A theological argument FOR abortion

[R_Daneel]

It is very simple and straightforward.

Take a zygote, freshly impregnated, before it even leaves for the trip to the uterus. According to the theists, it (definitely not a “he” or a “she”) is already a “human being”. It never gets implanted into the uterus wall, just gets flushed out from the woman’s system. What will be its fate? Will it get into heaven, or will be sent to hell? The limbo is no longer an offical doctrine - so we can leave that out from consideration. Surely it will not get to hell, not even the most conservative Catholic would assert that. So it will go into heaven, in some capacity. There are some people who say that it will not get to the beatific vision (whatever that means). But even a “low-level” heaven is pretty good.

Now, the second possibility is that the zygote gets implanted into the uterus wall, but for some reason or another, it gets spontaneously aborted. The result is the same, it will get into heaven. Good outcome.

Suppose that the abortion is not spontaneous, it is volitional. For the fetus the outcome is not diifferent, still a nice, cozy, warm place in heaven. Good outcome again. So, from a purely pragmatic standpoint, abortion is good. No risk of hell, only an assured place on God’s bosom.

But, what about the woman who makes this decision? Well, it depends on her intent. Catholics, (unlike some Protestants) take the intent into consideration, and not just the act itself. If her intent is to assure a place in heaven, she acts out of love, performing an act in the fetus’s best interest. Furthermore, she sacrifices herself, her future place in heaven, which is the highest form of love. So, she is not a criminal, she does not sin, she puts the well-being of the fetus in front of her own. Thus she is to be praised and a self-sacrificing person, who risks everything just to assure the fetus’s place.

Moreover, she prevents the possible “slip” of her child, who might commot some mortal sin and consequently would be confined to eternal damnation. From a simple risk-benefit analysis, it is her optimal solution. The fetus will get an assured place in heaven. Her fate is also assured, as a self-sacrificing person, who exhibits the highest form of love. Surely God will take her intent into consideration.

So, go and abort all your children. It is in the best interest of the child, and in the best interest of the mother. Be careful, however, not to be selfish, and do not perform the abortion for some temporal gain. Always cast your eyes on the heaven. God will understand your motive, and will reward for it.

 

[Fergal]

You are around long enough to realise that you have just presented a mangled load of old rubbish.

The whole article is a very good ad for relativism.

Next…

 

[R_Daneel]

You are around long enough to realise that you have just presented a mangled load of old rubbish.

Yes, indeed it is… but it is a Catholic “rubbish”. Everything stated in it is based on Catholic belief. From the fate of the unborn all the way to the good intent of the woman, to the highest form of love as the ultimate sacrifice… I did not invent it, I learned it from you guys. Don’t blame the mirror for the reflection.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

It is very simple and straightforward.

Take a zygote, freshly impregnated, before it even leaves for the trip to the uterus. According to the theists, it (definitely not a “he” or a “she”) is already a “human being”. It never gets implanted into the uterus wall, just gets flushed out from the woman’s system. What will be its fate? Will it get into heaven, or will be sent to hell? The limbo is no longer an offical doctrine - so we can leave that out from consideration. Surely it will not get to hell, not even the most conservative Catholic would assert that. So it will go into heaven, in some capacity. There are some people who say that it will not get to the beatific vision (whatever that means). But even a “low-level” heaven is pretty good.

Now, the second possibility is that the zygote gets implanted into the uterus wall, but for some reason or another, it gets spontaneously aborted. The result is the same, it will get into heaven. Good outcome.

Suppose that the abortion is not spontaneous, it is volitional. For the fetus the outcome is not diifferent, still a nice, cozy, warm place in heaven. Good outcome again. So, from a purely pragmatic standpoint, abortion is good. No risk of hell, only an assured place on God’s bosom.

But, what about the woman who makes this decision? Well, it depends on her intent. Catholics, (unlike some Protestants) take the intent into consideration, and not just the act itself. If her intent is to assure a place in heaven, she acts out of love, performing an act in the fetus’s best interest. Furthermore, she sacrifices herself, her future place in heaven, which is the highest form of love. So, she is not a criminal, she does not sin, she puts the well-being of the fetus in front of her own. Thus she is to be praised and a self-sacrificing person, who risks everything just to assure the fetus’s place.

Moreover, she prevents the possible “slip” of her child, who might commot some mortal sin and consequently would be confined to eternal damnation. From a simple risk-benefit analysis, it is her optimal solution. The fetus will get an assured place in heaven. Her fate is also assured, as a self-sacrificing person, who exhibits the highest form of love. Surely God will take her intent into consideration.

So, go and abort all your children. It is in the best interest of the child, and in the best interest of the mother. Be careful, however, not to be selfish, and do not perform the abortion for some temporal gain. Always cast your eyes on the heaven. God will understand your motive, and will reward for it.

Women don’t abort their children to ensure they get into heaven. They abort children for just about every other reason - financial stress, guilt, shame, pressure from the boyfriend or husband.

And it is not a zygote. By the time an abortion takes place, the foetus is well past the zygote stage.

I lifted this from Right to Life Australia.

*“Science tells us that the heart of the human foetus begins to form 18 days after conception. There is a measurable heart beat 21-24 days after conception. This is only 7-10 days after a woman would expect to begin her menstrual cycle. Since most women have cycles that can vary by this amount, they do not discover they are pregnant until after this point. Therefore, all abortions stop a beating heart, even “early” abortions. However, most abortions do not occur until 4-6 weeks after the foetus begins to form. The human brain begins to form on day 23 and is formed enough to produce brain waves by 6 weeks, which means that most abortions destroy a functioning human brain.”
*

Secondly by destroying a human life, the mother, and all those who were willing accessories to the act, become guilty of murder, including politicians who pass laws advocating it. That won’t wash well with God. She and they can repent, and be forgiven, but the reality is that a lot of them think it doesn’t matter.

I also happen to believe that men who father children and then abandon them are very heavily punished by God. But we don’t see that here and now.

 

[Sair]

It is very simple and straightforward.

Take a zygote, freshly impregnated, before it even leaves for the trip to the uterus. According to the theists, it (definitely not a “he” or a “she”) is already a “human being”. It never gets implanted into the uterus wall, just gets flushed out from the woman’s system. What will be its fate? Will it get into heaven, or will be sent to hell? The limbo is no longer an offical doctrine - so we can leave that out from consideration. Surely it will not get to hell, not even the most conservative Catholic would assert that. So it will go into heaven, in some capacity. There are some people who say that it will not get to the beatific vision (whatever that means). But even a “low-level” heaven is pretty good.

Now, the second possibility is that the zygote gets implanted into the uterus wall, but for some reason or another, it gets spontaneously aborted. The result is the same, it will get into heaven. Good outcome.

Suppose that the abortion is not spontaneous, it is volitional. For the fetus the outcome is not diifferent, still a nice, cozy, warm place in heaven. Good outcome again. So, from a purely pragmatic standpoint, abortion is good. No risk of hell, only an assured place on God’s bosom.

But, what about the woman who makes this decision? Well, it depends on her intent. Catholics, (unlike some Protestants) take the intent into consideration, and not just the act itself. If her intent is to assure a place in heaven, she acts out of love, performing an act in the fetus’s best interest. Furthermore, she sacrifices herself, her future place in heaven, which is the highest form of love. So, she is not a criminal, she does not sin, she puts the well-being of the fetus in front of her own. Thus she is to be praised and a self-sacrificing person, who risks everything just to assure the fetus’s place.

Moreover, she prevents the possible “slip” of her child, who might commot some mortal sin and consequently would be confined to eternal damnation. From a simple risk-benefit analysis, it is her optimal solution. The fetus will get an assured place in heaven. Her fate is also assured, as a self-sacrificing person, who exhibits the highest form of love. Surely God will take her intent into consideration.

So, go and abort all your children. It is in the best interest of the child, and in the best interest of the mother. Be careful, however, not to be selfish, and do not perform the abortion for some temporal gain. Always cast your eyes on the heaven. God will understand your motive, and will reward for it.

RDaneel, I have to say I admire your gumption.

I think you’ll probably find that most Catholics here will respond to this as a facetious attack on their beliefs, and perhaps that was your intent…

However, I do think that within this, there is a point of cognitive dissonance to be addressed for anyone who seriously believes that miscarried human foetuses go straight to heaven - how is it morally supportable, in the light of such a belief, for abortion to be condemned as injustice? The outcome for the foetus is favourable - given what is believed to be the ultimate purpose of earthly life - even if the intent of the mother is not necessarily compassionate.

 

[Fergal]

Well not all mirrors give good reflections:


Problem here is that you may have learned loads but you have understood nothing. Time to go back to school.

 

[JohnDamian]

By your argument; it would be a mercy to kill all people who are in a state of grace.

 

[NeedImprovement]

If by your own admission, you do not understand what is meant by the “beatific vision” , how can you use words like “assured place on God’s bosom” and “nice cozy warm place in heaven”.

As a general rule, to maintain any degree of credibility, one should not use concepts which one cannot believe or comprehend to substantiate one’s own arguments. They will never be able to establish a sense of conviction in subsequent postulations.

You have chosen the wrong subject for debate and the arguments presented are put forth in extremely poor taste. Abortion is not some kind of game .

Your opening statement…

It is very simple and straightforward.

Take a zygote, freshly impregnated, before it even leaves for the trip to the uterus. According to the theists, it (definitely not a “he” or a “she”) is already a "human being…

…is flawed . In your basis, you would prefer to relegate the confirmation that the zygote is a human being solely to theists, when in fact, scientists – also support this definition… rather an unscientific, approach … somewhat…… reductionist perhaps ?

You should read up on Dr. Jerome Lejeune (here are some other scientists who think the same way academic.wsc.edu/mathsci/hammer_m/life.htm ) We should further concede that a theist made outstanding advancements in the fields of microbiology, stereochemistry and the study of anaerobic bacteria … oh and by the way, his name was Dr. Louis Pasteur.

…Now, the second possibility is that the zygote gets implanted into the uterus wall, but for some reason or another, it gets spontaneously aborted. The result is the same, it will get into heaven. Good outcome.

Suppose that the abortion is not spontaneous, it is volitional. For the fetus the outcome is not diifferent, still a nice, cozy, warm place in heaven. Good outcome again. So, from a purely pragmatic standpoint, abortion is good. No risk of hell, only an assured place on God’s bosom…

By your argument; it would be a mercy to kill all people who are in a state of grace.

Precisely. So then it would also be “good” to have executioners waiting to charitably send someone to God as soon as they leave the confessional, or say a perfect act of contrition, or even when they feel remorse for wrongs they may have committed. If you’re waiting at the bus stop and you see someone praying a Rosary, do them a favour and shove them into an oncoming vehicle…:banghead:

As stated you chose the wrong subject for debate - if you do not understand the “beatific vision”, then neither will you (yet) understand that the souls of the aborted are not in favour of what you write.

I’m not so sure about the title either:

“A theological argument FOR abortion” … ? :dts:

*An abortion of a theological argument *… more likely.

 

[WatchingMedia]

Yes, indeed it is… but it is a Catholic “rubbish”. Everything stated in it is based on Catholic belief. From the fate of the unborn all the way to the good intent of the woman, to the highest form of love as the ultimate sacrifice… I did not invent it, I learned it from you guys. Don’t blame the mirror for the reflection.

There is no theological argument for MURDER - from conception until death. "Thou Shalt NOT KILL.
ehd.org/movies.php?mov_id=44

 

[Marc_Anthony]

I realize that the only reason you posted this is to discredit the Church, but this is a ridiculous post both logically and theologically.

 

[tjm190]

“A theological argument for smothering your children before they reach the age of reason” would be more accurate.

 

[seagal]

Yes, indeed it is… but it is a Catholic “rubbish”. Everything stated in it is based on Catholic belief. From the fate of the unborn all the way to the good intent of the woman, to the highest form of love as the ultimate sacrifice… I did not invent it, I learned it from you guys. Don’t blame the mirror for the reflection.

Actually, you’re wrong. This stinking pile is rubbish of your own making. The Catholic Church teaches that murder is always wrong, no matter what the intent. To quote the catechism

One may not do evil so that good may result from it.
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P5S.HTM

 

[R_Daneel]

Women don’t abort their children to ensure they get into heaven.

But maybe some do. It would be a sensible idea.

And it is not a zygote. By the time an abortion takes place, the foetus is well past the zygote stage.

What about the RU486, or “morning after” pill?

 

[Sair]

*“Science tells us that the heart of the human foetus begins to form 18 days after conception. There is a measurable heart beat 21-24 days after conception. This is only 7-10 days after a woman would expect to begin her menstrual cycle. Since most women have cycles that can vary by this amount, they do not discover they are pregnant until after this point. Therefore, all abortions stop a beating heart, even “early” abortions. However, most abortions do not occur until 4-6 weeks after the foetus begins to form. The human brain begins to form on day 23 and is formed enough to produce brain waves by 6 weeks, which means that most abortions destroy a functioning human brain.”
*

Some questions…

You stop a beating heart every time you kill a fly or a mosquito. What makes a foetal human heart more valuable than these?

Why is a heartbeat more important than sentience? Why must the life of the foetus be valued when the foetus cannot value its own life?

 

[kingal86]

That same argument could be used to say that murdering babies (who have been born) is fine because they go straight to Heaven. Or that murdering a Catholic in state of grace (e.g. immediately after Confession) is fine cos he’ll go straight to Heaven.

 

[mercygate]

“A theological argument for smothering your children before they reach the age of reason” would be more accurate.

I thought of that a few times when the little ones used to drive me nuts. But I don’t think it would have gone over very well in a court of law.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

It is very simple and straightforward.

Take a zygote, freshly impregnated, before it even leaves for the trip to the uterus. According to the theists, it (definitely not a “he” or a “she”) is already a “human being”. It never gets implanted into the uterus wall, just gets flushed out from the woman’s system. What will be its fate? Will it get into heaven, or will be sent to hell? The limbo is no longer an offical doctrine - so we can leave that out from consideration. Surely it will not get to hell, not even the most conservative Catholic would assert that. So it will go into heaven, in some capacity. There are some people who say that it will not get to the beatific vision (whatever that means). But even a “low-level” heaven is pretty good.

Now, the second possibility is that the zygote gets implanted into the uterus wall, but for some reason or another, it gets spontaneously aborted. The result is the same, it will get into heaven. Good outcome.

Suppose that the abortion is not spontaneous, it is volitional. For the fetus the outcome is not diifferent, still a nice, cozy, warm place in heaven. Good outcome again. So, from a purely pragmatic standpoint, abortion is good. No risk of hell, only an assured place on God’s bosom.

But, what about the woman who makes this decision? Well, it depends on her intent. Catholics, (unlike some Protestants) take the intent into consideration, and not just the act itself. If her intent is to assure a place in heaven, she acts out of love, performing an act in the fetus’s best interest. Furthermore, she sacrifices herself, her future place in heaven, which is the highest form of love. So, she is not a criminal, she does not sin, she puts the well-being of the fetus in front of her own. Thus she is to be praised and a self-sacrificing person, who risks everything just to assure the fetus’s place.

Moreover, she prevents the possible “slip” of her child, who might commot some mortal sin and consequently would be confined to eternal damnation. From a simple risk-benefit analysis, it is her optimal solution. The fetus will get an assured place in heaven. Her fate is also assured, as a self-sacrificing person, who exhibits the highest form of love. Surely God will take her intent into consideration.

So, go and abort all your children. It is in the best interest of the child, and in the best interest of the mother. Be careful, however, not to be selfish, and do not perform the abortion for some temporal gain. Always cast your eyes on the heaven. God will understand your motive, and will reward for it.

This is a joke, right?

If not, there is only one thing to say: Abortion is always a grave sin, and to promote it is heretical, morally wrong, and leads others to scandal.

 

[mercygate]

Some questions…

You stop a beating heart every time you kill a fly or a mosquito. What makes a foetal human heart more valuable than these?

The Christian answer would be that humans are made in the image and likeness of God, while a mosquito is not. It thus has intrinsic value that non-humans have not.

Why is a heartbeat more important than sentience? Why must the life of the foetus be valued when the foetus cannot value its own life?

Objectively taken, human life is valuable in itself. Sentience is a developmental concomitant of the human condition, but not definitive of it in individual cases. The non-sentient human deserves the protection of those who are sentient out of respect for the objective value of human life. “Sentience” comes on a continuum. The human foetus can react to light and sound and feel pain very early in gestation. The protection of the weak is a mark of civilization. If by “sentience” you mean capable of doing calculus, then you might as well kill me right now.

 

[the_hazel_nut]

Take a zygote, freshly impregnated, before it even leaves for the trip to the uterus. According to the theists, it (definitely not a “he” or a “she”) is already a “human being”.

First of all, chromosomal sex is determined at conception. So I have no idea what you are trying to say.

It never gets implanted into the uterus wall, just gets flushed out from the woman’s system. What will be its fate? Will it get into heaven, or will be sent to hell? The limbo is no longer an offical doctrine - so we can leave that out from consideration. Surely it will not get to hell, not even the most conservative Catholic would assert that. So it will go into heaven, in some capacity. There are some people who say that it will not get to the beatific vision (whatever that means). But even a “low-level” heaven is pretty good.

Let me clarify somethings. Limbo is part of hell (but if it exists, it is pleasant to be there). The most conservative Catholic would not say that aborted fetuses go to hell to suffer but some might still believe in limbo. It was NEVER an official doctrine, by the way. All in all, we don’t know that aborted fetuses experience the beatific vision, but most Catholics believe it, I would guess. And the beatific vision = heaven, even “low-level” heaven. I just thought I would let you know all of that, so that if you once again outsmart us, can at least do it with the correct information.

But, what about the woman who makes this decision? Well, it depends on her intent. Catholics, (unlike some Protestants) take the intent into consideration, and not just the act itself. If her intent is to assure a place in heaven, she acts out of love, performing an act in the fetus’s best interest. Furthermore, she sacrifices herself, her future place in heaven, which is the highest form of love. So, she is not a criminal, she does not sin, she puts the well-being of the fetus in front of her own. Thus she is to be praised and a self-sacrificing person, who risks everything just to assure the fetus’s place.

Moreover, she prevents the possible “slip” of her child, who might commot some mortal sin and consequently would be confined to eternal damnation. From a simple risk-benefit analysis, it is her optimal solution. The fetus will get an assured place in heaven. Her fate is also assured, as a self-sacrificing person, who exhibits the highest form of love. Surely God will take her intent into consideration.

I think you’ve been on this board long enough to have heard THE ENDS DON’T JUSTIFY THE MEANS enough times. What if someone wants to euthanize their grandfather because he is suffering? Of course, it is still a sin. God takes peoples desperation into accounts. But for someone who is sound of mind, and they kill someone, fetus or grandfather or anyone, is God going to praise that act? Is God going to not consider that sin? No. I’m sure by now you’ve read enough posts to realize this.

Do you want to know why no (mentally healthy) woman would ever abort her baby to get it to heaven? Because one of the commandments is “You shall not kill.” Anyone who believes that their fetus’ soul will go to heaven is going to realize that killing it will land her in hell if she doesn’t repent.

Also, maybe, just maybe, she doesn’t want to kill her baby. Since she is a good Catholic in this scenario, she will think of the fetus as her baby and she will think of abortion as murder.

So, go and abort all your children. It is in the best interest of the child, and in the best interest of the mother

:hypno:

 

[Lycorth]

It’s easy to see that this is the argument of a secularist who is looking to distort Church teaching to justify abortion and to poke fun at the Church like a delinquent child who doesn’t know how to do anything other than squash bugs and steal candy.

Killing people just so that they can get to Heaven would make the killer a murderer, as killing for anything other than self-defense or in a just war is a mortal sin, and thus the argument of the OP cannot be justified in light of Catholic teaching. We do not follow a God who teaches that the ends justify the means or that acceptable motives make unacceptable actions acceptable.

In other words: relativism FAIL.