A basic logical argument for the morality of abortion

[commoncents]

Andrea Yates would agree with you.
In fact, she did agree with you.
She mirdered her five children to get them to heaven.

Are you fine with that?

lol, no, not at all. I’m not advocating abortion and actually don’t really believe in abortion. If I did believe in abortion my son wouldn’t be in this world. I just think that if you believe that there is a heaven and that God sends aborted babies there, then you can make a logical argument that abortion isn’t bad. I don’t except the two presuppositions that are the basis for the argument though, but many people on this forum do just that.

 

[Pieman333272]

lol, no, not at all. I’m not advocating abortion and actually don’t really believe in abortion. If I did believe in abortion my son wouldn’t be in this world. I just think that if you believe that there is a heaven and that God sends aborted babies there, then you can make a logical argument that abortion isn’t bad. I don’t except the two presuppositions that are the basis for the argument though, but many people on this forum do just that.

Ah, but most people don’t accept both - they accept the first, but not the second - remember, aborted babies are unbaptized and probably didn’t accept Jesus or the Church, so they’re in God’s hands. Its nice to think that but it’s a theologically unsound idea.

 

[mesurman]

Aborted babies go to heaven. Heaven is undoubtedly better than earth in every possible way imaginable. In light of this by never gracing the earth an aborted fetus is not missing anything. If the fetus was not aborted, there is a chance that they could go to hell. Aborting a fetus is the only way to guarantee heaven. Therefore abortion is moral.

This post is utterly stupid and in very poor taste!!

 

[mdrummer5]

Aborted babies go to heaven. Heaven is undoubtedly better than earth in every possible way imaginable. In light of this by never gracing the earth an aborted fetus is not missing anything. If the fetus was not aborted, there is a chance that they could go to hell. Aborting a fetus is the only way to guarantee heaven. Therefore abortion is moral.

I will agree that from a PURELY logical standpoint this does make sense. However, logic and morality do not always coincide. Someone with a firm understanding of morality and the difference between right and wrong would not come to such a conclustion. A computer given all variables and with no sense of right and wrong likely would come to this conclusion… as would a sociopath as someone else stated earlier. It’s like the question as to why a woman’s sister was murdered after falling in love with a man at her mother’s funeral.

Also in regards to the comment of “what could be more noble than that?” I would agree that if a woman were completely off her rocker and wanted an abortion purely for that reason and her only intent truly was to ensure that her baby goes to heaven even if that means her going to hell that may… MAY be considered an act of nobility. However, anyone using that logic is likely simply trying to justify an immoral act to make themselves feel better about it.

 

[mdrummer5]

This post is utterly stupid and in very poor taste!!

I wouldn’t consider it poor taste or even stupid for that matter. It’s just a really jacked up way of thinking. I don’t believe it was the OP’s intent to justify abortion but simply to present the way some people may think of it in an effort to justify their own actions because as sick and twisted as it is… some people do think like this.

 

[Heliotropium]

The OPs purpose was to play devil’s advocate regarding abortion. I didn’t think it was in poor taste because the OP actually is demonstrating perfectly in my opinion the reality of the world we live in and the rationality people use to try and view their sins as “just” actions.

Abortion is always immoral because it is murder and murder is never justified regardless of where the victim might go after this life. The murders of many Christian martyrs are also not justified just because the martyrs would most likely go to heaven. The ends do not justify the means. God is the author of life and therefore by creating this person has given them the path to come back to Him at the end of their earthly journey. Weather the child grows up and goes to heaven or hell is dependent on that person’s use of God’s graces and their use of free will. People do not go to heaven or hell by chance and therefore to say your saving this child from something horrible is illogical especially when all the people who are in hell are there because they chose to be there.

Hell while being a horrible place is none the less a place God has created for the punishment of those who oppose Him. Gods Justice is good, and Gods Mercy is good, and therefore if the person goes to heaven by Gods Just Mercy or Hell by Gods Just Justice then regardless the end result is always GOOD. Since the end result of a person’s life is always good regardless of where they go because it was based on the choice they made with their own free will and because God honored this choice we can conclude that by you making the choice weather this person lives or dies is always considered “immoral” and “wrong.” The error you make is in presuming that you could bring a greater good for this person than what God could bring them. By doing this you not only offend God but you hurt everyone on this earth because God works through His creation and this always benefits us!

Abortion deprives this world of good souls just like how mortal sin deprives us of sanctifying grace and this makes abortion morally wrong because your action takes away the greater good God willed for us, for yourself, and for that person. By this we can see that the argument for abortion based on the “well they go to heaven” therefore its moral is a very flawed one. Sin effects everyone.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I see two things wrong with this argument.

1. I seems to suggest that committing murder has a good end. Murder is a moral evil. Catholic Teaching forbids the doing of an evil for a good outcome.
2. There is no guarantee that the unbaptized go to Heaven. Baptism is necessary for salvation. We do not know what happens to the unbaptized.

 

[Newbie2]

Intention: to get your baby to heaven.

Circumstances: you have the chance to get your baby to heaven and take it.

Consequence: you possibly give up your chance to go to heaven to guarantee your child does. What could be more noble than that?

I hope this is an “athiest hypothetical” rather than a serious question.

Isn’t it the afterlife that really matters? Wouldn’t you rather have a horrible life and go to heaven than have a great life and go to hell? Isn’t life just about getting to heaven? Isn’t that the overall goal? ***Am I missing something here? *** Everything else is just fluff. 80 years is nothing compared to eternity.

Yes, you are missing somthing here.

False dichotomy. The choice is not between ‘a horrible life and going to heaven’ OR 'a great life and go to hell.

.

Exactomundo.

Following the logic in the OP, we should murder people right after they come out of confession as a noble act.

 

[buffalo]

Overlooked in this argument is the fact that the capacity for the beatific vision is increased or decreased here on earth through human lifetime.

 

[Debora123]

Aborted babies go to heaven. Heaven is undoubtedly better than earth in every possible way imaginable. In light of this by never gracing the earth an aborted fetus is not missing anything. If the fetus was not aborted, there is a chance that they could go to hell. Aborting a fetus is the only way to guarantee heaven. Therefore abortion is moral.

Do you think it’s moral to slaughter a 5v year old? They’d go straight to heaven too, you know.

 

[Debora123]

lol, no, not at all. I’m not advocating abortion and actually don’t really believe in abortion. If I did believe in abortion my son wouldn’t be in this world. I just think that if you believe that there is a heaven and that God sends aborted babies there, then you can make a logical argument that abortion isn’t bad. I don’t except the two presuppositions that are the basis for the argument though, but many people on this forum do just that.

Simply put, as Christians we believe that the ends don’t justify the means. Killing someone is a horrible thing and it is against God’s law, even if the life you’re taking away is guaranteed to go right to heaven.

 

[Debora123]

Ah, but most people don’t accept both - they accept the first, but not the second - remember, aborted babies are unbaptized and probably didn’t accept Jesus or the Church, so they’re in God’s hands. Its nice to think that but it’s a theologically unsound idea.

I’m pretty sure it’s been established now that aborted babies do go to heaven. It may not be in Church doctrine, because realistically we have no way of saying for sure that we know anyone’s fate unless they are canonized as saints. But it is safe to assume, and as Catholics we do assume, that they go to heaven.

 

[catharina]

I’m pretty sure it’s been established now that aborted babies do go to heaven. It may not be in Church doctrine, because realistically we have no way of saying for sure that we know anyone’s fate unless they are canonized as saints. But it is safe to assume, and as Catholics we do assume, that they go to heaven.

You mean to say, perhaps, that you assume that.
You’re not speaking for the Church.

I’d prefer not to have to address this to you -
but as a Catholic, I can’t allow any grave
mis-statement of teachings such as yours.

 

[PJM]

=commoncents;7495269]Aborted babies go to heaven. Heaven is undoubtedly better than earth in every possible way imaginable. In light of this by never gracing the earth an aborted fetus is not missing anything. If the fetus was not aborted, there is a chance that they could go to hell. Aborting a fetus is the only way to guarantee heaven. Therefore abortion is moral.

---

First dear friend,

Where in the Bible or in the Teachings of the Magesterium does it state emphatically that “aborted babies” go to heaven?

SOME MIGHT? But the issue has never been settled.

Your position it seems to me, is only that: your position. Further your logic seems weak.

If taken as stated NO HUMAN PERSON should be permitted to be born, solely on the basis that such MIGHT CHOOSE FREELY TO SIN GEEVIOUSLY, not confess and repent and condem themselves to hell.

This in turn implies that God was, and is wrong for Creating humanity… A rather unusual position.

Perhaps you might reconsider your position?

God Bless,
Pat***

 

[davidv]

Simply put, as Christians we believe that the ends don’t justify the means. Killing someone is a horrible thing and it is against God’s law, even if the life you’re taking away is guaranteed to go right to heaven.

Which is the main principle that the OP ignors. An evil means is not made good by a good result.

 

[Debora123]

You mean to say, perhaps, that you assume that.
You’re not speaking for the Church.

I’d prefer not to have to address this to you -
but as a Catholic, I can’t allow any grave
mis-statement of teachings such as yours.

Like I said, Church doctrine doesn’t say whether or not babies go to Hell.

It is a safe assumption, though, that they do go to Heaven, as I’ve heard many priests casually make reference to this in mass.

Furthermore, I don’t know if you believe the Medjugorje appearances actually happened, but according to what those children learned from the Virgin Mary, there are no youngsters in Hell.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Like I said, Church doctrine doesn’t say whether or not babies go to Hell.

It is a safe assumption, though, that they do go to Heaven, as I’ve heard many priests casually make reference to this in mass.

You can make this assumption but I do not know what a “safe” assumption is. The Church is silent on this so the best we can do is hope that through God’s Mercy they will go to Heaven, but it is not a given, we do not know.

Furthermore, I don’t know if you believe the Medjugorje appearances actually happened, but according to what those children learned from the Virgin Mary, there are no youngsters in Hell.

Using unapproved (actually the local bishops’ have condemned it) private revelation does not support your argument. Even if the Church did proclaim this private revelation as “worthy of belief” it would not change any thing as approved private revelation are not required to be believed in by the faithful nor can it add anything to the Deposit of Faith.

 

[catharina]

Like I said, Church doctrine doesn’t say whether or not babies go to Hell.

It is a safe assumption, though, that they do go to Heaven, as I’ve heard many priests casually make reference to this in mass.

Furthermore, I don’t know if you believe the Medjugorje appearances actually happened, but according to what those children learned from the Virgin Mary, there are no youngsters in Hell.

Again, you are presenting your own supposition as Church Teaching.

In fact, the CHURCH has NEVER taught that unbaptized babies go to hell. NEVER. You’re simply exposing your own erroneous thinking about what is actual teaching and what is only your opinion.

 

[Debora123]

In fact, **the CHURCH has NEVER taught that unbaptized babies go to hell. NEVER. ** You’re simply exposing your own erroneous thinking about what is actual teaching and what is only your opinion.

Ummmm, I KNOW. Did you read my post? I said “Church doctrine doesn’t say whether or not babies go to Hell.”

Good grief Catharina.

 

[catharina]

Ummmm, I KNOW. Did you read my post? I said “Church doctrine doesn’t say whether or not babies go to Hell.”

Good grief Catharina.

good grief to you, debora.
the CHURCH says babies DO NOT go to hell.

Look it up.

In case you DON’T look it up, here it is.

**C.C.C. # 1261 "As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,” allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism. **

In my own childhood, rather long ago, the teaching regarding unbaptized children was related to the concept of limbo - a place of no suffering. Now the Church offers a bit more hope to the MANY parents who have lost children at or prior to birth. ‘We entrust them to the mercy of God’ - never have I heard any teaching that even implies such souls are thrown into hell. Have you?