Do you think ALL abortion should be illegal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DL82
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Neil_Anthony said:
As far as catholic teaching about which things should be illegal, do you have a reference? I’d like to see some straight answers on whether, for example, we’re required to support laws that would make birth control illegal for non-catholics, or make blasphemy illegal, etc. (Or, in this hypothetical case, a law to make it illegal to kill the fetus to save the life of the mother, if ever there were such a situation that arose).
Click to expand...
Sorry I missed this question.

As far as I know, there aren’t currently any proposals to make contraception illegal? 😃

In any case, if there were such a proposal I would support it because I have a duty as a Christian not only to live for Christ myself, but to spread Christ’s saving message to others too. If you want to know why the Catholic Church teaches against contraception, there are plenty of threads here at CAF to study.

Again, there is no reason to kill a baby to save the mother.

Are you asking about reconcilling our faith with political activism, as in voting?
 
I apologise for this post. The posts made by many contributors have shed much light on a position I was already aware of that the Church opposes ALL abortion, and teaches that the state should do the same.

Firstly, an apology for posting this thread.

Secondly a warning, promoting legalised abortion, under ANY circumstances, is a mortal sin. :eek: Anyone who knowingly voted A, B or C in the poll, please go to confession. I know I will be.

I’m so, so sorry, I hope my stupid excuse for an argument didn’t deprive any souls of the opportunity to receive the blessed sacrament this Sunday, or cost anyone their immortal soul! This kind of issue is just too risky, and I promise to steer clear of it in future.
 
DL82 said:
I apologise for this post. The posts made by many contributors have shed much light on a position I was already aware of that the Church opposes ALL abortion, and teaches that the state should do the same.

Firstly, an apology for posting this thread.

Secondly a warning, promoting legalised abortion, under ANY circumstances, is a mortal sin. :eek: Anyone who knowingly voted A, B or C in the poll, please go to confession. I know I will be.

I’m so, so sorry, I hope my stupid excuse for an argument didn’t deprive any souls of the opportunity to receive the blessed sacrament this Sunday, or cost anyone their immortal soul! This kind of issue is just too risky, and I promise to steer clear of it in future.
Click to expand...
Knowledge and understanding trump fear anytime and all the time. You should not steer clear of discussing the abortion issue. Now that you have a better understanding, you have a duty to work to spread understanding and knowledge to others.

As for confession, love of God and contrition is ideally what should lead us there - not fear.
 
stbruno said:
An ectopic pregnancy where this is a surgical emergency, because both mother and child will die is not considered an abortion because the object is not to kill the child.
Click to expand...
This is where I always get stuck. In the case of an ectopic pregnancy, it is lict to remove the burst or soon-to-burst tube but no licit to excise the baby and leave the tube intact.

I have a close friend who had an ectopic pregnancy where the baby implanted, not in the tube but in the abdomin. The surgery was to remove the baby to save her life. The baby could not have survived.

I usually take “life of the mother” with a grain of salt since doctors say that there is really no case in the Western medical system where continuing a pregancy would kill the mother. In most cases, holding out as long as possible and then delivering, early if necessary is possible.

But in the case above, what do you say? The mother would have bled to death without the surgery. She was unconcsious from blood loss when she got to the hospital and told me she was so glad she didn’t have to make the decision.

I am not sure how the Church would view a case like this but I think that in such a case, it should be legal to take the baby, even knowing it is certain death for the baby. The attending doctor should not be faced with legal action if acting thus.
 
Jennifer123 said:
Sorry I missed this question.

As far as I know, there aren’t currently any proposals to make contraception illegal? 😃

In any case, if there were such a proposal I would support it because I have a duty as a Christian not only to live for Christ myself, but to spread Christ’s saving message to others too. If you want to know why the Catholic Church teaches against contraception, there are plenty of threads here at CAF to study.

Again, there is no reason to kill a baby to save the mother.

Are you asking about reconcilling our faith with political activism, as in voting?
Click to expand...
I think this thread is about reconciling voting with our faith. We (hopefully) all believe that it is a sin to kill a fetus even if its necessary to save the life of the mother. And we (hopefully) all believe that its a sin to use birth control.

But “should I support a law to prevent people from using birth control” is, to me, a completely separate question from whether birth control is a sin. Missing mass is a sin, but no one wants to make it against the law for catholics to miss mass. Detraction is a sin, but as far as I know, catholics are allowed to support free speech laws even though free speech is often the sin of detraction. So it’s a complicated issue, deciding which moral rules should be enforced by law.
 
All, however last-ditch medical procedures to save the mother and the child, resulting in the unintentional death of the child would be accestable.
 
Corki said:
This is where I always get stuck. In the case of an ectopic pregnancy, it is lict to remove the burst or soon-to-burst tube but no licit to excise the baby and leave the tube intact.

I have a close friend who had an ectopic pregnancy where the baby implanted, not in the tube but in the abdomin. The surgery was to remove the baby to save her life. The baby could not have survived.

I usually take “life of the mother” with a grain of salt since doctors say that there is really no case in the Western medical system where continuing a pregancy would kill the mother. In most cases, holding out as long as possible and then delivering, early if necessary is possible.

But in the case above, what do you say? The mother would have bled to death without the surgery. She was unconcsious from blood loss when she got to the hospital and told me she was so glad she didn’t have to make the decision.

I am not sure how the Church would view a case like this but I think that in such a case, it should be legal to take the baby, even knowing it is certain death for the baby. The attending doctor should not be faced with legal action if acting thus.
Click to expand...
I think it will become less difficult for us to see the right choice as science catches up.

Already, many doctors and scientists are trying to find a way to take these little humans and implant them into the uterus.

There have been some trials; I haven’t checked back to see if any were successful.

Basically, in your friend’s case, the hope is that a surgeon could carefully remove the new human and place the human into the womb to continue to grow.

Pretty cool science, huh? Also, I can’t imagine a legal document being made to prohibit abortion where your friend’s case would apply. The human was not implanted in the womb.
 
DL82 said:
I apologise for this post. The posts made by many contributors have shed much light on a position I was already aware of that the Church opposes ALL abortion, and teaches that the state should do the same.

Firstly, an apology for posting this thread.

Secondly a warning, promoting legalised abortion, under ANY circumstances, is a mortal sin. :eek: Anyone who knowingly voted A, B or C in the poll, please go to confession. I know I will be.

I’m so, so sorry, I hope my stupid excuse for an argument didn’t deprive any souls of the opportunity to receive the blessed sacrament this Sunday, or cost anyone their immortal soul! This kind of issue is just too risky, and I promise to steer clear of it in future.
Click to expand...
Don’t be too hard on yourself. Nobody here was promoting an abortion, and there aren’t any laws up for consideration that would make it illegal in the case of danger to the mother’s life, so it was purely hypothetical. I think discussing things is always good!
 
Many tragic scenarios can be presented and used as reasons to try and justify abortion. The one major thing being overlooked is that the unborn baby is an innocent victim. Killing these most innocent and helpless in our society is a scourge that if continued will be the basis for the downfall of our society. This slaughter of innocents cannot under any circumstance or reason be justified. To repete a phrase, it is a life, not a choice. It is fully, totally and completely human. The only thing difference between it and a geriatric patient is age and the stage of development. Continued abortion will lead to euthanasia and assisted suicide. These are but faulty logical steps. Pray for an end of this holocaust.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
DL82 said:
Of course the Church teaches that abortion is always a moral evil. It is always the better choice to choose not to terminate a pregnancy.

Nonetheless, in some cases this amounts to the decision to accept martyrdom, to accept a death that has meaning only in the light of faith, i.e. that doesn’t even increase the chances of your unborn baby surviving. That is an extreme choice to make. Some have argued that reasonable self-defence permits abortion in some such cases, though I understand that the Church has never accepted such arguments.

Assuming you believe that the state should protect the rights of the unborn in normal circumstances, do you believe abortion should ALWAYS be illegal, even in these rare circumstances.

I have seen some campaigning materials from pro-life charities that suggest that “abortion should be rare” rather than calling for an all-out ban, and I think those arguments have a better chance of success in our secular society than calling for a total and absolute ban, though I’m not sure how I stand on the morality of such an argument.
Click to expand...
I haven’t answered the poll, because I think it depends on what you mean by “abortion.”

The deliberate killing of an unborn child should always be illegal in principle, although in practice I think society’s attitudes would need to change radically for this to be accepted with regard to early abortions, so we ought to have the more realistic goal of banning late-term abortions (when clearly designed to kill) and restricting early abortion as much as possible.

The removal of the child from the womb in cases where the mother’s life is in danger should be legal even if realistically the child is not going to survive, but always with the goal of saving both mother and child if at all possible. If the child dies anyway, this comes under the heading of “double effect.”

When the mother’s health, physical or psychological, is in serious danger (not talking about a vague unhappiness in the latter case but an extreme case such as rape or incest or suicidal depression), it is reasonable to remove the child as early as possible, but again this should be done in such a way as to protect the child as well. Given how difficult these issues are, a good deal of latitude should be given to mothers and their physicians, but the deliberate killing of the child is never legitimate.

In other words, I think that just laws about abortion in a society not wholly committed to orthodox Christian teaching in this regard will have to have a lot of fuzzy edges. I do not think that it is realistic to push for a complete banning of all abortions in society as it exists now, and I’m not even sure that this would be just. What we can establish is that personhood clearly begins before birth, perhaps as early as conception, and that laws ought to reflect this. This is why prochoice folks fight things like the “born-alive” act so hard. If even a “pre-viable” infant can be “alive” outside the womb however briefly, then it looks very much as if the killing of such a being is murder. Prolife folks need to push these issues as hard as possible, pointing out that this is a matter of simple justice which should be treated as such rather than as a tool for partisan manipulation (as in the argument that “born-alive” laws are just the camel’s nose under the tent–well, so what if they are? The question is whether they are just, and this particular camel should be allowed to push as far as possible).

I know that my position seems too “soft” to many folks here. But I think the status of the very early embryo/fetus is open to reasonable disagreement. I strongly favor the view that life should be protected from the moment of conception. But I think it is both juster and more effective to make a clear distinction between the very early stages, in which one can have a reasonable argument, and the later stages, in which the fetus is distinguished from an infant only by his/her relationship to the mother’s womb. Not that we abandon the push to protect the early stages as well, but that we recognize that there is a difference in just how clear and obvious the argument is in each case.

Edwin
 
According to official church teaching, is it okay to have an abortion to save the nother’s life, assuming the baby is going to die either way?

Woah, the amount of people who picked options 2 and 3 is startling!
 
Abortion to save a mother’s life should be legal 13 38.24%
Abortion should be legal if a mother has been raped 5 14.71%
The morning-after pill should be legal 6 17.65%
ALL abortion should be illegal 21 61.76%

I hadn’t realized that there was such a high percentage of non-catholics on this forum.
 
Timbothefiveth said:
According to official church teaching, is it okay to have an abortion to save the nother’s life, assuming the baby is going to die either way?

Woah, the amount of people who picked options 2 and 3 is startling!
Click to expand...
No. It is not okay to have an abortion to save the mother’s life, because you cannot assume that the baby is going to die either way.
 
I wound up voting for “all abortion should be illegal,” defining “abortion” as the deliberate killing of the unborn and “should” as “ideally.”

Edwin
 
Timbothefiveth said:
According to official church teaching, is it okay to have an abortion to save the nother’s life, assuming the baby is going to die either way?

Woah, the amount of people who picked options 2 and 3 is startling!
Click to expand...
Why are you suprised at 3? The morning-after-pill may be used licitly in cases of rape where ovulation tests are negative.
 
DL82 said:
I apologise for this post. The posts made by many contributors have shed much light on a position I was already aware of that the Church opposes ALL abortion, and teaches that the state should do the same.

Firstly, an apology for posting this thread.

Secondly a warning, promoting legalised abortion, under ANY circumstances, is a mortal sin. :eek: Anyone who knowingly voted A, B or C in the poll, please go to confession. I know I will be.

I’m so, so sorry, I hope my stupid excuse for an argument didn’t deprive any souls of the opportunity to receive the blessed sacrament this Sunday, or cost anyone their immortal soul! This kind of issue is just too risky, and I promise to steer clear of it in future.
Click to expand...
Apology? You have my gratitude for starting this thread. 👍

By posting you started an exchange of ideas, during which “StBruno” mentioned the real life of St. Gianna, I did a search about her and learned a lot (I will be buying a book on her soon), then I will share this information with a young lady at my church who works on abortion issues, and so on…

Also, after my high school class gets done reading about St. Maria Goretti we will be reading about St. Gianna. What a tremendous example for my students.

St. Gianna is now added to my list of favorite saints along with St. Kolbe and St. Goretti.

Oh, I voted that all abortions should be illegal.
 
I have a question. Is the excepetion, “for the health of the mother” been widely missused since 1972? I always thought it was, but is there a study that proves it? Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top