A practical question for Mormons

[why_me]

I think that the question becomes one of fundamentals. To my understanding, mormons believe that before we gained our physical body, we lived with heavenly father in the preexistence. Thus, there are many spirits waiting to receive their physical bodies right now in the preexistence.

Our physical bodies become a conduit for such spirits in the preexistence to gain a body through our giving birth to a child.

Catholics do not have such an understanding. As I understand, we have become created from ‘dust’. And that we had no preexistence with the Father.

Thus, we see the difference in the mormon stance. To have an abortion to save the life of the mother does negate that preexistence life from receiving life through another body or later from the same mother as she becomes pregnant again.

Am I correct in all this? I don’t know, but I did give my understanding of the two positions dealing with preexistence and human creation.

 

[fellowChristian]

I think that the life of the mother is of greater value than the life of the fetus. The fetus can be renewed through another pregnancy. The life of the mother cannot be.

zerinus

You have to understand the LDS way of thinking.

You see god the father and god the heavenly mother produce spirit children and they get tested to see if they can move on to earth.

If they pass they are born of an earthly mother and father.

So I guess if one of these spirit children are aborted for what ever reason, it is no big deal?!

So the spirit child is basically sent back to god the father and god the heavenly mother.

Whereas a mother if she dies she doesn’t get to come back.
She either goes to hell or one of the three heavens depending on what kind of a mormon she was.
That is what I got out of it.

correct me if I am wrong zerinus.

 

[zerinus]

You have to understand the LDS way of thinking.

You see god the father and god the heavenly mother produce spirit children and they get tested to see if they can move on to earth.

If they pass they are born of an earthly mother and father.

So I guess if one of these spirit children are aborted for what ever reason, it is no big deal?!

So the spirit child is basically sent back to god the father and god the heavenly mother.

Whereas a mother if she dies she doesn’t get to come back.
She either goes to hell or one of the three heavens depending on what kind of a mormon she was.
That is what I got out of it.

correct me if I am wrong zerinus.

Answer here.

zerinus

 

[why_me]

You have to understand the LDS way of thinking.

You see god the father and god the heavenly mother produce spirit children and they get tested to see if they can move on to earth.

If they pass they are born of an earthly mother and father.

So I guess if one of these spirit children are aborted for what ever reason, it is no big deal?!

So the spirit child is basically sent back to god the father and god the heavenly mother.

Whereas a mother if she dies she doesn’t get to come back.
She either goes to hell or one of the three heavens depending on what kind of a mormon she was.
That is what I got out of it.

correct me if I am wrong zerinus.

See my previous post recently on this thread.

 

[majick275]

all abortion is wrong. why can’t mormon prophets know this? they “reveal” what to eat and drink and what to wear but not the sanctity of life?

 

[exiled]

Answer here.

zerinus

Your link to post #56 does not answer fellowchristian’s question. Did you mean to link to another post?

 

[valient_Lucy]

But if she (and her fetus) drop dead as a result of (preventable) fatal pregnancy, who gains anything from that?

zerinus

First of all, you’re assuming we are saying, “Don’t save the life of the mother.” What we’re really saying is, “Don’t kill anyone to save the life of the mother.”

Even if the mother was to drop dead and both she and the unborn child would die, this would still be morally better than to abort the child to save the life of the mother. We can’t do evil so that good can result. We also cannot base moral decisions on “what can we gain.” We must base them on “What is right and what is wrong?”

I’m not saying it wouldn’t be incredibly tragic. But suffering in life is not evil; murder is, and there are things worse than death, like mortal sin.

 

[Good_Daughter]

But if she (and her fetus) drop dead as a result of (preventable) fatal pregnancy, who gains anything from that?

zerinus

Your question seems inherently flawed. How can a pregnancy be prevented if it already exists?

 

[po18guy]

Your statement of course has nothing to do with what I originally said.

Oh, pardon me! It could have been because I originally thought what you said was NONSENSE.

 

[zerinus]

First of all, you’re assuming we are saying, “Don’t save the life of the mother.” What we’re really saying is, “Don’t kill anyone to save the life of the mother.”

Even if the mother was to drop dead and both she and the unborn child would die, this would still be morally better than to abort the child to save the life of the mother. We can’t do evil so that good can result. We also cannot base moral decisions on “what can we gain.” We must base them on “What is right and what is wrong?”

I’m not saying it wouldn’t be incredibly tragic. But suffering in life is not evil; murder is, and there are things worse than death, like mortal sin.

That looks to me like a fanatically criminal adherence to a false ideology. The JWs also refuse to accept (or allow) blood transfusion even if it means the difference life and death to someone. Some have been known to have died as a result. I don’t see any difference. I am glad I am a Mormon.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Your question seems inherently flawed. How can a pregnancy be prevented if it already exists?

By “preventable” I meant preventing the pregnancy to reach full term.

zerinus

 

[truthsilence]

My understanding of the Catholic position is that if surgery is necessary to save the life of the mother, such as the removal of a diseased organ or in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, then it can or should be performed. If the intent is to save the life of the mother and not to end the life of the child, then it is not morally wrong to do it. Some mothers will choose not to have surgery at all, even if they know their life is in extreme danger by continuing the pregnancy. It seems as though some are saying here that the Catholic position is that in no instance should surgery be performed to save a mothers life if as a result the child will perish. I don’t understand that to be the case from what I have been taught, I believe it is called the doctrine of double effect.

Here is a related Q&A article I found from EWTNs website:

Re: Ectopic
Question from on 05-07-2007:
Judie,

Some years ago I had a laparoscopic surgery done to remove a ectopic pregnancy. I talked to a priest and a nun before I had it. I was never told that some ways of doing it were not right. Do they not know anything about this?

Answer by Judie Brown on 05-08-2007:

Dear Dee

The following position statement was written by a moral theologian for American Life League. This sets forth our understanding of Catholic teaching:

The moral management of ectopic pregnancies

By Fr. Joseph C. Howard, Jr., M. Div.

The presence of an ectopic pregnancy may result from a tubal disorder or cause the fallopian tube to be pathological. In all cases, all actions must be analyzed according to intention, means, and end. If any of these three are immoral, the act itself is immoral.

Using the Thomistic Principle of Totality (removal of a pathological part to preserve the life of the person) and the Doctrine of Double Effect, the only moral action in an ectopic pregnancy where a woman’s life is directly threatened is the removal of the tube containing the human embryo. The death of the human embryo is unintended although foreseen. Put another way, if there were a way to save both lives, which, of course, are of equal value, one would be obliged morally to do so. At this time, this is not possible.

 

[Good_Daughter]

By “preventable” I meant preventing the pregnancy to reach full term.

zerinus

Then it’s an “endable” pregnancy, a “snuffable” life.

 

[truthsilence]

I found a good reference on the doctrine of double effect. Again, this explains the catholic position well. We’re not just being whacky about medical issues.

cuf.org/FaithFacts/details_view.asp?ffID=56

 

[po18guy]

Answer here.

zerinus

Some things never change. But God is at work on the Mormons. I pray for them.

 

[zerinus]

Then it’s an “endable” pregnancy, a “snuffable” life.

Answer given here.

zerinus

 

[RebeccaJ]

But if she (and her fetus) drop dead as a result of (preventable) fatal pregnancy, who gains anything from that?

zerinus

This is taking the approach that pregnancy is a disease. It is not.

 

[RebeccaJ]

That looks to me like a fanatically criminal adherence to a false ideology. The JWs also refuse to accept (or allow) blood transfusion even if it means the difference life and death to someone. Some have been known to have died as a result. I don’t see any difference. I am glad I am a Mormon.

zerinus

Blood transfusions are for treating injury, and in some cases disease. Again, pregnancy is not a disease or an injury.

I am glad that you are not my OB/GYN.

 

[po18guy]

Blood transfusions are for treating injury, and in some cases disease. Again, pregnancy is not a disease or an injury.

I am glad that you are not my OB/GYN.

RebeccaJ, is it just me, or do you notice that all these z-links are recollective of Christ, when he said in Mark 13:21-23 “At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or, ‘Look, there he is!’ do not believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect—if that were possible. So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time”. [New International Version (NIV) Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society]

See answer here, See answer there…

 

[zerinus]

Blood transfusions are for treating injury, and in some cases disease. Again, pregnancy is not a disease or an injury.

Pregnancy, when it goes wrong and develops complications, and becomes life-threating, is no different from injury or disease, and requires competent medical treatement.

zerinus