Vatican newspaper trumpets Obama’s “common ground” message on abortion
posted at 8:31 pm on May 18, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
There must be some vestigial loyalty to the Church buried deep in my disbelieving heart because I find this so disappointing.
The Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano said Obama’s speech at the leading Catholic university on Sunday confirmed what he had said at a recent news conference — that signing the so-called Freedom of Choice Act in the U.S. Congress wasn’t his highest legislative priority. The bill would protect a woman’s right to have a child or end a pregnancy…
The article didn’t mention the protest by dozens of U.S. Catholic bishops who denounced Notre Dame for honoring Obama because his abortion rights record clashes with fundamental church teaching.
Instead, it simply quoted Obama as inviting all Americans to work together to reduce the number of abortions and unwanted pregnancies, and concluded he was searching for common ground on the “delicate question of abortion.”…
In addition, L’Osservatore Romano gave Obama a positive review after his first 100 days in office, saying in a front-page editorial that even on ethical questions Obama hadn’t confirmed the “radical” new direction he had discussed during the campaign.
Partisanship aside, and duly noting the political delicacy involved here in not wanting to attack a head of state, can the house organ of the Catholic Church really not muster anything more critical than this about a guy as radically pro-choice as Obama? The idea that they’re clinging to the fact that he hasn’t said he won’t sign the Freedom of Choice Act but merely that it’s not his highest priority is so pathetic, it’d make Doug Kmiec blush. Slublog managed to produce a more righteous editorial last night in our Greenroom, during odd hours away from his kids. I get that the Church doesn’t want to alienate The One’s liberal Catholic supporters, but I suspect those supporters have already made peace with the idea that disapproving sounds about the president’s position on life are bound to emanate from the Vatican now and again. If the Church won’t even stand up for the bishops who spoke out on an issue as fundamental as life, what will it stand up for?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Obama is beyond pro-choice, he is pro-abortion.
cadams on May 18, 2009 at 8:33 PM
If you changed “disbelieving” to “Calvinist” then it would describe me.
This is just so unbelievable.
OneGyT on May 18, 2009 at 8:34 PM
He is truly “The One”
EnochCain on May 18, 2009 at 8:35 PM
The paper has drawn some criticism lately with its nuanced position. I wouldn’t read into it too much. What really matters is what the bishops in the US backed up by key clerics in Rome like Burke will do to punish ND.
Vatican Watcher on May 18, 2009 at 8:35 PM
Do they know about the One’s restoring funding for international organizations that provide abortions? Or his order allowing federal funds for embryonic stem cell research?
Wethal on May 18, 2009 at 8:36 PM
Does the Catholic Church understand this is why so many Catholics are drifting? Sheppard Attend To Your Flock.
Dr Evil on May 18, 2009 at 8:36 PM
this whole affair is very interesting…it really makes you wonder what is going on with the catholic church…
right4life on May 18, 2009 at 8:36 PM
Sad.
WisCon on May 18, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Did Kmiec’s disease get tranfered to the Holy Father.
Holy Moly!*
* I am thinking of another word.
Mr. Joe on May 18, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Obama makes me sick for his views on pro-abortion. It is disturbing what he believes.
deidre on May 18, 2009 at 8:38 PM
At this rate, in another few years they will be throwing Christ under the bus.
MB4 on May 18, 2009 at 8:38 PM
As of yesterday the church has signaled all its followers that abortion is acceptable. By the Vatican or it’s news organ not challenging Obama’s speech and his “can’t we all get along” comments it sends a crystal clear picture that the church itself is okay with abortions and that Catholics anywhere in the world no longer have to worry about abiding by doctorine.
So have at it Catholics. Do what you want, the church no longer has a leg to stand on. It’s now become a free-for-all.
angrywonk on May 18, 2009 at 8:38 PM
Hey, Pope, let us know what you think when Obama incrementally enacts FOCA–in particular, elimination of the conscience exceptions for health-care workers.
BuckeyeSam on May 18, 2009 at 8:38 PM
What planet is this!!
Sorry,this is just too surreal!
Is the Vatican going soft on abortion?
canopfor on May 18, 2009 at 8:40 PM
There’s a deadly mix of lack of moral clarity and courage. To what extent I do not know, but this is not an issue to be couched in diplospeak. Obama is a radical pro-abort and his opposition to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act marks him as pro-infanticide.
Good question. I understand some 77 Catholic bishops spoke against Notre Dame’s decision.
INC on May 18, 2009 at 8:41 PM
pro-death
off by 665 or so
sven10077 on May 18, 2009 at 8:41 PM
Allah, I just want to voice my appreciation for how level headed you’ve been on this particular episode.
AbaddonsReign on May 18, 2009 at 8:41 PM
It seems lately that the people are going to have to save themselves from their overlords whether it be in DC or Rome.
katy on May 18, 2009 at 8:42 PM
I wouldn’t be surprised if, by the end of summer, Time, Newsweek, or both, are running issues titled, “Out: Christ; In: Obama.”
BuckeyeSam on May 18, 2009 at 8:42 PM
Do the US Bishops have much control over the University?
In the case of the Vatican, they may be delegating the Obama criticism to the US Bishops, allowing the Pope to speak on the issue without going after a head of state directly.
dedalus on May 18, 2009 at 8:43 PM
I may have to find another religion to follow. If the can so flippantly except the political rhetoric of BHO, then perhaps they (the church) aren’t the great spiritual leaders I thought they were. But I will withhold final judgement until the POpe makes an official statement. Why is everyone blindly jumping on the Obama bandwagon regardless of the consequences?
Tommy_G on May 18, 2009 at 8:44 PM
I believe in Catholic people coming from a family of Catholics…I know them to be sincere in their belief. My mother knows her Bible because it used to be taught in the Catholic Church. I left the Church because of the hierarchy and knew I’d made the right decision when in November 2001 the Pope came out and said you din’t need to follow Christ to get to heaven…
CCRWM on May 18, 2009 at 8:44 PM
Sad…the Church is just going to roll over for The One now. This will cost them dearly.
AUINSC on May 18, 2009 at 8:44 PM
There’s someone more important than they are whose opinion should matter more to the Vatican. His name is God.
I’m shocked that the Vatican couldn’t come up with anything stronger for someone they would’ve excommunicated by now, were he a member of their fellowship.
emailnuevo on May 18, 2009 at 8:44 PM
The brilliant shining light of The One makes principles and integrity melt away, it seems.
Cicero43 on May 18, 2009 at 8:44 PM
What common ground can there be? We can not even agree on whether babies born alive and viable outside of its mother’s womb should be aborted! Or if a baby delivered all but for its head in its mother’s womb can have its skull smashed and its brain’s sucked out! Will Obama at least meet us on these two issues, as an effort to achieve common ground?
DarkKnight3565 on May 18, 2009 at 8:45 PM
One side is life, the other is death. The only common ground we’re going to have is the battlefield.
macummings on May 18, 2009 at 8:46 PM
Maybe we are all already dead and in hell. lol
EnochCain on May 18, 2009 at 8:46 PM
I second that. Thanks for being Ed while he is away on vacation. You’ll need a vacation when he returns probably though, haha!
deidre on May 18, 2009 at 8:47 PM
Are Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace advising the Vatican now?
msmveritas on May 18, 2009 at 8:48 PM
P.S.
Oh, and don’t forget:
Not so concerned with “common ground.” And as it should be.
emailnuevo on May 18, 2009 at 8:48 PM
This is unbelievably pathetic.
progressoverpeace on May 18, 2009 at 8:49 PM
Me too!!!
PrincipledPilgrim on May 18, 2009 at 8:49 PM
OneGyT,
What do you think Mark Noll will do. After being at Wheaton for a number of years, he went to ND in hopes of finding common ground between Protestants and Catholics. I would love to hear his thoughts on all this and whether he will choose to stay at ND.
PrincipledPilgrim on May 18, 2009 at 8:51 PM
Obama’s thought to reduce less abortions is to fund more of them in the world. Do people not look at what Obama’s actions are and compare them to his words? Goodness, it is sickening.
deidre on May 18, 2009 at 8:51 PM
Just like the early Christians didn’t want to antogonize the pagan Romans, so they moderated Christian theology.
All that stuff about lions and coliseums? Just old legend. Or maybe “symbolic,” like the Resurrection.
s/off
Wethal on May 18, 2009 at 8:51 PM
Doug Kmiec just started packing his bags–”Honey get ready for that Rome extended vacation I promised!”
Mr. Joe on May 18, 2009 at 8:51 PM
Sadly, I’m not surprised.
There was a nasty little story a few months ago ripping Benedict for everything but having beer pong games in the Vatican gardens. The sources were inside the Curia.
Popes come and go but these people hang around forever blunting anything harshly doctrinaire.Lifes so much easier that way.
It also shows that Pope Benedict at 83 may not have the energy or desire to “crack heads” over these weasels despite his fairly conservative philosophy on matters of doctrine.When I was at Santa Clara 20 years ago I lost count of how many Jesuits I would have excommunicated, so subversive church officials are nothing new.
jjshaka on May 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM
Maybe they are being PC up at the top, but beneath the surface they may be shaking some things up. Just a thought.
Luthien on May 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM
This is very sad when you must conclude that the Roman Catholic Church is nothing more than an institutional stooge for Obama. On the other hand, it also learned to live quite well with Hitler. The entire world has developed a sickness of mind, the spirit and the heart . . . nothing is sacred or beyond the realm of hedonism.
rplat on May 18, 2009 at 8:55 PM
End Times?
Mr. Joe on May 18, 2009 at 8:55 PM
What makes you think they didn’t do that centuries ago?
TMK on May 18, 2009 at 8:55 PM
The pontiff is just hopin’ to be more jiggy with it…
First lovin’ on the bomb throwin’ palis, and now the nail in the head murderers…..everybody ask for your money back…..and set up your own alters in your homes.
nondhimmie on May 18, 2009 at 8:56 PM
Standing by for TTheoLogan to dig in with one of his rants in 5…4…3…
kingsjester on May 18, 2009 at 8:57 PM
Thirded.
inviolet on May 18, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Asked at a forum when he believes life begins, Barack Obama says he cannot answer, as it is “above his pay grade”. Based on his actions, it seems that life doesn’t even begin outside the womb.
He also said “ I’ve got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.” Punished with a baby?
Now if he believes that his daughter carrying a baby to term is a punishment, and he believes she should have an abortion to avoid this punishment, he thinks that abortion is a good thing. He supports abortion. If he supports abortion with his words and deeds, then he is Pro-Abortion.
When it comes to abortion, Barack Obama is an absolutist.
joepub on May 18, 2009 at 9:00 PM
Unfortunately, there is a liberal wing of the Church. They aren’t true Catholics. No true Catholic can support anyone who believes abortion is just. God does not make exceptions to this. God does not go with what is socially acceptable.
madmonkphotog on May 18, 2009 at 9:02 PM
There can be no common ground.
A dead baby is already dead….
How dreadful and disappointing this continual compromise and surrender to lies and death.
bperiwinkle on May 18, 2009 at 9:03 PM
ALLAHP:
If the Church won’t even stand up for the bishops who spoke out on an issue as fundamental as life, what will it stand up for?
RELIAP:
NOTHING.
THE CHURCH IS AS GOOD AS DEAD UNDER THE COWARDLY BENEDICT.
THE NEW NY CARDINAL WAS BETTER THAN BENEDICT OR THE VATICAN.
IT’S SICKENING.
FALACCI IS SPINNING IN HER GRAVE.
reliapundit on May 18, 2009 at 9:03 PM
That answers many of the questions some had regarding the Catholic Church.
AnninCA on May 18, 2009 at 9:04 PM
A formidable enemy…and don’t dispute, that is what he is. He has coopted the most revered religious institution in human history. He is in his den tonight, cackling and smelling this one more step towards victory. Why can’t others see his evil??
PaCadle on May 18, 2009 at 9:04 PM
He had a totally different speech when he spoke at planned parenthood.
deidre on May 18, 2009 at 9:04 PM
I really can’t believe this. Really, I can’t. As a protestant, I really like the Pope. But this…really, this is difficult for me. I can’t imagine how those who stood up for the unborn at ND must feel. Abandoned? Enraged? Frustrating.
This has been my hope for at least a decade now. I have been longing for mainline protestant denominations to begin engaging in Council styled meetings with the Vatican in the hope that the Church would be unified. But if the Vatican is going to be silent on something that the Laws of Nature declare loudly, then I’m not sure I want to discuss the finer issues of a forensic understanding of justification.
Weight of Glory on May 18, 2009 at 9:05 PM
Me too, AP.
Weight of Glory on May 18, 2009 at 9:08 PM
“I’m shocked that the Vatican couldn’t come up with anything stronger for someone they would’ve excommunicated by now, were he a member of their fellowship.
emailnuevo on May 18, 2009 at 8:44 PM”
Yeah, like Kathleen Sebelius or Teddy Kennedy?
KS Rex on May 18, 2009 at 9:09 PM
At this rate, Vatican City will look like Studio 54 by the time we get our next Pope.
justfinethanks on May 18, 2009 at 9:11 PM
Allah,
Don’t get your news about what the Vatican has to say from YahooNews.
Here: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=16034
The Vatican is more critical of Obama than you may think.
MedSchoolCatholic on May 18, 2009 at 9:12 PM
I heard this on the news earlier and couldn’t believe my ears. Either shit or get off the pot, Catholic Church. You either against abortion or you are not. I think this is just another sign that the Catholic Church as have others, have put “social justice” aka, marxism above theology and commandments.
Blake on May 18, 2009 at 9:13 PM
AnninCA on May 18, 2009 at 9:13 PM
Someone wrote yesterday (sorry, I don’t remember who) that Obama’s real goal in going to Notre Dame was to push a wedge between Catholics and their Church leadership, with the ultimate goal, of course, being the marginalization and eventual destruction of the Catholic Church. It’s plausible. If there’s anything standing between the far left and total power, it’s organized religion. Considering this argument, it’s interesting that the Vatican paper would take a soft approach. It’ll give them more ‘fair-minded words’ credentials later on when Obama’s support for infanticide rears its ugly head again. Moreover, it looks like Obamacare will head quickly toward rationing health care, particularly for the old, so the Church will be able to wade in there, as well, arguing that they were “fair-minded,” but Obama has simply gone too far. Really, I think any future criticisms by Church leadership about Obama and life will carry more weight in the light of this “measured” response. I’m sure Obama would have preferred a full-on attack by the “intolerant” Vatican.
Rational Thought on May 18, 2009 at 9:16 PM
Second look at the “antichrist kooks” in 3… 2… 1…
You have to wonder what the Vatican folksies were thinking here, how does this work out in their favor?
Merovign on May 18, 2009 at 9:17 PM
AP, bless your heart for your common sense insight on this topic. You see this for the surreal atrocity it is, and I commend you for it. Now if only the Church would come to its senses. I pray that, as Luthien said, something action is happening beneath the surface.
KS Rex on May 18, 2009 at 9:17 PM
It’s a false church, what do you expect?
On another note, Obama is brilliant in how he subtly takes the most radical position on policies in their implementation but, with charisma and charm, makes them sound so moderate and detached from himself.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:18 PM
This is so distressing to me. My husband and I came back to the church about 6 years ago after growing up in Massachusetts where cafeteria catholics are a dime a dozen. We thought that the shallow practice of our catholic faith was something almost regional as people really strive to practice what is preached here in the south. However, when I see this debacle at Notre Dame and now the Vatican – well, it makes me wonder why I bothered coming back. This is truly an eye-opening disappointment . . .
KickandSwimMom on May 18, 2009 at 9:20 PM
Seriously, there’s nothing wrong with the position of talking “passionately” and then working to reduce unwanted pregnancies. That’s pretty tame stuff.
AnninCA on May 18, 2009 at 9:20 PM
I love the euphemism here. I guess it’s sort of like lenin, stalin, mao, pol pot, and hitler “reducing unwanted air-breathers.”
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:22 PM
Thank you for the added context. However, approaching the abortion/life debate through the door of the stem cell issues, really doesn’t have the required bite when addressing ND giving an honorary Dr. to a man who literally advocates infanticide. That needs to be addressed directly as evil. It needs to have clarity and force. It needs to have authority. In other words, it needs the Papacy.
Weight of Glory on May 18, 2009 at 9:23 PM
Interesting words. They came directly from Charles Krauthammer about three hours ago on Fox News.
sherry on May 18, 2009 at 9:23 PM
Actually, they didn’t. I just finished watching what he said on my tivo/mythtv. Feel free to paste the transcript of what exactly he said.
Not that I don’t agree with krauthammer and think he’s very intelligent, but I thought this about obama’s positions on other things as well, far before the notre dame thing. He did this all throughout the campaign.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:25 PM
So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth. Rev. 3:16
P.S. this is not a commentary on your comment.
Editor on May 18, 2009 at 9:28 PM
Your persistent posting on this subject will not relieve you of your guilt…you should know that by now.
Jamson64 on May 18, 2009 at 9:28 PM
The “unwanted pregnancy” shtick comes down to one massively scary idea: that a human being’s value is determined by others, and therefore, if a sufficient amount of people, or one powerful person, determine they have no value, then they don’t.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:30 PM
So far Obama hasn’t done anything legislatively to advance abortion. If Obama were to actually pass FOCA one day, I’m sure you’ll hear condemnations from the Pope.
With the words of praise, the Vatican is likely trying to encourage Obama to remain as moderate as he can on the abortion issue, since changing Obama’s mind on the abortion issue is, at present, a lost cause.
MedSchoolCatholic on May 18, 2009 at 9:31 PM
Other than reinstating the mexico city policy, getting rid of the conscience exception, etc.
Oh wait, that’s EXECUTIVE Orders and things in the executive branch… in other words, things completely done by obama and not by the congress.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:33 PM
I don’t post on this anymore than any of the rest of you do. I do happen to be pro-choice.
AnninCA on May 18, 2009 at 9:34 PM
and hey, the Pope agrees with me. *haha
Discussion is good!
AnninCA on May 18, 2009 at 9:35 PM
Let’s stop beating around the bush and quit with the euphemisms. Just say you’re pro-abortion.
I’m pro-death penalty. That doesn’t mean I believe in killing every single person on the planet, it just means I support the legal option of the death penalty, just as you support the legal option of abortion.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:35 PM
The pope is lost. He’s not exactly someone to look to for spiritual truth and guidance.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:35 PM
Okay, I take that back. I don’t mean he hasn’t done anything legislatively. We’ve basically gone back to how things were under Clinton.
What I really meant to say is that it could be worse, especially if you take into account what he promised during the campaign.
MedSchoolCatholic on May 18, 2009 at 9:36 PM
Do not confuse the writings of any one contributor to L’Osservatore Romano, with a proper understanding of Catholic teaching. The Church will never “go soft” on abortion. She never has. She never will.
manwithblackhat on May 18, 2009 at 9:38 PM
It’s been about 100 days. He hasn’t had the opportunity to do anything worse as of yet.
BTW, he’s about to appoint a radically pro-abortion justice to the supreme court.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:38 PM
EWWW. Now even the catholic church is trying to play Steele’s game.
I never, ever would have thought they’d try that. Steele’s game is stupid and it won’t work. Both he and the pope will look like a couple idiots if the world ever digs it’s head out of it’s moral relativistic ass and actually starts thinking.
Spiritk9 on May 18, 2009 at 9:38 PM
right on
MedSchoolCatholic on May 18, 2009 at 9:39 PM
Oh, I bet you anything they will. The catholic church always eventually takes the popular position on things in order to keep its numbers.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:39 PM
Then we should have already gone down the path of the Anglican Church and changed our stance on contraception by now. Most of the world supports contraception, even self-described “Catholics.”
But we haven’t emulated groups like the Anglicans, and won’t.
MedSchoolCatholic on May 18, 2009 at 9:42 PM
The Vatican’s newspaper is not a papal organ — it is “semi-official”, meaning that content is not necessarily authorized by the Pope or the Curia. Both of your arguments are spurious.
unclesmrgol on May 18, 2009 at 9:42 PM
I’m pro-choice. I never have hidden that. I think that it’s far, far more acceptable for women today to have a baby and not be married, so abortion is no longer particularly attractive as pure birth control. I doubt many have it friviously. However, I do absolutely think this is an issue of individual privacy.
AnninCA on May 18, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Yup.
This is from wikipedia, but still…
MedSchoolCatholic on May 18, 2009 at 9:46 PM
So why do you continue to use euphemisms? You’re pro-abortion. Dressing it up with euphemisms like “privacy,” “choice,” etc is no different than what the Japanese did labeling forced prostitutes as “comfort women,” cute terms like “the final solution,” etc.
Seriously, stop being a coward and hiding behind euphemisms. There’s absolutely no reason to reduce “unwanted pregnancies” if it’s simply any other medical procedure.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:48 PM
I’m sure you studied vatican 2, and know the glaring differences in catholic theology before and after.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:48 PM
“Partisanship aside, and duly noting the political delicacy involved here in not wanting to attack a head of state, can the house organ of the Catholic Church really not muster anything more critical than this about a guy as radically pro-choice as Obama?”
_
In his speech Obama said Americans need to “work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions.” Yet his policies suggest a far different agenda.
_
Let me see if I can help the Vatican and Pope here. In his first 100 days in office, Obama:
1. Signed an executive order allowing taxpayer funding to go to international groups that promote or provide abortions.
2. Opened the door for more human embryos to be destroyed for unethical stem-cell research.
3. Began the process of rescinding the Bush health care provider conscience regulations.
4. Lifted a seven-year ban on taxpayer funding of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which is linked to forced abortion programs.
_
Unfortunately, I can’t help the Vatican develop a spine.
youngturk on May 18, 2009 at 9:50 PM
The truth is, people like anninca do not want the word “abortion” anywhere in their arsenal of beliefs. That’s why they hide behind euphemisms. It’s easier to hide egregious human rights violations in euphemisms and relative, nonsensical phrases.
TTheoLogan on May 18, 2009 at 9:50 PM
L’Osservatore Romano does not speak authoritatively for the Catholic Church. It’s a newspaper, not part of the Magisterium. And an article on Yahoo! that interpretes an article from L’Osservatore Romano, without a link to the actual article, seems more than a little suspect to me. Since when does the media report what the Holy Father actually says? They always twist and distort his words to suit their own agenda.
Mulligan on May 18, 2009 at 9:54 PM
Common ground. Humm. OK, here’s some common ground. Let’s let leftists kill all thier kids, no matter what age, any time they find them to be inconvenient. Those of on the right will keep our kids, and nurture them the best we can, no matter what. The whole problem should go away in about one generation.
The Vatican may just have made itself irrelevant on this issue.
MikeA on May 18, 2009 at 9:55 PM
Hey, people, I don’t care. I’m pro-choice, pro-abortion, or whatever label you wish to use.
I have no problem with abortion. I’m not hiding. I don’t agree with 80% of you on this issue.
Big deal.
AnninCA on May 18, 2009 at 9:56 PM
And don’t think it’s not funny to watch you bash the Pope on this.
Says it all. I rest my case that zealots are zealots, regardless of right or left.
AnninCA on May 18, 2009 at 9:57 PM
Post and post all you care but in the end the guilt is still there.
Jamson64 on May 18, 2009 at 9:58 PM
If I were Catholic, I’d be ready to leave the Church about now.
ProfessorMiao on May 18, 2009 at 9:59 PM
How dare those that disagree point it out.
Jamson64 on May 18, 2009 at 9:59 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »