Abortion vs Captial Punishment

[JoeyWarren]

On this Issue of a Non-vote:

Let’s look at a possible scenario.

You have 2 candidates running that both support Pro-choice and there no other candidates.

And lets say the race is in a dead heat with the greater of the two evils leading by one vote, just enough to get the winner-take-all electorial vote.

Now lets say we have 1 couple in each state that has decided to not vote because both of the candidates are Pro-Choice.

The failure of these 51 Couples to vote would give the Presidency to the Greater of two Evils.

The no vote has the potential to cause more harm in the long run than a yes vote for the lesser of two evils.

I would be curious to find out how they would answer the question if God put it to them on the Judgement Day when God asks you: “Your selfish no vote caused the lesser of my people harm, your vote could have made things better, why?”

 

[mike182d]

JoeyWarren:

What would the Vatican say if the public cried out for the Execution of these priests? I will put my soul up against yours that they would cite the last paragraph.

Killing a priest for molestation would be for blood-thirsty revenge as murdering a man - regardless of how you feel about it - is not the same as molesting.

Killing a mass murderer could be considered justice because the punishment is equal to the crime.

 

[JoeyWarren]

mike182d:

Killing a priest for molestation would be for blood-thirsty revenge as murdering a man - regardless of how you feel about it - is not the same as molesting.
Killing a mass murderer could be considered justice because the punishment is equal to the crime.

Not according to Mosaic law. Each one demands the death penalty. Except I don’t know how to address the issue when the Priest molests a female child. When the Priest lays with another male, the punishment is death by law. According to God the punishment fits the crime. And if Jesus came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets then the Death Penalty still applies?

 

[JoeyWarren]

Remember according to the law of God as handed down to Moses. All crimes and sin that require the death penalty are of equality by definition of the commanded punishment.

 

[JoeyWarren]

CNN Breaking News: – Roman Catholic archdiocese of Dublin report says 102 priests are suspected of sexually or physically abusing at least 350 children since 1940, The Associated Press reports.

 

[fix]

JoeyWarren:

The issue is not about whether it is intrinisically evil or not, it’s about whether it’s right or wrong. And if it is wrong then it is a sin of some degree.

What does that mean? If some act is intrnsically evil it is be definition always wrong. Capital punisment is not intrnsically evil. It is not always wrong.

BIRTH CONTROL: Whether it’s intrinisically evil or not is not the issue. The issue is whether it is right or wrong.

Huh?

The church has declared it wrong and has declared it a sin according to my knowledge.

The Church interprets the natural moral law and finds that contraception is against the natural moral law.

No it’s not a matter of intrinsically evil or not, it’s a matter if it is classified as being right or wrong and whether it is considered a sin however miniscule it may seem.

This is confusing to say the least.

 

[JoeyWarren]

fix:

What does that mean? If some act is intrnsically evil it is be definition always wrong. Capital punisment is not intrnsically evil. It is not always wrong.

It is not always right either.

fix:

The Church interprets the natural moral law and finds that contraception is against the natural moral law…

And if it is against the natural moral law, then is it wrong? And if it is wrong, is it a sin even in the minute of the sense?

fix:

This is confusing to say the least.

Yes it is…

 

[fix]

JoeyWarren:

It is not always right either.

True, but the differences in terminology are very important. Direct abortion is always wrong. It is wrong in every age, every circumstance and will always be wrong. Capital punishment is a matter of prudence. It can be wrong, but that does not mean it is wrong as it is practiced today in each case.

And if it is against the natural moral law, then is it wrong?

Axiomatically it is wrong.

And if it is wrong, is it a sin even in the minute of the sense?

Obviously it is, as intrinsic evil is always wrong.

Yes it is…

It is confusing because it seems your argument is confusing.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Well, what can I say, I am a confusing person.

 

[Orionthehunter]

JoeyWarren:

On this Issue of a Non-vote:

Let’s look at a possible scenario.

You have 2 candidates running that both support Pro-choice and there no other candidates.

And lets say the race is in a dead heat with the greater of the two evils leading by one vote, just enough to get the winner-take-all electorial vote.

Now lets say we have 1 couple in each state that has decided to not vote because both of the candidates are Pro-Choice.

The failure of these 51 Couples to vote would give the Presidency to the Greater of two Evils.

The no vote has the potential to cause more harm in the long run than a yes vote for the lesser of two evils.

I would be curious to find out how they would answer the question if God put it to them on the Judgement Day when God asks you: “Your selfish no vote caused the lesser of my people harm, your vote could have made things better, why?”

God will not judge us by the results of our actions. For instance, if a person is dying on the street and I stop and think the person’s heart has stopped so I thump on his chest and that kills him, society might judge and provide a penalty but God will know what was in my heart.

Just as sometimes no decision is a decision, no vote can be a vote. If I choose to skip a race in protest of their Pro-Abortion views, I’m not held responsible for what these people ultimately do in office, regardless if was determined by a million votes or one vote.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Orionthehunter:

God will not judge us by the results of our actions…

Are you so sure about that? He will judge our actions and no doubt weigh those actions against any compounding results

PENITENTIAL RITE excerpt
I have sinned through my own fault, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do

IE If I steal something from the backyard of a person, I am only hurting Christ, myself, and the person I stole from.

Now if I still something from a store, I am hurting Christ, myself, and the whole population that shops at that store. My theft from the store causes a ripple effect throughout the community. The community now has to pay higher prices across the board because the store has to recoup that loss.

So you say you want be judged by the results of your actions?

 

[Orionthehunter]

JoeyWarren:

Are you so sure about that? He will judge our actions and no doubt weigh those actions against any compounding results

PENITENTIAL RITE excerpt
I have sinned through my own fault, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do

IE If I steal something from the backyard of a person, I am only hurting Christ, myself, and the person I stole from.

Now if I still something from a store, I am hurting Christ, myself, and the whole population that shops at that store. My theft from the store causes a ripple effect throughout the community. The community now has to pay higher prices across the board because the store has to recoup that loss.

So you say you want be judged by the results of your actions?

I am absolutely and unequivically sure that it is the action/inaction and our intent in the action/inaction that we did and not the results. We don’t have the omniscience of God to fully know (full knowledge is necessary for sin) what the results of the actions will be. I’m not “justified” or relieved of the consequences of raping a girl even if the child grows up to be Pope. Concurrently, I’m not held responsible becuase I did something based on my knowledge that turned out bad (ala drove to the hospital to visit a sick friend but had a blow out and left the road and ran over a kid).

Granted, if we have reason to think that something will bad happen by our inaction, we are called to act. But failing to vote for two Pro-choice candidates out of protest doesn’t impose on one a “selfish motive” and thus sin because one or the other candidate did or didn’t win.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Orionthehunter:

For instance, if a person is dying on the street and I stop and think the person’s heart has stopped so I thump on his chest and that kills him, society might judge and provide a penalty but God will know what was in my heart.QUOTE] Yes that is true. Not questioning that, but the Not Voting issue is akin to walking past the same person and not rendering help at all. Or in a worse case scenario with the same person, you see the person dying on the street and you have the skill set to help him, but you recognize the person as a known pedofile, so you continue to walk by without helping. How will God judge you then?

 

[Orionthehunter]

JoeyWarren:

Orionthehunter:

For instance, if a person is dying on the street and I stop and think the person’s heart has stopped so I thump on his chest and that kills him, society might judge and provide a penalty but God will know what was in my heart.QUOTE] Yes that is true. Not questioning that, but the Not Voting issue is akin to walking past the same person and not rendering help at all. Or in a worse case scenario with the same person, you see the person dying on the street and you have the skill set to help him, but you recognize the person as a known pedofile, so you continue to walk by without helping. How will God judge you then?

God will judge what is in their heart. You seem to dismiss that not voting can be a vote of protest. When we know a person freely in conformance w/ a rightly formed conscience (as defined by the Church) exercises Prudence (as defined by the Church), we are not to chastise them. When we don’t know the motives, we are not to chastise them. Our perogative to judge is only when the action is intrinsically evil or the consequences of the action are known to be evil (walking by a pedophile in the act of abusing a child is intrinsically evil.). Expressing their exercise of Prudent decisions that differs from how you’d express your prudence are issues for discussion but not chastisement/ characterization as sinful.

 

[DreadVandal]

JoeyWarren:

Not according to Mosaic law. Each one demands the death penalty. Except I don’t know how to address the issue when the Priest molests a female child. When the Priest lays with another male, the punishment is death by law. According to God the punishment fits the crime. And if Jesus came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets then the Death Penalty still applies?

The death penalty is established prior to the Mosaic law and reaffirmed by Paul in Romans (at least the death penalty for murder). So, while it may be the case that the death penalty for other crimes, such as adultery and violation of Hebrew priestly regulations, are tied to the old Mosaic law, it is not the case that every use of the death penalty is.

And by the way, it is not clear that it is intrinsically unjust to give the death penalty for other heineous crimes such as treason or willful, public heresy that disrupts society. If, through correct, reasoning, it is deemed necessary by the state, then it may be legitimate to execute heretics and witches as well.

 

[JoeyWarren]

DreadVandal:

The death penalty is established prior to the Mosaic law and reaffirmed by Paul in Romans (at least the death penalty for murder). So, while it may be the case that the death penalty for other crimes, such as adultery and violation of Hebrew priestly regulations, are tied to the old Mosaic law, it is not the case that every use of the death penalty is.

And by the way, it is not clear that it is intrinsically unjust to give the death penalty for other heineous crimes such as treason or willful, public heresy that disrupts society. If, through correct, reasoning, it is deemed necessary by the state, then it may be legitimate to execute heretics and witches as well.

True.

 

[jobeyjobey]

It’s not only a question of Abortion and Capital punishment. Pro-life also means that we have to back candidates who are against embryonic stem cell research. Our current president has fought very well against embryonic stem cell research.

I think the war in Iraq was a huge mistake, I have never liked Bush’s policies towards energy, polution, education, the economy and foreign policy. But if he were to run against another canditate who was pro-death and pro-embryonic stem cell research, I would vote for Bush

 

[JoeyWarren]

jobeyjobey:

It’s not only a question of Abortion and Capital punishment. Pro-life also means that we have to back candidates who are against embryonic stem cell research. Our current president has fought very well against embryonic stem cell research.

I think the war in Iraq was a huge mistake, I have never liked Bush’s policies towards energy, polution, education, the economy and foreign policy. But if he were to run against another canditate who was pro-death and pro-embryonic stem cell research, I would vote for Bush

ok!

 

[Cadence]

Wow!

Those of you who live in the States (clearly the majority of those who contribute comments) - do you realise that there are many civilised nations who do NOT have capital punishment and function quite nicely? Australia, Britain, Canada etc
I am shocked at the attitude of some of you. It is all very well to talk about capital punishment in theory - that if it is the only way to protect society and if there is irrefutable proof that the person is guilty - but this needs to be discussed in terms of the practical.
Does the death penalty only get applied in these situations? Once you make it legal for the state to kill people who can you prevent it from getting out of hand? In this day and age we can give people life imprisonment. To argue that it is too expensive to keep these people alive is just disgusting. We cannot kill people because it is more economical!
I had never heard of good Catholics supporting the death penalty until I started reading american boards.
We are all guilty of sin - none of us is better than the other. It is not wrong to kill the unborn because they are innocent - that only makes it more horrifying. It is wrong because we are not to intentionally take life!

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Cadence:

I had never heard of good Catholics supporting the death penalty until I started reading american boards.

Then you haven’t studied Catholicism. The Roman Catechism, was not an “American” catechism, and it stated: “Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent.” If I’m not mistaken, the Catholic Church of Australia abides by magisterial doctrines, right?

The point, which seems you missed is this: just capital punishment and just war are congruent with Catholic doctrine, abortion is not. Whether you advocate for war or the death penalty in particular is irrelevent. Catholics are bound by canon law to give their religious submission of intellect and will to Catholic doctrine. “Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.” (canon 752).

We can be against or for capital punishment in any particular circumstance while admitting that it is not intrinsically evil, doctrinally speaking. Yet, and this part is very important, we cannot be for deliberate abortion, as it is always intrinsically evil. Thus, there are some party platforms that proudly advocate that which is instrinsically evil according to Divine and Catholic faith, the platform given by the Communist Party and Democratic Party are examples.