Here is an excerpt from a statement issued by Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly:
“After she was elected to Congress, and the choice issue became more public as she would have to vote on it, she studied the matter more closely. Her views on when life begins were informed by the views of Saint Augustine, who said: ‘…the law does not provide that the act [abortion] pertains to homicide, for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation…’ (Saint Augustine, On Exodus 21.22)"
Let's be clear. Nancy Pelosi was elected to Congress in 1987 - 14 years after Roe v. Wade and longer still than abortion had been legalized in California. It's hard to believe she started investigating this after she was elected to Congress.
Second, if she were sincere in wanting to explore the issue, she could have investigated "abortion" proper rather than the euphemistic "choice issue."
Last, Augustine and Nancy Pelosi do share one thing in common - They would both fail a fifth grade biology exam. No one in the world looks to Fourth Century Catholic bishops for lessons on embryology. Why would she trust Augustine's faulty biology and not his still sound moral judgment which condemned abortion at all times. Augustine agreed with what the Christian Community has always held on abortion. In determining just how culpapble one guilty of abortion is he relied on the science available to antiquity. In the 21st Century, it is most peculiar to base one's judgements on what people knew of human development in the 4th.
Cardinal Egan of New York has put it best today:
"What the Speaker had to say about theologians and their positions regarding abortion was not only misinformed; it was also, and especially, utterly incredible in this day and age.
We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being 'chooses' to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name."