Abortion Doctor Geroge Tiller Murdered this morning

[greg_b]

Someone earlier stated, and I am not even sure if this is true, that abortion can get you excommunicated but not murder. Now IF this is true, this is why I am asking where is the line between abortion and murder, because it seems to me that you can make a case there is no line (Hence my theoretical situation where a child is killed halfway outside the body)

 

[jimpres]

Buffalo,

I was only addressing abortion. I understand defending ones self and the community.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Someone earlier stated, and I am not even sure if this is true, that abortion can get you excommunicated but not murder. Now IF this is true, this is why I am asking where is the line between abortion and murder, because it seems to me that you can make a case there is no line (Hence my theoretical situation where a child is killed halfway outside the body)

My statement wasn’t that murder CAN get you excommunicated while murder CANNOT. No, what I said was that we can see how heinous abortion campared to other forms of killing by the mere fact of how the Church treats it. We see that the Church says that for anyone who procures an abortion (even one who so much as drives such a person to the clinic with the intent to help) will be excommunicated automatically, latae sententiae. While at the same time we do not see the Church saying the same thing about killing in other situations, nor even for the case of murder in the general sense. I do not even know of a case where the Church has pronounced someone to be excommunicated for murder, (let alone say that it would be incurred latae sententiae, as would be the case in abortion - even if you were only a friend or relative of the party seeking the abortion if you helped or condoned it in any fashion.)

You were trying to make the case that the Church says the gravity of one form of killing is not greater than another, while I was making the case that the Church does indeed make distinctions and we can see this clearly in her treatment of them.

---

CAN/CANNOT is not the same thing as DOES/DOES NOT.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Wow, E.E.N.S avoided the subject AGAIN. I should be keeping track of this. I did not mention anything about war in this question, but he brought it up as way of changing the subject. I guess this proves my point that murder and abortion are both the same and you can’t differentiate the two.

You are a very odd person. The first and second time you asked the question it was answered, both by myself and another poster. Then you ignore it and ask the same thing a third time and I respond by saying that you have already been answered both times…how does this show that I was dodging the question? Are you 12? Can you not have an honest conversation? Do you need to resort to strawman arguments because you cannot honestly answer in any other fashion?

You asked: If the baby is halfway out is it murder or abortion?

I answered: Abortion is murder. If the mother has taken the child to a doctor to have this done, then it is an abortion and she would incur excommunication latae sententiae. This type of procedure is also known as a partial birth abortion.

What more do you want from me? How many times do I need to answer your smug questions before you will stop saying that I didn’t?? Do you want me to copy and paste this fifteen more times so you don’t miss it??? Sheesh, give me a break.

 

[cathgal]

Someone earlier stated, and I am not even sure if this is true, that abortion can get you excommunicated but not murder. Now IF this is true, this is why I am asking where is the line between abortion and murder, because it seems to me that you can make a case there is no line (Hence my theoretical situation where a child is killed halfway outside the body)

I guess you can define abortion as murdering of a human person who has never seen the light of day from his/her mother’s womb.

Everyone knows that murder is wrong but not everyone knows / accepts that abortion is murder, hence, excommunication is used to show that abortion is truly the murdering of a human being yet to be born.

 

[wanner47]

I guess you can define abortion as murdering of a human person who has never seen the light of day from his/her mother’s womb.

Everyone knows that murder is wrong but not everyone knows / accepts that abortion is murder, hence, excommunication is used to show that abortion is truly the murdering of a human being yet to be born.

Exactly.

Greg, do you know what excommunication is meant to do? What is your understanding of its purpose?

 

[E.E.N.S]

For the record…posted in order:

Question 1 & 2:

So if a baby is halfway outside it’s mother and it is killed, is that murder or abortion? What is the difference? excommunication or not?

“Innoncent civilians and children killed in war is unintentional?” Oh please, try telling that to a Holocaust survivor. Any any war waged for non-defensive reasons and/or based off lies or deceit is mass murder, and you know damn well that’s true.

That doesn’t answer the question though, when does abortion stop and murder begin?

Answer 1:

If a woman “intends” an abortion and an abortion is committed she would be committing the sin that is deserving of excommunication.
If a woman did not intend an abortion and was forced onto the abortionist’s table like some women are in China she would not be commiting a sin at all.

“Intention” of committing abortion is the key.

Therefore, it does not matter if the baby is halfway out or not…the woman committed the sin of abortion as soon as she consented willingly to the butcher’s knife.

Answer 2:

If it is done by a doctor with the mother’s approval, and the baby has yet to be born, that is called an abortion. Permissible by law. Also known as partial birth abortion.

Excommunication of course. Did you really not know the answer to this question?

Answer 3:

Catholic Morals 101: Abortion is murder. Learn the basics before coming here and being a P.i.t.A.

Same question as before…:

Are you really that dumb? You know damn well what I was asking about. Some people here are saying that abortion gets you excommunicated but murder doesn’t. If that is true then I will ask this hypothetical for the 3rd time: If I kill a newborn halfway outside the mother, will that get me excommunicated or not? Is that considered abortion or not? Where does the line end and start? The point I am making is that you can’t consider abortion and any other kind of murder 2 different situations, since the only difference is that one is attached by an umbilical cord.

Answer…:

You are just being a pain in the *** to make a point that you believe is correct. We all know that the punishment for abortion is excommunication. Show me where the Church teaches that killing outside of abortion deserves excommunication latae sentensiae…or at all.

You say that accidental killing of a non-combatant is just as heinous and perverse as a mother paying to have her baby slaughtered. The Church in no way, shape or form says this, yet you try to imply that she does.

You are either intellectually dishonest or deluded…I am just not sure which.

---

By the way, the first part of your question has been answered twice, no need for a third.

Answered again today…
E.E.N.S.:

My statement wasn’t that murder CAN get you excommunicated while murder CANNOT. No, what I said was that we can see how heinous abortion campared to other forms of killing by the mere fact of how the Church treats it. We see that the Church says that for anyone who procures an abortion (even one who so much as drives such a person to the clinic with the intent to help) will be excommunicated automatically, latae sententiae. While at the same time we do not see the Church saying the same thing about killing in other situations, nor even for the case of murder in the general sense. I do not even know of a case where the Church has pronounced someone to be excommunicated for murder, (let alone say that it would be incurred latae sententiae, as would be the case in abortion - even if you were only a friend or relative of the party seeking the abortion if you helped or condoned it in any fashion.)

You were trying to make the case that the Church says the gravity of one form of killing is not greater than another, while I was making the case that the Church does indeed make distinctions and we can see this clearly in her treatment of them.

---

CAN/CANNOT is not the same thing as DOES/DOES NOT.

You refuse to accept that your question has been answered multiple times…:

greg_b:

Wow, E.E.N.S avoided the subject AGAIN. I should be keeping track of this. I did not mention anything about war in this question, but he brought it up as way of changing the subject. I guess this proves my point that murder and abortion are both the same and you can’t differentiate the two.

And I address it again, repeating myself…:
E.E.N.S.:

You are a very odd person. The first and second time you asked the question it was answered, both by myself and another poster. Then you ignore it and ask the same thing a third time and I respond by saying that you have already been answered both times…how does this show that I was dodging the question? Are you 12? Can you not have an honest conversation? Do you need to resort to strawman arguments because you cannot honestly answer in any other fashion?

You asked: If the baby is halfway out is it murder or abortion?

I answered: Abortion is murder. If the mother has taken the child to a doctor to have this done, then it is an abortion and she would incur excommunication latae sententiae. This type of procedure is also known as a partial birth abortion.

What more do you want from me? How many times do I need to answer your smug questions before you will stop saying that I didn’t?? Do you want me to copy and paste this fifteen more times so you don’t miss it??? Sheesh, give me a break.

Satisfied yet?

 

[E.E.N.S]

Perhaps some CCC quotes will serve some people well:

**2272 **Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,” “by the very commission of the offense,” and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights."81

**2274 **Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being. Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, “if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence.”

**2322 **From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a “criminal” practice (*GS *27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life.

 

[aicirt]

For Greg B.

The Church excommunicates for abortion because it is always morally wrong.

Murder, the taking of another’s life, doesn’t immediately mean it wasn’t without just cause. The circumstances are taken into consideration.

It could be first degree, second, manslaughter, self defense etc.

 

[joe_clark]

What are you suggesting…that abortion law remains intact?

No. I am just stating a fact, we live by laws and people appear to be looking for an end around it. Instead, change the laws instead of shooting people in the head to get where you want to go.

On the flip side, if women did not go to doctors for abortions, there would be none, zero, zippo! Maybe the push should be to connect toward more young women, classes and education. You don’t need to scare them with posters ect., the truth will be more than enough.

 

[joe_clark]

That poster was not trying to negotiate murder at all.
As far as “the law”-so if tomorrow the law declares that raping certain individuals, or killing people with certain defects is not murder, then it’s no longer murder? Sounds like relativism. So does this mean that when the Nazi’s, for example, passed the anti-Semitic laws, it suddenly and magically changed throwing Jews into ovens ‘not murder’?

Many women don’t want to listen to reason, some are scared, some are brainwashed, some don’t care about anything other than themselves-regardless, how about the children, the persons, who are being led to a brutal slaughter while lying comfortably and innocently in their mother’s womb? What about their rights when a woman you “tap on the shoulder” tells you its her body and to bug off, then maybe charges you with battery for touching her?

Sure, changing the law is the best thing, and people are trying.

I wonder how different you consider the shooter’s act as that of, let’s say, Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg’s attempt on Hitler.

OK, so some women will find a way to get an abortion done, just like murderers and rapists and other criminals find a way to still commit their crimes. Does this mean we legalize the crime?

I sorry, I didn’t mean actually tap women on their shoulders. I meant to converse with them., listen to them an assist them any way you can short of terminating the pregnancy. By the time a women is walking into a clinic, the ship already sailed. WE need to get the message to women BEFORE they become pregnant. Yea yea I know, abstinence, but people do stray. So, educating young women, media, commercials on the benefits and the beauty of a small child should be front and center. The posters of aborted children are real, but it only creates a backlash and the people holding the posters look just like the ghouls that they say they are protesting against. It’s only a perception, but that is a quick way to turn anyone off. No one connects this way. Think about it.

 

[E.E.N.S]

No. I am just stating a fact, we live by laws and people appear to be looking for an end around it. Instead, change the laws instead of shooting people in the head to get where you want to go.

On the flip side, if women did not go to doctors for abortions, there would be none, zero, zippo! Maybe the push should be to connect toward more young women, classes and education. You don’t need to scare them with posters ect., the truth will be more than enough.

With the way things are going, getting classes and education to teach the moral evil of abortion is getting harder and harder. Planned Parenthood is pushing for sex education classes fiercely, but you should read the reasons why - and it is not to reduce the numbers of abortions.

 

[joe_clark]

With the way things are going, getting classes and education to teach the moral evil of abortion is getting harder and harder. Planned Parenthood is pushing for sex education classes fiercely, but you should read the reasons why - and it is not to reduce the numbers of abortions.

Yes, you are right and we should learn from it. If Planned Parenthood is pushing for sex education classes fiercely, then what are we pushing? Nothing, that is my point. Yea, the anger and the rage and emotion that goes with protesting, but is that message reaching the people who really need it or preaching to the choir, or sort of a feel good moment that goes nowhere? I don’t mean to belittle any effort an anyones part but I thing we all need to re-think our positions.

How about we get fierce on educating young women before they become pregnant, and yes, after a women becomes pregnant. The “option of adoption”. I think the message needs to get to the children in a common sense, age approppriate approach.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Yes, you are right and we should learn from it. If Planned Parenthood is pushing for sex education classes fiercely, then what are we pushing? Nothing, that is my point. Yea, the anger and the rage and emotion that goes with protesting, but is that message reaching the people who really need it or preaching to the choir, or sort of a feel good moment that goes nowhere? I don’t mean to belittle any effort an anyones part but I thing we all need to re-think our positions.

How about we get fierce on educating young women before they become pregnant, and yes, after a women becomes pregnant. The “option of adoption”. I think the message needs to get to the children in a common sense, age approppriate approach.

Yes, we must teach young men and women this, without a doubt, and it must come from home. Unfortunately the schools are teaching that contraception, homosexual lifestyle, etc., is all perfectly good and acceptable, and from the looks of it parents are not permitted to pull their children from these classes either. Things are headed to hell, and they are only going to get worse before they get better. Still, the battle continues and fight we must! (<—For you hypercritical types, this is not a condoning of violence.)

 

[aicirt]

Yes, you are right and we should learn from it. If Planned Parenthood is pushing for sex education classes fiercely, then what are we pushing? Nothing, that is my point. Yea, the anger and the rage and emotion that goes with protesting, but is that message reaching the people who really need it or preaching to the choir, or sort of a feel good moment that goes nowhere? I don’t mean to belittle any effort an anyones part but I thing we all need to re-think our positions.

How about we get fierce on educating young women before they become pregnant, and yes, after a women becomes pregnant. The “option of adoption”. I think the message needs to get to the children in a common sense, age approppriate approach.

And get fierce educating our boys and men. Takes two to tango!!

First, make them understand they are placing their son and daughter with a girl/woman who may not be the best candidate for motherhood…too young, too selfish, doesn’t want to be a mother, doesn’t want to get married. The boys/men need to know that a woman carrying their child does not need any one’s approval to get an abortion at any time.

Second, don’t bed anyone unless you are prepared to wed that person.

Third, if you have a child by someone, the mother will always be a part of your life.

Four, it only takes one time.

 

[buffalo]

And get fierce educating our boys and men. Takes two to tango!!

First, make them understand they are placing their son and daughter with a girl/woman who may not be the best candidate for motherhood…too young, too selfish, doesn’t want to be a mother, doesn’t want to get married. The boys/men need to know that a woman carrying their child does not need any one’s approval to get an abortion at any time.

Second, don’t bed anyone unless you are prepared to wed that person.

Third, if you have a child by someone, the mother will always be a part of your life.

Four, it only takes one time.

I would add one more - what you see in the movies and on TV isn’t reality.

 

[aicirt]

I would add one more - what you see in the movies and on TV isn’t reality.

That would make #5

Sixth, no form of birth control is 100% effective. See #4.

Seventh, there are girls/women who really, really want to get married and they are willing to get pregnant to assure that happens.

 

[E.E.N.S]

That would make #5

Sixth, no form of birth control is 100% effective. See #4.

Seventh, there are girls/women who really, really want to get married and they are willing to get pregnant to assure that happens.

1. Contraception is not a viable/moral option. (See #4 & #6)

 

[Disciple96]

For Greg B.

The Church excommunicates for abortion because it is always morally wrong.

Murder, the taking of another’s life, doesn’t immediately mean it wasn’t without just cause. The circumstances are taken into consideration.

It could be first degree, second, manslaughter, self defense etc.

I think I see what you’re trying to say. But, technically, those are not types of murder that you’ve listed there. They are, rather, different degrees or types of killing, with murder being the worst one, looking at it from the point of view of the degree of sin and intention involved. A manslaughter charge is not the same as a murder charge, it’s a different charge. Both are horrible, but murder is considered to be intentional while manslaughter isn’t. Interesting that our courts still have at least a trace of a moral sense about them, isn’t it?

So I agree with you, just wanted to clarify a little. Hope I did.

Hey, lookey there! My 200th post! Cool!

 

[greg_b]

Everyone knows that murder is wrong but not everyone knows / accepts that abortion is murder, hence, excommunication is used to show that abortion is truly the murdering of a human being yet to be born.

That makes the most sense.