Abortion worse than the Holocaust

[iamrefreshed]

You would kill a very sick or badly injured animal out of compassion, why not for humans?

Good thing you were not around when my son broke his leg.

I can only assume you would have treated him like a horse.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

Well then the church is contradicting itself and would be wrong.

 

[Linnyo]

Cardinal O’brian said before the elections,

In his speech to mark the 40th anniversary of the Abortion Act in Britain, O’Brian likened the number of abortions carried out in Scotland each day to the equivalent of two Dunblane massacres_ a 1996 incident during which a gunman killed 16 children at the Dunblane elementary school.

Really harsh but very true.

 

[bmmckinney]

Linnyo, actually it is 100,000 times 16 to get the worldwide abortion count each day.

 

[Elric]

Good thing you were not around when my son broke his leg.

I can only assume you would have treated him like a horse.

Oh yes, thats very clever.

 

[Linnyo]

You are right - that was just Scotland - my home. This was said just before the Scottish elections. Unfortunately, the 'catholic MPs in our country support abortion and the people (not me) voted them in again! .

Linnyo, actually it is 100,000 times 16 to get the worldwide abortion count each day.

 

[Elric]

Elric;2576618:

We’ll deal with the Church in a second.

We don’t kill sick people because they are greater than dogs

. We are created in God’s image, and we have an immortal soul. Dogs, pigs, horses – none of them have these qualities.

Exactly, yet it seems that we are more humane/compassionate to them.

We’re going around in circles here. And I’m not passing judgement on you

– merely on a choice you made. If the choice truly is kill the child or let the mother die, there is a clear-cut, black-and-white choice that is correct and one that is wrong. I am as qualified as anyone else to make a moral decision if I know the correct choice.

No you are not. But you are right, we are going around in circles here.

Abortions are evil – PERIOD. Abortion is the dismemberment of a living human being who cannot defend him/herself. There is no factor that can mitigate the evil of this action.

There is, you are not prepared to accept them.

Please cite chapter and verse, and demonstrate how the Scripture you cite pertains to the discussion and, if possible, how it is relevant to the New Covenenant.

I cant remember off the top of my head, its in the old testament and nothing later contradicts it.

And now, for the Church.

You say that the Church is wrong about abortion, and it seems you believe the same about euthanasia. Are you Catholic?.

Does that matter?

Are you familiar with the guarantee of protection from error that Christ made? Do you acknowledge the Church’s authority (and ability) to teach in Christ’s name? Do you believe that the Catholic Church is the Church Jesus founded?

1. That doesnt mean that they cant be wrong, they can.
2. That really depends on what and how they teach.
3. There were other churches around before the Cathloic Church.

If you are Catholic and can answer “no” to any of these questions, I strongly suggest you read more of what the Church teaches on Apostolic Succession. Whether you’re Catholic or not, I recommend that you read Humanae Vitae

.{/QUOTE]

And, finally, on an intellectual note: you are offering the same arguments over and over again, and when I present Church teaching that refutes your arguments, you respond by saying that the Church is wrong. Please demonstrate how she is wrong if you intend to hang your argument on that notion.

Peace,
Dante

What I am offering is what the Bible teaches us, mercy and compassion. You also have the point of where babies go when they die, straight to God. The church chooses to forget or ignore these teachings and as such they dont even take all of their own teachings into consideration.

They completly ignore the “Why” and tar evenyone with the same brush. This is an issue where you cant afford to do that because there are so many different variables that lead up to that decision, its true that not all reasons are justified (as I have stated all along), but there are some that are (even if those people are in a minority). Plus the babies go to a better place (what is better than being with God?).

So yes, the church is wrong on this issue and it isnt the first time that they were wrong about something.

 

[bmmckinney]

I know the babies go to a better place… a better place then those who supported for any reason what happened to those babies. This issue is cut and dry… we like to play games… God doesn’t… He gave us 10 commandements, not suggestions… anyone remember the 5th? It doesn’t have subclauses in it for a reason!

 

[Elric]

I know the babies go to a better place… a better place then those who supported for any reason what happened to those babies. This issue is cut and dry… we like to play games… God doesn’t… He gave us 10 commandements, not suggestions… anyone remember the 5th? It doesn’t have subclauses in it for a reason!

To kill an infedel is not murder. Remember that one?

Lets not forget what else is in that book you are refering to:

Condoning and encouragment of slavery.

Decree that all infertile people should be executed.

Condoning of Genocide.

All put down to the will of God.

And it seems that the church can be quite selective about following the 5th commandment. But if you read a bit more, you will find “subclauses”. They are called mercy, compassion and love.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

DanteAlighieri;2580053:

Exactly, yet it seems that we are more humane/compassionate to them.

The point is that it is not merciful to take someone’s life from them. Ending someone’s suffering by taking steps to kill them is inherently evil.

No you are not. But you are right, we are going around in circles here.

Yes I am.

If it is objectively wrong to do Z, I am perfectly capable of saying “It is objectively wrong to do Z”, even if I’ve never been forced to make the choice before.

There is, you are not prepared to accept them.

You still haven’t provided an adequate, specific example. And, no, there are NOT circumstances that mitigate the evil of an objectively evil action. The action is either evil or it isn’t; you can’t have it both ways.

I cant remember off the top of my head, its in the old testament and nothing later contradicts it.

If it’s from the OT, it’s part of the Law of Moses – which is no longer in effect since Christ instituted the New Covenant. The Bible doesn’t “contradict” itself; it shows the development of Salvation History.

Does that matter?

Yes, it matters if you’re Catholic, because Catholics are subject to the Pope, who is the Vicar of Christ and the successor of Peter. We are to submit to his authority – even if it means saying “I don’t understand, but I accept it as true”.

1. That doesnt mean that they cant be wrong, they can.

1. That really depends on what and how they teach.

1. There were other churches around before the Cathloic Church.

1. Not in matters of faith and morals – the Holy Spirit protects the Church from error in these areas.
2. To an extent, yes – as long as we’re talking about faith and morals, it is true. Abortion is a matter of morality, and therefore the Church is correct.
3. No, there simply were not. The Catholic Church is the church Christ founded; any other “Christian church” is an offshoot from the original and therefore does not contain the fullness of truth.

Have you read Humanae Vitae.?

What I am offering is what the Bible teaches us, mercy and compassion. You also have the point of where babies go when they die, straight to God. The church chooses to forget or ignore these teachings and as such they dont even take all of their own teachings into consideration.

No, you are distorting what the Bible teaches us. Mercy and compassion have nothing to do with deciding when someone should die! They have everything to do with seeing someone in need and doing all you can to help – even if all you can do is pray for them.

The Church does not choose to forget her teachings; it is supremely unmerciful to kill someone, even if your intentions are to spare them from suffering. That suffering is an opportunity for them to receive grace before they die!

They completly ignore the “Why” and tar evenyone with the same brush. This is an issue where you cant afford to do that because there are so many different variables that lead up to that decision, its true that not all reasons are justified (as I have stated all along), but there are some that are (even if those people are in a minority). Plus the babies go to a better place (what is better than being with God?).

The “Why” doesn’t matter when the action in question is objectively evil. If I murder someone so that I can steal his food and feed my family, I’ve still committed a grave sin. The old cliche “The road to hell is paved with good intentions” is absolutely true: it doesn’t matter how noble your intent is if you are committing gravely sinful actions in order to accomplish your mission.

Furthermore, the Church does not teach that aborted children go to heaven; we have no way of knowing what happens to their souls. We can hope that God is merciful to them, but the bottom line is that we don’t know.

Even if we did know, though, your line of thinking would logically imply that it’s better to kill EVERYONE before they sin so they can have a “Get out of Hell Free” card.

So yes, the church is wrong on this issue and it isnt the first time that they were wrong about something.

You still haven’t adequately demonstrated how the Church is wrong, let alone how she contradicts her own teachings. If this is important to you, then do some research.

And, while you’re at it, see if you can drum up another instance of the Church being wrong about faith and morals, and demonstrate it by citing sources.

If you continue to refuse to find any source to back up your argument, you are surrendering your position. Merely railing against the Church with no logical backing for your argument is not intellectually tenable.

Peace,
Dante

 

[Elric]

Elric;2580252:

DanteAlighieri;2580053:

The point is that it is not merciful to take someone’s life from them. Ending someone’s suffering by taking steps to kill them is inherently evil.

Yes I am.

If it is objectively wrong to do Z, I am perfectly capable of saying “It is objectively wrong to do Z”, even if I’ve never been forced to make the choice before.

You still haven’t provided an adequate, specific example. And, no, there are NOT circumstances that mitigate the evil of an objectively evil action. The action is either evil or it isn’t; you can’t have it both ways.

If it’s from the OT, it’s part of the Law of Moses – which is no longer in effect since Christ instituted the New Covenant. The Bible doesn’t “contradict” itself; it shows the development of Salvation History.

Yes, it matters if you’re Catholic, because Catholics are subject to the Pope, who is the Vicar of Christ and the successor of Peter. We are to submit to his authority – even if it means saying “I don’t understand, but I accept it as true”.

1. Not in matters of faith and morals – the Holy Spirit protects the Church from error in these areas.
2. To an extent, yes – as long as we’re talking about faith and morals, it is true. Abortion is a matter of morality, and therefore the Church is correct.
3. No, there simply were not. The Catholic Church is the church Christ founded; any other “Christian church” is an offshoot from the original and therefore does not contain the fullness of truth.

Have you read Humanae Vitae

.?

No, you are distorting what the Bible teaches us. Mercy and compassion have nothing to do with deciding when someone should die! They have everything to do with seeing someone in need and doing all you can to help – even if all you can do is pray for them.

The Church does not choose to forget her teachings; it is supremely unmerciful to kill someone, even if your intentions are to spare them from suffering. That suffering is an opportunity for them to receive grace before they die!

The “Why” doesn’t matter when the action in question is objectively evil. If I murder someone so that I can steal his food and feed my family, I’ve still committed a grave sin. The old cliche “The road to hell is paved with good intentions” is absolutely true: it doesn’t matter how noble your intent is if you are committing gravely sinful actions in order to accomplish your mission.

Furthermore, the Church does not teach that aborted children go to heaven; we have no way of knowing what happens to their souls. We can hope that God is merciful to them, but the bottom line is that we don’t know.

Even if we did know, though, your line of thinking would logically imply that it’s better to kill EVERYONE before they sin so they can have a “Get out of Hell Free” card.

You still haven’t adequately demonstrated how the Church is wrong, let alone how she contradicts her own teachings. If this is important to you, then do some research.

And, while you’re at it, see if you can drum up another instance of the Church being wrong about faith and morals, and demonstrate it by citing sources.

If you continue to refuse to find any source to back up your argument, you are surrendering your position. Merely railing against the Church with no logical backing for your argument is not intellectually tenable.

Peace,
Dante

Right so what it comes down to is blindly following a man, even though Jesus teaches us against doing this. Parts of the bible being null and void, even though we still use them and they are still in the bible. The church not being culpable for any wrong or they cant do any wrong (you might want to tell that to a few “witches”). Selective acts of compassion. Warping history and that every issue is a simple black and white issue.

Well how can you argue against that?

You cant really. Because the mind is quite clearly closed.

You say something from the bible and the reply is “Oh that doesnt count anymore”, I guess we can kiss the 10 commandments goodbye. Taking a life out of compassion or even love is wrong, but its perfectly fine if they are an infidel or a “witch”.

Babies go to Heaven, unless of course they are aborted then we dont know (What the?!).

Killing people cant be merciful or compassionate, its better to let someone die in agony. Sorry I cant believe that.

 

[estesbob]

To kill an infedel is not murder. Remember that one?

Not really. Can you point out to us?

Lets not forget what else is in that book you are refering to:

Condoning and encouragment of slavery.

It encourages slavery? It condones slavery? Can you give us some cites to back this up

Decree that all infertile people should be executed.

And where might one find this in Scripture?

Condoning of Genocide.

Really.? Where?

All put down to the will of God.

Really?

And it seems that the church can be quite selective about following the 5th commandment. But if you read a bit more, you will find “subclauses”. They are called mercy, compassion and love.

So let’s see. In the grand holy religion of Elric killing children is merciful compassionate and loving. And you criticize the Catholic Church?

 

[Elric]

Not really. Can you point out to us?

Lets not forget what else is in that book you are refering to:

It encourages slavery? It condones slavery? Can you give us some cites to back this up

And where might one find this in Scripture?

Really.? Where?

Really?

So let’s see. In the grand holy religion of Elric killing children is merciful compassionate and loving. And you criticize the Catholic Church?

You really dont know your bible do you?

It seams that you dont even know the history of your own institution either.

But then again after making such statments as that last one, its not really that suprising.

 

[iamrefreshed]

You really dont know your bible do you?

It seams that you dont even know the history of your own institution either.

But then again after making such statments as that last one, its not really that suprising.

As a general rule, when you make a claim, you should at least back it up with some citations.

You are making broad statements without any factual basis. The onus is on you Elric.

Please enlighten us about your profile religion “my own”. Perhaps that would give us some insight to your “compassion and mercy”.

 

[estesbob]

You really dont know your bible do you?

It seams that you dont even know the history of your own institution either.

But then again after making such statments as that last one, its not really that suprising.

As I thought you are unable back up the claims you made. The Catholics in this forum know their Bible enough to know what you posted was utter nonsense.

 

[bmmckinney]

Choose life… so that you may live…

Thou shall not kill…

Doesn’t say anywhere in the bible even the protestant collection of writings that its ok to dismember, disembow, and decapitate an unborn baby does it? I didn’t think.

 

[estesbob]

Choose life… so that you may live…

Thou shall not kill…

Doesn’t say anywhere in the bible even the protestant collection of writings that its ok to dismember, disembow, and decapitate an unborn baby does it? I didn’t think.

Only if you do it out of compassion.

 

[fix]

You really dont know your bible do you?

It seams that you dont even know the history of your own institution either.

Please share your information with us.

 

[hasikelee]

Highly respected by who? They are the propaganda arm of one the most vile and evil organizations in the history of the world. They deserve no respect.

Well, that is precisely why I pointed out Gutmacher’s stance on the subject.

Elric is in a very uncomfortable spot indeed, with people on every side agreeing that science, logic and medicine are against his unfounded beliefs.

I just thought that if I pointed out someone who wasn’t Catholic, pro-life or even religious, he might try thinking about things in a more factual way.

Personally, based on the generalised and exaggerated claims elric has made on this thread, I seriously doubt his story of being forced by doctors to choose between his wife or his child in the delivery room.

Of course, you never know…the attending may have just wanted less responsibility…if the father signed paperwork choosing to kill one patient, that leaves less culpability on the doctor in the case of a difficult situation. It’s easier to just pressure the father to authorize killing the child and not have to worry about liability in case you accidentally kill the child, know what I mean?

And if that was the case, elric’s story has more to do with cowardly doctors protecting themselves than about moral dilemmas of life and death.

I would feel rather angry myself, if a doctor was that concerned about covering his behind as to want to seal my child’s fate. I certainly wouldn’t have felt my wife was safe in that doctor’s hands!

Maybe elric realised something similar to my ponderings above and in order to feel he is in conrtol of his life and what happened, he rejected medicine, science, logic and truth to maintain a surrealistic belief. It’s a common tendency in humans when subjected to trauma or “bad things” to want to maintain control.

I mean, if elric were to accept facts on this thread, and his situation really was true, then his wife and child were severely mistreated and he himself was lied to by their own doctor. It also means elric at that time was poorly misinformed and could have made a permanent choice…the wrong choice. That’s a lot to swallow…maybe elric just wants to stay in his bubble of pro-choice fairytales instead of think about those possibilities…

 

[estesbob]

Well, that is precisely why I pointed out Gutmacher’s stance on the subject.

-…

Sorry. I got my attributions mixed up.