L
LCMS_No_More
Guest
Fabrication archived.I looked up a word often used in these debates, “Nuance.” Turns out it’s French for, “It don’t mean what it says, it means what I want it to mean.”
- Status
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Childish retort noted.
J
janechantal
Guest
just a thought…
Protestants can be pro-choice?
Protestants can be pro-choice?
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Protestant religions vary widely in their beliefs – so some can, and not violate the basic doctrine of their religion.
Catholics, however, must follow the Catechism – although some take a “nuanced” position, and regard the Catechism as a mere “crib sheet.”
B
BamaRider
Guest
I’ll let these words of the Holy Father speak on their own-
*I]Some today argue that respect for freedom of the individual makes it wrong to seek truth, including the truth about what is good. In some circles to speak of truth is seen as controversial or divisive, and consequently best kept in the private sphere. And in truth’s place – or better said its absence – an idea has spread which, in giving value to everything indiscriminately, claims to assure freedom and to liberate conscience. This we call relativism. But what purpose has a “freedom” which, in disregarding truth, pursues what is false or wrong? **How many young people have been offered a hand which in the name of freedom or experience has led them to addiction, to moral or intellectual confusion, to hurt, to a loss of self-respect, even to despair and so tragically and sadly to the taking of their own life?/*I]
His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI
Speaking at Youth Rally at St. Joseph Seminary, Yonkers, NY.
Last week.
What this means truth is arrived out in a black and white way. Good and Bad, evil and good. There is no gray area in doing what’s right. The revelaltists want you to believe there is no evil in this world like terrorists, and pro abortion politicians, and govt programs that rob people of their freedom and self respect.
Unlike many Americans, the Holy Father loves this country, He knows America led the fight, with the grace of God, to rid his country of true evil, and there are some, that say force of arms for self defense is incorrect.
The Holy Father knows the challenges our country faces in terms morality. It is a battle we must engage in everyday to defend the unborn, and that means defeating those at the ballot box with pro life agendas, but many Catholics refuse to do that because they’re worried about the minimum wage.
I was glad to see the Holy Father mention the concept of individual liberty is not lost.
*I]Some today argue that respect for freedom of the individual makes it wrong to seek truth, including the truth about what is good. In some circles to speak of truth is seen as controversial or divisive, and consequently best kept in the private sphere. And in truth’s place – or better said its absence – an idea has spread which, in giving value to everything indiscriminately, claims to assure freedom and to liberate conscience. This we call relativism. But what purpose has a “freedom” which, in disregarding truth, pursues what is false or wrong? **How many young people have been offered a hand which in the name of freedom or experience has led them to addiction, to moral or intellectual confusion, to hurt, to a loss of self-respect, even to despair and so tragically and sadly to the taking of their own life?/*I]
His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI
Speaking at Youth Rally at St. Joseph Seminary, Yonkers, NY.
Last week.
What this means truth is arrived out in a black and white way. Good and Bad, evil and good. There is no gray area in doing what’s right. The revelaltists want you to believe there is no evil in this world like terrorists, and pro abortion politicians, and govt programs that rob people of their freedom and self respect.
Unlike many Americans, the Holy Father loves this country, He knows America led the fight, with the grace of God, to rid his country of true evil, and there are some, that say force of arms for self defense is incorrect.
The Holy Father knows the challenges our country faces in terms morality. It is a battle we must engage in everyday to defend the unborn, and that means defeating those at the ballot box with pro life agendas, but many Catholics refuse to do that because they’re worried about the minimum wage.
I was glad to see the Holy Father mention the concept of individual liberty is not lost.
C
CradleCath
Guest
I don’t think so. I know that some of them belong to Churches that don’t have a problem with abortion, but I think that God does.
Abortion is not like attending Mass every Sunday…a teaching that only applies to Catholics. Abortion is an objective evil & a matter of Natural Law. One can know by reason alone that it is a grave wrong to kill one’s offspring. I think that, in God’s eyes, Protestants who either have an abortion or promote one, are just as culpable as Catholics. The shame in that situation is that their Churches (some) don’t advise them about the destruction of their soul that comes with this sin.
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
I think what too many people do, is to carry over our freedoms guaranteed in the constitution for our lives as citizens here in the U.S. into their religious lives as Catholics and or other faiths. Theologically speaking, we do not have freedom to sin. We have free will and have a conscious to guide us, but we also have a moral obligation to properly form our consciouses to the correct moral order. Another problem driving people to immoral choices in a chosen life style is the number of unchurched people we have. Then another problem we have is politicians thinking that the constitution which they vow to uphold, supersedes the natural law and pander to all kind of fringe groups for votes simply to stay in positions of power. Our entire culture is skewered. I certainly would like to see term limits. I think this would be one way to possibly correct our society. I know this is a larger issue than just pro-choice, but by extension it can certainly bring in these issues.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
S
SoCalRC
Guest
Bamarider set the context for the discussion on torture. He believes in torturing detainees under certain conditions, it is not clear if the torture he (and you) are currently supporting politically meets that standard.
CCC 2313 prohibits torture of prisoners and declares the standard to be the accepted “law of nations”.
However, your argument is pretty disturbing on another level. Torture requires total physical control over another human person. I realize that some people rationalize actions like pouring gasoline on cats, etc. but it is difficult for me to see how one could ever exercise torture on another human being and not run afoul of the Dogmatic teaching of the Chuch.
CCC 2297 condemns torture by name. CCC 2298 indicates that the Church has “in times past” been remiss in adaquately condemning “cruel practices” (interestingly, the reference in the margin is to CCC 2267 where the Church indicates that licit applications of the death penalty “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”)
Granted, torture only has one subject index entry in the Catechism (“as offense against mankind”). But it is listed as an absolute in both the Dogmatic and Pastoral Constitutions from the Second Vatican Council. In CHRISTIFIDELES LAICI, the Pope quotes the Second Vatican Council and lists it as a reflection of our inviolate view of the right to life.
With respect to life, NO Catholic should be pro-choice. However, the label as applied in US politics does not reflect our Catholic teaching. So it is hypocritical to be wagging our fingers at other Catholics.
With regards to Voting, Rome lists 9 examples of moral principles which are ‘non negotiable’. The Church tells us that what is at stake is the essence of moral law:
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html
The first three examples are abortion, euthanasia, and protecting the rights of the human embryo. If you vote for a ‘pro choice’ Dem, you are violating the first one. But if you voted for, say, President Bush, you violated the other two. Remember, despite all the noise, he permits federal dollars to go to stem cell research and is in favor if IVF, something we deem to be the same basic violation.
Granted, we disagree on rather or not “moral principles that do not admit of exception, compromise or derogation” means ‘non negotiable’, just as we disagree on what the Church means when it says:
But when the Church condems something, by name, as an affront to the inalienable rights of the human person. It is hard to understand how supporting it is a Catholic “pro life” position.
S
SoCalRC
Guest
I think you are missing the point, which Benedict has explained quite fully in his books. We believe in some moral absolutes. Abortion is always wrong, even in war torture of prisoners is always wrong.
That means that this are pinciples worth dying for. That is why, even in the tragic case of marternal death, we reject abortion. And that is why, even when you are really, really, scared of swarthy foreigners, we still reject torture. Doing what is right does not insure our personal safety - look at early Christians being fed to lions for sport.
Nor does following Christ insure our prosperity. Religious priests take a vow of poverty.
But we believe that following God is the one true path to eternal life.
This is an incredibly high standard to live up to. So it is not unusal that, say, Ender disagrees with the Pope on the implications of the death penalty, Vern’s certainty that some abortions to save maternal life are just, or your thinking that torture for the sake of your own fear of death is justified. The problem I have is when we fall into the trap of redefining the bar. Telling ourselves and others that we are ‘rightous’, instead of calling to mind our own unworthiness (as we do each week at Mass).
E
Ender
Guest
If I understand this, you reject the notion that Catholics can (properly) be pro-choice re abortion but you contend that they likewise cannot be pro-choice with regard to ESCR, the death penalty, torture, and euthanasia. Since almost everyone is pro-choice on some of these issues it is inappropriate to single out one group as “pro-choice” while giving a pass to the others. So far so good? Is it also your contention that there is no substantial moral difference between the person (or party) who is pro-choice on abortion and the one who is pro-choice on torture?
Ender
B
BamaRider
Guest
SoCal said-
The Holy Father said this just last week-
Some today argue that respect for freedom of the individual makes it wrong to seek truth, including the truth about what is good. In some circles to speak of truth is seen as controversial or divisive, and consequently best kept in the private sphere. And in truth’s place – or better said its absence – an idea has spread which, in giving value to everything indiscriminately, claims to assure freedom and to liberate conscience. This we call relativism. But what purpose has a “freedom” which, in disregarding truth, pursues what is false or wrong? How many young people have been offered a hand which in the name of freedom or experience has led them to addiction, to moral or intellectual confusion, to hurt, to a loss of self-respect, even to despair and so tragically and sadly to the taking of their own life?
And clear thinking individuals know the message is-
Dang brother, first ya told Vern he didn’t understand what he just read, and now ya telling me! LOL. Look, I dunno what else to tell ya other than thats what HE said, how ya choose to read it is up to you I reckon. SoCal said I missed the point of what he said, is anyone else missing it, or is it just me?
What does this mean?
The Holy Father said this just last week-
Some today argue that respect for freedom of the individual makes it wrong to seek truth, including the truth about what is good. In some circles to speak of truth is seen as controversial or divisive, and consequently best kept in the private sphere. And in truth’s place – or better said its absence – an idea has spread which, in giving value to everything indiscriminately, claims to assure freedom and to liberate conscience. This we call relativism. But what purpose has a “freedom” which, in disregarding truth, pursues what is false or wrong? How many young people have been offered a hand which in the name of freedom or experience has led them to addiction, to moral or intellectual confusion, to hurt, to a loss of self-respect, even to despair and so tragically and sadly to the taking of their own life?
And clear thinking individuals know the message is-
But then SoCal responded
To which I say-
Dang brother, first ya told Vern he didn’t understand what he just read, and now ya telling me! LOL. Look, I dunno what else to tell ya other than thats what HE said, how ya choose to read it is up to you I reckon. SoCal said I missed the point of what he said, is anyone else missing it, or is it just me?
L
LCMS_No_More
Guest
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
To give one perspective to this conversation, I will relate how I reasoned myself out o being in favor of the death penalty. I simply asked myself if I would be willing to pull the switch that would kill a convict. My answer was no. If that was my answer, than how could I be in favor of someone else pulling it. Abortion, is always murder - no exceptions. Euthanasia is always murder, no exceptions. Embryonic Stem cell research, -most always involves abortion, i.e., murder. We are in a culture of death. We should be in a culture of life. Is war OK. We would have to get into a discussion of the principles of a just war. If we think back in history, it was the Battle of Lepanto that saved western Europe from being under Muslim domination By no means am I wanting to start discussion on just war. I am simply saying some are just. To turn a phrase around, lets all be pro choice, and let that choice be life.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
B
BamaRider
Guest
Good Post Deacon. I pretty much followed the same path. I was pro DP, but the last few years began to soften that stance. I’m for locking him up like they do at Super Max in Colorado, 23 hours a day. No books, no TV, no radio, no nothing just you and that cell for 23 hours. One hour a day they let you out to walk in the 4x4 fence area. Thats it. The more I thought about it, the more I figured the state didn’t need to be in the business of death, and like you I wouldn’t want to be in the executioners spot.
J
janechantal
Guest
Doesn’t it seem natural then that we should be saying that all peoples who are “Christian” should be Pro-Life; leaving out the determination of the faith walk…Catholic or Protestant or whatever?
God created us all and so - what in the world happened to those who are denying that Life is Sacred? I realize this subject has been hashed back and forth since Roe vs Wade…this discussion won’t change much unless there is someone who actually believes that Catholics are not and should not be Pro-Life. God is in control of this culability issue and those who will be held responsible are going to be in His Hands when they face Him one day. We as Pro-Life Catholics must live as witnesses always in this matter so that those who don’t believe, will believe. I am so thankful that there is a Divine Mercy for those who are ignorant and who are led astray and most especially for those who cultivate this ignorance and sin.
God sees us as His children. When He spoke about someone leading the children astray…was this not one of His “woe to thee” sentences?
We, as Catholics who practice our faith walk, must then take it upon ourselves to be the intercessors for those who lead and those who go astray. Only then can we be seen as doing something for salvation of souls and be able to receive mercy ourselves when we face our God one day for we, too, are guilty when we just walk on as if nothing is going on around us. Let us be the prayer persons for those who walk in the darkness of abortion. In this way, we can rebuke the evil about us a little, I hope.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
First of all, “Pro-choice” cannot apply to ESCR, the death penalty and torture, since these are not personal matters – I can’t choose to perform ESCR or put my neighbor to death.
Secondly, the Church absolutely condemns ESCR, torture, and euthanasia.
Issue like war and the death penalty are matters of prudential judgement. The Church does not deny that there are circumstances under which a nation must resort to arms, or cases where only the death penalty will protect society – although such cases should be rare.
B
Brian_B
Guest
Look, I think that we all agree that abortion is wrong. If you read the text of the original quote at the top, the poster is not suggesting that the church is for abortion. I read this quote as the church having a stated goal of no one having abortions in a society that allows them.
Would it be terrible if we lived in a society that legally allowed abortions, but through teaching, counseling, and other options, all pregnant women exercised their free will to keeping the baby?
‘Pro Choice’ doesn’t mean ‘Anti-Life.’
Would it be terrible if we lived in a society that legally allowed abortions, but through teaching, counseling, and other options, all pregnant women exercised their free will to keeping the baby?
‘Pro Choice’ doesn’t mean ‘Anti-Life.’
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
It would be nice if we lived in a society that legally allowed murder, rape and bank robbery, but through teaching, counseling, and other options, no one chose to commit those acts.
If the law says abortion is a** right**, how do we convice people it’s ** wrong**?
Society must speak out – and society speaks through its laws.
C
ComputerGeek25
Guest
Yes, I am pro-choice. I can either have sex or not have sex. That’s the only choice. Easy as that.
S
SoCalRC
Guest
What about ectopic pregnancies? The secular world considers their termination abortions. You have repeatedly argued that those terminations are just and reasonable.
What about uterine cysts? The fate of some fertilized zygotes - they even retain DNA unique from the mother. You have previously stated that you consider them human beings. Does that mean that it should be illegal to have a cancerous one removed?
For Catholics, it is a problem. The Church has spoken, emphatically, that we cannot endorse or support laws that attack human life. That said, some aspects of our teachings (ex. no abortions even to save the life of the mother) are not widely accepted even in the moral certainty of the lay faithful.
What Brian B does hit on is the concept that societal attitudes and behavior must fundementally change. If history demonstrates anything, it is that ‘prohibition’ does not work, rather it is alcohol, other illegal drugs, or abortion. Now that about 15% (and rising) of the abortions are chemical, a prohibition approach succeeding is even more improbable.
- Status