A thought experiment for Catholics: support legal abortion. Then what?

[Hokomai]

This is an experiment. The reason I propose it is that I think Catholics have become mired in an argument about law, when they are really talking about human behavior they think should change.

To encourage thought about this, I invite Catholics to consider what they would do were the Bishops of your country to announce defeat, and state that there was no longer any hope of restricting abortions by law, and that Catholics should devote their time and energy to more fruitful pursuits.

I am not saying the Bishops would do this, just asking you to consider the next thing to do were this to happen. It is a bit like an army considering what it would do were it to lose a major defended position.

How would you go about trying to discourage abortion, and encourage people to choose not to abort, if you could not focus on the law?

 

[Corki]

This isn’t really a hypothetical since only a small percentage of Catholic pro-life activity is focused on changing the law. The majority of what pro-life Catholics do is to educate as many people as possible on what abortion is and on the value of human life, to support those facing “crisis” pregnancy issues, to encourage adoption instead of killing and to pray. We would also continue to support politicians and leaders who value all human life in the hopes of creating a more life affirming country at some point in the future.

 

[Adonia]

The legality or illegality to me is immaterial. The law will not be changed anytime soon, and some restrictions have been deemed legal. We can still express our opposition to the practice.

The only thing that really can be done is to lead by example. No Christian should ever consider it and alternatives need to be offered to take care of pregnancies where the woman does not want the child. The culture needs to be changed from within, peoples hearts need to be touched.

 

[JRKH]

Add my voice to those above.

Hokomai,
The news reports things like legal efforts because they are governmental and judicial and they really can’t avoid them. They DON’T report on things that they can avoid. Like people standing quietly outside abortion clinics and praying, or quietly offering (in a loving manner) information to people entering those places. They don’t report on the annual and HUGE march that takes place in Washington every January. They don’t share when a new “crisis pregnancy center” opens up…or how many “at risk” children are saved by efforts of various charities to find proper help and adoptive parents and so forth.

So in truth…We don’t have to think about what to do because the Church is already doing it.

But thanks for the thread to help bring this forward because you are right in that we can sometimes become too focused on the “legal” aspects.

Peace
James

 

[R1ch4rd]

This isn’t really a hypothetical since only a small percentage of Catholic pro-life activity is focused on changing the law. The majority of what pro-life Catholics do is to educate as many people as possible on what abortion is and on the value of human life, to support those facing “crisis” pregnancy issues, to encourage adoption instead of killing and to pray. We would also continue to support politicians and leaders who value all human life in the hopes of creating a more life affirming country at some point in the future.

This is true! However, the media considers what mainstream Catholics are doing very boring so more attention is given to our “argument about law”

 

[DCNBILL]

This is an experiment. The reason I propose it is that I think Catholics have become mired in an argument about law, when they are really talking about human behavior they think should change.

To encourage thought about this, I invite Catholics to consider what they would do were the Bishops of your country to announce defeat, and state that there was no longer any hope of restricting abortions by law, and that Catholics should devote their time and energy to more fruitful pursuits.

I am not saying the Bishops would do this, just asking you to consider the next thing to do were this to happen. It is a bit like an army considering what it would do were it to lose a major defended position.

How would you go about trying to discourage abortion, and encourage people to choose not to abort, if you could not focus on the law?

Prayer and sacrificial offerings.

 

[JRKH]

This is true! However, the media considers what mainstream Catholics are doing very boring so more attention is given to our “argument about law”

I think that the media would even ignore the “argument about law” if it wasn’t for the fact that they are pretty much obligated to report on what is happening in the legislatures…(with appropriate spin of course……)

Peace
James

 

[Ladygem]

I’d do the same thing I’ve been doing, Trying to convince people that the unborn deserve life and to be protected. I know that the vast majority of “pro-choice” supporters aren’t heartless baby-killers, they just don’t realize exactly what they are doing because they don’t consider a fetus to be a separate human life. They are obviously mistaken since everything we know about reproduction says otherwise, so education is key if we want to have the best hope of saving the unborn. When more people see abortion for what it truly is, murder, we won’t need the law to keep people from aborting.

 

[superamazingman]

Frankly, I would try anyways and ignore the bishops, because they would be speaking against the mind of the church.

 

[JRKH]

Frankly, I would try anyways and ignore the bishops, because they would be speaking against the mind of the church.

I think that the only practical way that what hokomai proposes could “pan out” would be if the Bishops were to say something like…
It’s obvious that we cannot change the law until sufficient numbers of hearts are changed. When that happens, the change in law will occur naturally, like a ripe apple falls from a tree. So let us focus all of our attentions and efforts on the necessary changing of hearts and less on the legislative process for now.
If the Bishops made a statement along these lines they would not be speaking “against the mind of the Church” but would simply be refocusing effort.

Of course as many are already pointing out…it is already the case that most of the Pro-life effort is NOT focused in the legislative area…So it sort of short circuits the thought experiment that the OP proposed…

Peace
James

 

[Joe_5859]

This isn’t really a hypothetical since only a small percentage of Catholic pro-life activity is focused on changing the law. The majority of what pro-life Catholics do is to educate as many people as possible on what abortion is and on the value of human life, to support those facing “crisis” pregnancy issues, to encourage adoption instead of killing and to pray. We would also continue to support politicians and leaders who value all human life in the hopes of creating a more life affirming country at some point in the future.

Exactly.

Every election season, the fact that pro-lifers are so vocal about electing pro-life politicians (and especially a pro-life president who would – at least in theory – appoint pro-life judges) leads some to conclude that all pro-lifers are only concerened with the legislative side of things. That is not the case at all. We can multi-task.

 

[marian_love]

Pray. Simple as that.

 

[manualman]

There are things you can choose to de-prioritize. This HAS happened in catholic history, such as when laws changed to allow (and then subsidize) contraception. Some folks don’t know it was once largely illegal!

But there is a difference between choosing your public battles in matters like contraception law where there are no innocent victims and in matters like abortion which is, quite literally, a crime against humanity.

I won’t go so far as to say it’s impossible. It’s perhaps a valid criticism to question why it took so long for the catholic church to vigorously denounce chattel slavery, for example. But the fact that there has been sluggish and unresponsive leadership in the past doesn’t excuse repeating the mistake.

We won’t ever stop. We might never win, but we’ll never stop calling abortion by its true name: the murder of an innocent baby. Any civilization that enables such behavior is in danger of losing claim to the very title of ‘civilization.’ Brutality can never exist in a vacuum. Brutality begets more brutality (and this one can’t be aborted). The longer our society enables the killing of innocent children, the longer we will continue our slide into barbarism.

 

[Bill_Martin]

If the Bishops said to stop bothering with trying to prohibit murder of children, which we agree would not happen, I would completely ignore them.

 

[markeverett49]

If the Bishops said to stop bothering with trying to prohibit murder of children, which we agree would not happen, I would completely ignore them.

Good answer! If it were okay with the bishops for mothers to kill unborn children, it’s hard to imagine what WOULD seem a worthwhile moral cause to them. Mother Tersesa got it right twice. First, “God has not called me to be successful, he has called me to be faithful.” Second,“The greatest destroyer of peace is abortion because if a mother can kill her own child, what is left for me to kill you and you to kill me?”

 

[Nate13]

Part of changing the law is changing minds. Overturning Roe V. Wade would just put the issue back to the States which would result in much stricter laws for abortion in some States and the opposite in others. A new Amendment to the Constitution would require a 2/3 majority in both Houses of Congress which would only be possible with much greater public support than currently exists. I don’t see pursuing making abortion illegal and pursuing informing people to be different pursuits.

 

[JRKH]

Part of changing the law is changing minds. Overturning Roe V. Wade would just put the issue back to the States which would result in much stricter laws for abortion in some States and the opposite in others. A new Amendment to the Constitution would require a 2/3 majority in both Houses of Congress which would only be possible with much greater public support than currently exists. I don’t see pursuing making abortion illegal and pursuing informing people to be different pursuits.

This……and the only fruitful way to pursue changing the law would be to change enough minds.

Peace
James

 

[Nate13]

This……and the only fruitful way to pursue changing the law would be to change enough minds.

Peace
James

Exactly, and I’d point out that America didn’t wait till 100% of people were on board with ending slavery, far from it actually. The Civil War was absolutely brutal and devastating, but I doubt anyone would say they wish they could take back the Civil War being where we are today in terms of race equality. The situation with abortion is not going to result in a Civil War but as opponents like to point out it would cause a lot of problems. I acknowledge these problems and I’m willing to fight through them to get where we need to go. Things would get worse before they got better, but they would get better. If ending slavery was worth it, then how can people turn away from the pains of ending the murder of millions of innocent children?

 

[Bradski]

How would you go about trying to discourage abortion, and encourage people to choose not to abort, if you could not focus on the law?

If you don’t get pregnant, you don’t need an abortion.

To not get pregnant, you can either not have sex (sounds simple doesn’t it?) or you can use contraception.

A combination of the two would seem like a good idea. If you find you can go through life not having sex, then that would work. If you can’t then someone needs to be using contraception.

 

[Hokomai]

If you don’t get pregnant, you don’t need an abortion.

To not get pregnant, you can either not have sex (sounds simple doesn’t it?) or you can use contraception.

A combination of the two would seem like a good idea. If you find you can go through life not having sex, then that would work. If you can’t then someone needs to be using contraception.

No problem from me here. But Catholics, because they consider ‘artificial’ contraception to be against natural law, and therefore an evil whoever uses it to regulate conception, will not advocate for better use of better contraceptive techniques. I have yet to see a comprehensive programme aimed at making it less likely that pregnant women will choose abortion being advocated either. There are certainly efforts, but these seem to be marked by voluntarism, a dependence on donations, and a focus on pregnancy and birth rather than the life issues which affect many women in making these decisions. Are there such programmes being advocated?