday evening looking for numbers but mainly found nothing apart from hidious pictures, but nowhere did I see the claim that Bush has managed to save any unwanted children.I again ask, that if abortion was to be made 100% illegal, then what happens? It’s sair enough to call for it to be banned outright, but what is your suggestion from that point? And again I ask this; are you happy with the Presidents work on outlawing abortion so far? Is he doing enough?
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2006 at 9:19 am
Simon… another one from the Anti-Abortion camp…
For one thing, regardless of what I say here, it is likely to be labeled a typical response from a male who doesn’t have to ever worry about being faced with that decision.
However, here I go. The unfortunate thing is, that the majority of abortions that take place in America are more of a birth control nature than that of “life threatening, no where else to turn” circumstances. The truth is, that in our culture of convenience, the choice to go to university or the choice to not have a lasting reminder of a one night stand is to eliminate the possibility of a baby to make a choice to live.
A look closer into the culture of the so-called Pro-Choice agenda will show you that the only choice they want to present is abortion. Any effort by even moderate Pro Lifers too pass normal laws is met with venomous retort. For example, in the US, if you are under the age of 18, you must have parental consent to get a piercing, but you are not required to notify parents of an abortion on a minor. A life altering, invasive surgery is considered less of a necessity to inform a parent. Planned Parenthood is the largest Pro-Abortion lobby (and make Billions each year killing babies). Even attempting to press them to include education on what is happening to the fetus in an abortion is unthinkable. They won’t tell you about the possible mental anguish and guilt that often times follows the process.
The flip side, what to do with the unwanted babies who weren’t aborted… President Bush has given great incentives to Faith Based organizations that present alternatives to abortion, including homes for the pregnant mothers to live out their pregnancies, foster care ministries that place kids in loving homes, and even public programs that allow a girl to leave a baby with authorities – no questions asked – if she can’t handle the responsibility of being a mother at the time.
I have to get back to work now, but I want to finish by saying this… there are terrible circumstances that surround each choice to abort or not. I do not envy someone in those positions. My wish is that more people would choose to allow the baby to live than to compound one mistake by making another.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2006 at 9:37 am
I think the president could do more. As of yet , he’s managed to make partial birth abortion (killing the child as they are part way out of the womb) illegal. This was a ‘victory’ for prolifers a few years ago except that there are still other forms of 3rd trimester abortion legal. Basically, we can still kill children all the way up to the woman’s labor… as long as the child isnt visible but then that’s what all of abortion promotes- unseen violence on the innocent. I dont think Bush has done as much as he could and i’m disappointed. I believe he’s done a lot to channel funding away from institutions that support abortion…I know that Planned Parenthood for one has lost a good amount of funding from the government…but I dont know if its state or federal funding…it might just be a statewide thing here.
I dont know how they do abortions in Europe, but here, abortion clinics are not government run.. and they are scarey places. They dont have the regulations hospitals have and if something goes wrong they cant give the care a hospital provides, and yes women have died from abortions in america. It’s not a huge percentage but it is still a percentage.
What will we do if abortion is 100% illegal…well I think we’ll manage. We have problems in our society with poverty and neglect and things like that…who doesnt. abortion is in no way the answer to that problem. The answer to that problem has to do with a reform in the messed up families we now have operating…(which bush could put more into) but abortion is not a solution to that. Abortion is cruel.. and from my understanding there is research that suggests that at 7-9 weeks the fetus has feeling. There’s a video called the silent scream put out by a former abortionist who taped a sonogram of a D&E procedure on an 11 week old fetus. The fetus dodges the forceps as best he can (because in this procedure the babies limbs are ripped from his body…and then removed) and then finally the doctor gets ahold of the fetus’s leg and as the doctor’s pulling the fetus opens his mouth wide in what would appear to be pain….hence the name. We dont know what all the fetus.. the babies go through during abortion and we just assume that they feel nothing, and are just lumps of tissue…Why? Why dont we assume in favor of the most innocent one involved in the situation, the baby…because its more convenient to do otherwise?
As far as abortion being used as birth control, I used to talk to women outside abortion clinics and there was a small percentage of women who did use it as birth control…coming up on their 4th or 5th abortion, and they were the scariest women. I dont understand why we would put limits on abortion…suggesting that there needs to be limits means that there is something wrong with it….why would you need to limit something that was perfectly fine?
Final note, and a little off subject, Roe v. Wade, Roe who is actually Norma McCorvey, is now a professing Christian..and very prolife. The same is true for lots of former abortionists around the country such as the one who put out The Silent Scream. The turn over rate in the abortion industry is well known to be high… we can talk about the procedure in theory…but when it actually comes to going through with it…I dont think we could stand it. We talk about saving children from a life of rejection or whatever it is we think we’re doing for them by aborting them…and that’s just twisted. We dont know what’s going to happen to those children once they’re born and just because someone has a hard life does not mean that their life is worthless…
links: https://www.operationsaveamerica.org/press/press/000107abortiondecline.html
https://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_pain.htm
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2006 at 6:42 pm
Some very interesting comments here. It’s clearly an emotive issue, very much a ‘can of worms’ which would explain why people choose to remain silent on the issue I suppose.
I’ve said before that I hadn’t done much research or reading about this, though I have now read the links posted here and done a great deal of Googling. There is clearly a huge amount of emotion surrounding the issue, many pro-life websites I visited had clearly concluded that the publication of grotesque and disturbing images was entirely fitting, and who am I to call them wrong I suppose. So yes Rachel, I have seen some truly horrific pictures of the partial birth mutilated dead bodies.
I was also interested to learn that Norma McCorvey, who was the plantiff in Roe vs Wade, actually converted to Catholicism in the 90’s and is indeed now a prolific anti-abortion campaigner. An ironic twist indeed. More ironic was the fact that she never actually had the abortion she fought for either.
My question though wasn’t wether people were pro-choice or pro-life, and in essence I think stating one of either of those positions is foolish as the understanding for both seems very black and white when in truth this issue, like so many, is hardly black and white.
The partial birth abortion is horrid, plain and simple. I feel great sympathy for anyone involved in such a barbaric murder. The mother, the baby and even the abortionist. To do such a thing must have terrible repercussions on those involved. To my mind this practice should never ever have been deemed acceptable by any standard and I am truly stunned by Americas quite astounding laws surrounding abortion.
However I would state, if asked, my position on abortion to be a moderate mix of both arguments. In other words I am pro-choice, though I do not believe this then makes it right. I believe that there needs to be limitations placed upon abortion.
I know that Rachel has already stated that she believes limitations are a nonsense, but in illustrating my point I would say that despite you car being well capable of reaching speeds well in excess of 100mph, the state imposes limits to guard not only your safety and the safety of others. No one has made a serious argument suggesting that these limits are pointless.
In other words I feel that abortion, though terrible, should not simply be declared illegal, though as it stands the law on the subject should be changed. So you see I can neither stand in the pro-life corner, nor the pro-choice corner. I stand in a far more moderate middle ground, and I believe it is there where the answer lies. To simply continue the extreme sides to bang their heads together while not giving an inch away is completely pointless, and under the current US abortion laws one might even argue that it is criminal not to have a more sensible debate.
In the UK, though the subject is still obviously one surrounded in controversy, the laws of the land make abortion a much harder and graphic choice. Though the law allows for women to seek a termination at anytime up to 24 weeks, the truth is that most do not do so. In fact nearly 90% of all abortion here are carried out in the first 12 weeks, and even then one can only get an abortion if two Doctors agree that the risk to a woman’s physical or mental health or the risk to her child(ren)s physical or mental health will be greater if she continues with the pregnancy than if she ends it. [Link]
Sadly after Googling for quite some time on this subject I can find no evidence to back Chip’s claim that Bush has reduced the rate of abortion at all, let alone by 500,000 per year. Disturbingly there seem to be more studies and statistics that prove the rate of abortions may well have increased since Bush took office.
As ever, I appreciate the comments you are all making, and I am very interested in hearing more.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2006 at 7:02 pm
I honestly don’t know what the president has done to reduce the numbers of abortion. I do know that where I live a women, even a minor can walk into any state run health clinic and receive free birth control pills, condoms and contraceptive foam/gel. I’m not sure about how easy it is to get the morning after pill or what the cost of it is and if low income people can afford it (it’s not always easy to come up with an extra 50 to 100 bucks for some people) or if it’s even given to minors. I’m glad that minors are given free contraceptives. I would want my daughter to be able to use that option if she felt that she couldn’t talk to me.As far as my daughter walking into an abortion clinic and having an abortion without my knowledge, I know she can do it.. but I hope I’ve raised her well enough that she would come to me first. I got pregnant with her at 15, I choose to keep her but I would never try to make that decision for her. I would try my best to help her to make the decision that she could live with.As far as late stage abortions, after the first trimester. I think they should be on a case by case basis, handled by a doctor and only for medical reasons. If a women in her second trimester has to choose between her baby and her own life, who am I to say the baby should be saved. I can’t imagine that giving birth to a baby either by c section or naturally could pose any more of a health risk to a mother in the third trimester than having an abortion. I never understood live birth abortion and in my opinion it’s murder.I had an early 3rd trimester still birth where the baby had died in utero. I had to have labor induced, much in a same way that anyone having an abortion at that stage would. I’ve never seen the abortion pictures that you talked about.. but I held my son and he had all of his fingers, toes, eyelashes, hair… he was a tiny little person, I could never refer to him as a fetus.. he was my son. I couldn’t imagine putting him into a trash can. He was given a name and a funeral.People do use abortion as a form of birth control, and not just uneducated people. I have a friend who has a college degree who had 3 abortions within a 2 year period. The first time, I went with her. I listened to her cry afterward and watched her struggle with her decision. The second time, I allowed her to cry to me through the phone about how guilty she felt. The third time I told her to go on the pill and stop being so damn irresposible. I don’t know if she listened, she no longer speaks to me. I think that the government should run the abortion clinics, or at least be more active in how they’re run ( they have their hand in everything else ) .. When you go to get an abortion your name should be put into a nationwide database, first time, ok, second time.. ok.. maybe you really are a dumbass and counseling is in order. Third time.. welcome to your free tublaligation, or at least mandatory norplant for a few years until you smarten up. I know a lot of people would say it’s a privacy issue but if you can’t expect privacy in an airport why whould you expect it in an abortion clinic. If you’re ashamed of it. Don’t do it.I don’t know if Roe vs. Wade will ever be overturned. I’m not sure that it should be. I do believe in regualion in this area. If it is overturned I do hope that we first have a better, safer foster care system in place, and better adoption laws and incentives, and more education. We’ll need it.Good question but I’m not sure if this helped.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2006 at 7:27 pm
Good comment there Wookit.
I just wanted to add that as far as I understand it, all fetuses that are aborted at my local hospital are given a funeral wether the parent choose to go or not. There is a special garden in their remembrance at the local cemetery where the services are held.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 17, 2006 at 11:13 am
just because abortion is illegal doesn’t mean that people are going to stop getting them. so instead of going to some back-door butcher that will get the job done it’s better to have a real doctor do it.do i think abortion is “right”? absolutely not. but my rights end where someone else’s begin, and that someone else has the right to choose whether or not to recieve an abortion.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 17, 2006 at 3:10 pm
2 comments.1.) To my dismay Simon is right in the fact that I am now unable to locate the website that made the claim of 500,000 less per year, but I’m not giving up because I googled “U.S. Abortion Statistics” and browsed for less than 5-10 pages before clicking on the link.
They claimed to use stat info. supported by the Alan Guttmacher Institute. I admit It was late that night and I had been drinking BUT I wasn’t that drunk. umm. anyway…2.) I completely disagree with the premise of doittomorrow last arguement “just because abortion is illegal doesn’t mean that people are going to stop getting them.”
This is a true statement for a select few but not true for the masses. Making abortion illegal will reduce the number of abortions. I’m really not necessarily pro-life but this particular arguement doesn’t hold weight because it pushes to the question of why should a society have any laws at all if people are just going to break them anyway.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 18, 2006 at 5:13 pm
Well I Googled around too Chip, using the same search term as you, and probably like you I found a deluge of information and statistics to prove and disprove all things. The most reliable ones I found suggest that abortion decline since it’s peak in 1984 has effectively stalled under Bush. But this might not be due to anything he’s done, or not done.
I too feel that Doittomorrow is probably stretching things somewhat to assume that all women who seek abortion legally now would also therefore seek an illegal abortion. However, having said that, desperate times call for desperate measure according to the saying, so who knows what a desperate woman might do, and I ask is it really worth the risk of finding out if desperate women would seek illegal means to terminate a pregnancy?
After doing quite a bit of reading about this subject I can only conclude that President Bush could do more to promote a reasonable discussion on this subject. One that does not pit people into black and white corners of pro-life or pro-choice where the middle ground is still unacceptable to all.
Not every progression can be a leap, sometimes we have to be happy with the smaller steps knowing that we are at least making headway.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 18, 2006 at 7:13 pm
i am strongly pro-life, but weary of politics. i don’t believe that legislation will necessarily solve the problem; hearts and minds must be changed, but it takes time and dedication. there are many in the pro-life movement who are making concerted efforts to reduce the number of abortions. my husband is on the board of a local pro-life group and also organizes an event to inspire christian churches to take a stronger role in reducing abortions here in the u.s.
i once visited a nazi concentration camp and was amazed to see a neighborhood of homes lined up just outside the fence. did these neighbors remain silent during the holocaust? or did anyone speak out? try to help the jews? protest?
at what point does life begin? you may debate it. but for anyone who has seen an ultrasound of a baby in the uterus, you would probably agree that some abortions amount to the taking of (innocent) human life. i don’t wish to be complacent and therefore guilty by my silence.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 19, 2006 at 4:36 am
It’s funny you should say that Christians should be more involved in anti abortion stuff Annabean. In fact I was discussing this the other day with someone, the fact that it seems to me a lot of Christians seem very involved in their own faith, but beyond that, not much else.
At the time we weren’t talking about the abortion problem, but poverty and the environment. I was wondering why it is more Christians don’t seem to be more active in programs to help end poverty, provide water to the world, and curb the damage we are doing to the environment and the future.
Bono said recently that “it’s not about charity, it’s about justice.” That quote was regarding poverty in Africa and our role in making a change there. But it could be applied equally to abortion couldn’t it. I mean you could give some money to an anti abortion fund, or maybe even go on a march or something. But is there more you could do, something constructive?
When my friend Pam used to strip, she had to walk past a bunch of Christian pickets outside the club who every night were there holding up placards, wearing sandwich boards and playing praise and worship music over their crappy little PA system. Pam labeled them “the religious nuts” because she felt they were pointless and socially out of touch. Then one night after another confrontation with one she told me something that really made me think. She said “They probably turn more people away from God than the [strip] club.”
So yes, I think Christians should be more involved in many things. But by this I mean something more constructive, more meaningful and more LOVING than pickets, rallies and words.
Right at the start of these comments SpiritusNaturae said “I think we have gotten far too spoiled in this country and everything tends to be about ‘convenience’ and ‘self’.” With that I am in total agreement. We’ve grown fat and lazy atop a throne of wealth and choice, convenience and distractions. And it seems to me that as we take this all for granted we become less and less connected or concerned with anything beyond that which we can see. So when wars are being fought in far of places for questionable reasons – we do nothing. When 3000 children die each day in Africa of diseases we can cure with drugs that could be bought at any local drug store – we do nothing. When a tyrant leader lives in the lap of luxury while his country starves to death – we do nothing. And when we see and hear figures of the near irreversible damage we continue to wreak upon the world God has given to us – we do nothing.
When God said “love thy neighbor” I don’t think he was just talking about the guy next door.