Frustrated over single issue pro-lifers

[Whitacre_Girl]

Hi all; this is something that I find frustrating among a lot of Catholics. We are against all forms of abortion. That I can get behind and support 100%. But I have a problem with a lot of Catholics who think “pro-life” is all about dead babies.

Agreed.

“Pro-life” isn’t just about dead babies. It should extend to suicide, euthanasia, eugenics, capital punishment, war, life imprisonment, self-defense, and use of deadly force.

Pro-life means supporting the right of people to live and defending that right. This does contradict some of the things you are against. Life-imprisonment is necessary in some cases where people are intent on murdering others due to a very poorly formed conscience or mental illness. Capital punishment can be used only when there is NO OTHER way to save human lives from this person. Whether this is done in the prison systems, or by someone killing someone who is trying to harm an innocent. War can be just - as the church upholds. Let’s take WWII. Politics of it aside, would you say it is anti-life to go to war to end the holocaust? Did that situation not call for the immediate attention and most severe action to stop?

It’s wrong to murder someone or kill them because it’s “easier” than dealing with them. However, there are situations where killing someone to save the life of that person’s victim is necessary and that is upheld by the church.

As a Catholic worker I cannot honestly believe that being pro-life means only being against abortion. To do so would be throwing away the lives of every person on death row wondering when their going to have a needle stuck in their arms or a prisoner rotting away in a dark dirty cell somewhere for the rest of his life over a mental illness or drug addiction.

What would you propose be done with them? And they are hardly “dark dirty cells.” People with legitimate mental illnesses receive treatment and care. Granted, many of the facilities are under-funded and the care can be poor at times, but seriously…are you going to let them roam around and kill as they please? That hardly seems pro-life. We have a duty to protect the innocent - whether that is the innocent in the womb, or the woman walking to her car after work in a bad part of town.

Or an innocent bystander who is callously shot and killed by a trigger happy cop, brave men and women in our armed forces who wonder if it will be the last time they see their loved ones. A drug addict who is desperate to get high shot by an overreacting gun toting constitutionalist.

I sincerely doubt this happens as often you think it does, and there is a lot of things in this paragraph that suggest a really strong bias that I want to dig at more here. Are you honestly upset at these injustices? Because you are right to be. But down deeper, are you just against all forms of violence or defense of self and others?

An boy with down syndrome subjected to genetic testing and treatment for something he couldn’t help, or a misled terminally ill patient who is in nothing but pain who sees no way out. A depressed teenager who’s a homosexual who feels so bullied and so isolated he thinks the only way out is to tie a noose and hang himself with it.

How does this relate to pro-life issues? These people are offered care and support if they seek it out. However, in the case of the homosexual, that doesn’t mean catholics are going to tell him that it’s okay to have gay relations - because that is directly AGAINST the church.

I only see dead babies. On national tv all I see is abortion this abortion that. Yeah abortion is wrong but so is all this other stuff. I think as Catholics if we stood up for this stuff as much as we did those babies; the world would be a better place!

It comes to energy. Yes, we need to defend all causes but right NOW the most important are the 1/3rd of all babies being murdered at their mother’s request. THAT is the focus right now. If we had people being rounded up and murdered, that would then become a bigger focus.

Until ONE THIRD of our population is no longer being murdered, I think we need to concentrate our efforts on that.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

I think you’re not doing yourself any favors by generalizing and assuming you know how other Catholics think and feel.

Speaking for myself, I certainly don’t think you’re a “commie”. You’re right, the Church has a very rich wealth of writings on social justice issues, from Rerum Novarum on up through Caritas in Veritate. We do not ignore them.

We have a moral obligation to work on all social justice issues. But, of course, that doesn’t mean that each individual can devote an equal amount of time to each issue. Some will necessarily need to focus on one issue or another in order for us to be effective.

Also, Corki brings up a great point that sometimes there can be a legitimate difference of opinion in how we go about doing what Catholic teaching shows us must be done. We all agree that we must help the poor. But we might disagree on whether a particular program (like welfare) is the best means to acheive that end. That doesn’t mean that one person is a better Catholic than the other. In fact, I think the discussion is important to lead us towards better and better means of helping the poor.

I am sure you don’t want people to mistake your passion for social justice as meaning you don’t care about abortion. So try not to mistake another person’s passion to end abortion for a neglect of other social justice issues.

All this is not to say that other posters here aren’t very forthcoming about opinions that are going to rub you the wrong way. This is the internet, after all.

 

[mrld20]

I think you’re not doing yourself any favors by generalizing and assuming you know how other Catholics think and feel.

Speaking for myself, I certainly don’t think you’re a “commie”. You’re right, the Church has a very rich wealth of writings on social justice issues, from Rerum Novarum on up through Caritas in Veritate. We do not ignore them.

We have a moral obligation to work on all social justice issues. But, of course, that doesn’t mean that each individual can devote an equal amount of time to each issue. Some will necessarily need to focus on one issue or another in order for us to be effective.

Also, Corki brings up a great point that sometimes there can be a legitimate difference of opinion in how we go about doing what Catholic teaching shows us must be done. We all agree that we must help the poor. But we might disagree on whether a particular program (like welfare) is the best means to acheive that end. That doesn’t mean that one person is a better Catholic than the other. In fact, I think the discussion is important to lead us towards better and better means of helping the poor.

I am sure you don’t want people to mistake your passion for social justice as meaning you don’t care about abortion. So try not to mistake another person’s passion to end abortion for a neglect of other social justice issues.

All this is not to say that other posters here aren’t very forthcoming about opinions that are going to rub you the wrong way. This is the internet, after all.

Let me say I’m sorry for getting so worked up about this post. But some people have really jumped down my throat on this . I will admit there are a lot of good posts and arguments on all sides of the debate…

But I’m really hurt by the people who think I’m “pro-choice” just because I argued for a broader definition of “pro-life.” I think abortion is murder no exceptions. I clearly stated that in some of my previous posts.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says capital punishment should be used only rarely. Personally I think it needs to go a step further and call for the outright abolition of the death penalty. Many Catholic laypeople, theologians, bishops, and clergymen have called for the same thing.

Many Catholics like myself are staunch pacifists and believe war is wrong. We take the “just war” theory to a whole new level and say all armed conflict unless absolutely necessary is wrong. The Sisters of Mercy of the Americas are one of my favorite religious orders.

Every year hundreds of Sisters of Mercy and other volunteers like myself go out and we protest at various military bases including the school of the Americas for the end to wars.

I’ve marched in many pro-life rallies (abortion centered), I’ve marched in anti-death penalty rallies. I’ve marched in rallies for suicide and bullying awareness.

The list goes on what I’ve done. But to insinuate just because I advocate for a number of “leftist” causes doesn’t mean I’m an anarchist or communist. I think the fact I’m a Catholic Worker makes a number of people uncomfortable

I think Communism is a horrible system. I admit I’ve been really one sided in this but I think we all need to calm down.

I hold the belief in the same one, holy apostolic church as everyone else. I’m all for the Church and her work. But people need to take a chill pill…

 

[BVM_1221]

That’s not exactly what the bishops said (at least, if we’re talking about the Faithful Citizenship document). They said that we should not vote for someone because of their stance on a single issue. But we can (and should) not vote for someone because of their stance on a single issue when that issue involves an intrinsic grave moral evil (like abortion or institutional racism, to use their examples).

Well, if it is institutional racism that is your bee-in-the bonnet single intrinsic moral issue, vote Democrat. Have you noticed how upset Bishops are with all the GOP-sponsered anti-immigration laws? And the GOP track record on racism, such as affirmative action, is very poor as well:sad_yes:

 

[BVM_1221]

Such as?

Every other issue, since “intrinsic” does not mean “infinite”, or even bigger somehow then non-intrinsic. To label any issue as “intrinsic” does not mean it is in any way, shape, or form an issue that shoves all other issues to the sidelines.:dts:

This constant misuse of the word “intrinsic” is precisely the problem noted by the original poster :tsktsk::tsktsk::tsktsk::tsktsk::tsktsk:

 

[mark_a]

So, YES, other isues ARE comparable to abortion. :yup::yup:

Not when proportionality is factored into the equation. I read that we are approaching 1,000,000,000 worldwide.

 

[BVM_1221]

Not when proportionality is factored into the equation. I read that we are approaching 1,000,000,000 worldwide.

Where did the Bishops say anything about proportionality and/or equations and/or factoring?

 

[Corki]

Well, if it is institutional racism that is your bee-in-the bonnet single intrinsic moral issue, vote Democrat. Have you noticed how upset Bishops are with all the GOP-sponsered anti-immigration laws? And the GOP track record on racism, such as affirmative action, is very poor as well

Immigration is one of those issues where the politicians differ on the “how” but just about everyone agrees that the current system is broken. It is nothing more than simplistic name-calling to say that the Republican proposal is “institutional racism” and that the Democrats position is intrinsically moral.

Where did the Bishops say anything about proportionality and/or equations and/or factoring?

In the Faithful Citizenship document, that’s where.

In our nation, “abortion and euthanasia have become **preeminent threats **to human dignity because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental human good
and the condition for all others” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 5). It is a mistake
with grave moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life
merely as a matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right
to life on the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.

“preeminent threat” is certainly wording conferring proportionality.
Joe 5859:

That’s not exactly what the bishops said (at least, if we’re talking about the Faithful Citizenship document). They said that we should not vote for someone because of their stance on a single issue. But we can (and should) not vote for someone because of their stance on a single issue when that issue involves an intrinsic grave moral evil (like abortion or institutional racism, to use their examples).

Exactly! The paragraph in FC that says this is:

As Catholics we are not single-issue voters. A candidate’s position on a single
issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter’s support. Yet a candidate’s position on a
single issue that involves an intrinsic evil, such as support for legal abortion or the
promotion of racism, may legitimately lead a voter to disqualify a candidate from
receiving support.

 

[carn]

Here we go again. The misuse of words. :tsktsk::tsktsk::tsktsk:

Yes, abortion is always wrong. But this is not the same as infinitely wrong. So abortion does not unilaterraly trump any other voting consideration. This is why the Bishops insisted that we were not to be one-issue voters.

So, YES, other isues ARE comparable to abortion. :yup::yup:

I meant not comparable, as with abortion there is no grey area according to church teaching. So it is easy to formulate a common and clear position.

With most other issues the OP mentioned there is a grey area in so far as different people cannot agree always which acts are wrong and what would be right to do. If you cannot agree you cannot form an effective movement, so the concentration on abortion stems from political/tactical reasons.

Whether thats good or bad is another question. I think its unavoidable.

“Abortion is wrong.”

No one will object.

“Gun-violence is wrong.”

I and others will object to that statement. So we have to reformulate:
“Gun-violence except in cases of self-defense is wrong.”

Others might disagree, pointing out, that even if its self-defense situation if the defender nonetheless acts out of revenge, it is immoral. So next try:

“Gun-violence except in cases of self-defense with the motive being defense is wrong.”

Again one could object, as if someone thinks he is in a self-defense situation but is actually in error, does not do something gravely immoral. Again:

“Gun-violence except in cases of self-defense with the motive being defense and acting on the assumption of a legitimate self-defense situation is wrong.”

Now we can remeber, there might be people who are too quick to act and do not consider carefully enough whether a self-defense situation is actually at hand:

“Gun-violence is wrong, except in cases of self-defense with the motive being defense and acting on the assumption of a legitimate self-defense situation, if the defender cautiosly considered if its self-defense.”

But wait, cautious considerations are not always possible:

“Gun-violence is wrong, except in cases of self-defense with the motive being defense and acting on the assumption of a legitimate self-defense situation, if the defender cautiosly considered if its self-defense, in so far the situation allowed him to do so.”

And then we have to think about, that even if self-defense situation is at hand, it might not be serious enough, e.g. neighbors kids stealing apples from your tree.

“Gun-violence is wrong, except in cases of self-defense with the motive being defense and acting on the assumption of a legitimate self-defense situation, if the defender cautiosly considered if its self-defense, in so far the situation allowed him to do so, and only if the thing to be defended is grave enough to justify gun use.”

Wiat now one might say, basically the robber only aims at my property, so is gun use then allowed according to our slogan?

…

Numerous iterations later:
And now put the result on a sign and carry it around on a march - it will be politically completely ineffective but it will be great for your fitness.

 

[kyrie80]

And the GOP track record on racism, such as affirmative action, is very poor as well:sad_yes:

The GOP’s track record on racism is very poor? The Democrats are the party of slavery, Jim Crow, putting the Japanese in internment camps, and segregation. It was the Democrat governors of the South who refused to allow black students into white schools. Can you name one Republican governor that did that? Just one?

Calvin Coolidge–probably the most conservative Republican president of the 20th century (even more than Reagan)–signed some of the most toughest anti-lynching laws of his time. FDR “supported” anti-lynching laws in “principle,” but didn’t push them because he needed the southern Democrat senators to pass his New Deal. In other words, pushing his neo-socialist agenda was more important than equal rights for the blacks.

Given all this, you say the GOP’s record on racism is poor because they don’t support government-sponsored racism?

 

[BVM_1221]

To the Original Poster: I am not so sure if I am frustrated over the single-issue pro-lifers. But I am BORED of their constant missuse of the English language in general, and their constant missuse of the word “intrinsic” in particular.

So time for me to drop this thread. It has become soooo tedious. :yawn:

And it isn’t even 2012 yet?:doh2:

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

The GOP’s track record on racism is very poor? The Democrats are the party of slavery, Jim Crow, putting the Japanese in internment camps, and segregation. It was the Democrat governors of the South who refused to allow black students into white schools. Can you name one Republican governor that did that? Just one?

Calvin Coolidge–probably the most conservative Republican president of the 20th century (even more than Reagan)–signed some of the most toughest anti-lynching laws of his time. FDR “supported” anti-lynching laws in “principle,” but didn’t push them because he needed the southern Democrat senators to pass his New Deal. In other words, pushing his neo-socialist agenda was more important than equal rights for the blacks.

Given all this, you say the GOP’s record on racism is poor because they don’t support government-sponsored racism?

Not to mention the GOP was founded by Abraham Lincoln himself…

 

[St_Francis]

To the Original Poster: I am not so sure if I am frustrated over the single-issue pro-lifers. But I am BORED of their constant missuse of the English language in general, and their constant missuse of the word “intrinsic” in particular.

So time for me to drop this thread. It has become soooo tedious. :yawn:

And it isn’t even 2012 yet?:doh2:

It probably wpuldn’t be so tedious for you if you would read and consier the responses to your single comment and engage in a dialogue.

Oh, well, maybe next time.

 

[St_Francis]

I’m frustrated because so many Catholics lack the same strong sense of social justice I do… They’ve become marching goblins of the Republican Party and only see abortion as the “big evil.” Yeah abortion is horrible, but so is suicide, capital punishment, war etc.

‘m frustrated because so many Catholics lack the same strong sense of social justice I do… They’ve become marching goblins of the Democrat Party and only see not expanding government programs for the poor as the “big evil.” Yeah, poverty is horrible, but so is allowing the killing of killing babies in their mothers’ wombs, etc

I’m frustrated because every Catholic here thinks I’m a commie for the views I have… Every time I meet a fellow Catholic they don’t share any views on social justice I have… It’s sad because the Pope and Vatican have issued all sorts of documents and homilies on social justice issues and so many Catholics ignore them…

I have met many Catholics like you, in fact, I would venture to say that 54% of Catholics are like you, given how they voted in the 2008 election. There are parishes full of them–and if you want to check about other parishes in your area, you can look at their parish website and find out what sorts of committees they have.

Do you never meet any other Catholics when you go to the protests you go to? Does your involvement with Catholic Worker not help you meet other Catholics like you?

 

[mrld20]

Funny how there is no concern about how communism is mutually exclusive to the Catholic Faith.

I also love how someone who supports communism and total government control, also complains about over-aggressive government agents (i.e. trigger-happy cops).

I’m not a communist

This is so frustrating… By many posters I’ve been accused of being “pro-choice”, a “communist.” Many of these posters have implied somehow I’m a bad Catholic… Come on guys…

 

[Bluegoat]

Yes, I have to agree, I’ve been accused of being a socialist more than occe on CAF, and I’ve seen it happen to others as well, to people who were simply not socialists. And I’ve seen many people being accused of being pro-life because they objected to lies by pro-life people, took the arguments of the pro-choice lobby seriously, or had reservations about basing voting choices on one issue.

 

[estesbob]

*“No, you can never vote for someone who favors absolutely what’s called the ‘right to choice’ of a woman to destroy human life in her womb, or the right to a procured abortion,” *

Cardinal Raymond Burke

Obviously, we have other important issues facing us this fall: the economy, the war in Iraq, immigration justice. But we can’t build a healthy society while ignoring the routine and very profitable legalized homicide that goes on every day against America’s unborn children. The right to life is foundational. Every other right depends on it. Efforts to reduce abortions, or to create alternatives to abortion, or to foster an environment where more women will choose to keep their unborn child, can have great merit–but not if they serve to cover over or distract from the brutality and fundamental injustice of abortion itself. We should remember that one of the crucial things that set early Christians apart from the pagan culture around them was their rejection of abortion and infanticide. Yet for thirty-five years I’ve watched prominent “pro-choice” Catholics justify themselves with the kind of moral and verbal gymnastics that should qualify as an Olympic event. All they’ve really done is capitulate to Roe v. Wade.

Archbishop Charles Chaput

 

[RaymondJensen]

Hi all; this is something that I find frustrating among a lot of Catholics. We are against all forms of abortion. That I can get behind and support 100%. But I have a problem with a lot of Catholics who think “pro-life” is all about dead babies.

“Pro-life” isn’t just about dead babies. It should extend to suicide, euthanasia, eugenics, capital punishment, war, life imprisonment, self-defense, and use of deadly force.

As a Catholic worker I cannot honestly believe that being pro-life means only being against abortion. To do so would be throwing away the lives of every person on death row wondering when their going to have a needle stuck in their arms or a prisoner rotting away in a dark dirty cell somewhere for the rest of his life over a mental illness or drug addiction.

Or an innocent bystander who is callously shot and killed by a trigger happy cop, brave men and women in our armed forces who wonder if it will be the last time they see their loved ones. A drug addict who is desperate to get high shot by an overreacting gun toting constitutionalist.

An boy with down syndrome subjected to genetic testing and treatment for something he couldn’t help, or a misled terminally ill patient who is in nothing but pain who sees no way out. A depressed teenager who’s a homosexual who feels so bullied and so isolated he thinks the only way out is to tie a noose and hang himself with it.

I only see dead babies. On national tv all I see is abortion this abortion that. Yeah abortion is wrong but so is all this other stuff. I think as Catholics if we stood up for this stuff as much as we did those babies; the world would be a better place!

Actually you realized something about prolife that alot of people don’t realize which is it’s not all about abortion. The march for life for example includes some of the other stuff you suggested such as suicide and capital punishment. I’m actually have a feeling that I’m called to prolife issues. I’m planning on stating a religious order that only focuses on prolife issues. I was going to just do abortion, suicide, euthanasia, capital punishment, and other kinds of homocide. Also if you don’t like the idea of self defense because it harms the other person may I suggest Aikido, which is a self defense that is very peaceful (rarely does the other person get hurt and chances are they won’t die). I think it’s a good self defense except against guns. Anyways thank you for posting this. I’m glad that not everyone thinks that pro life means anti abortion only. I still have to find like minded men (which i don’t know if you’re a guy or a woman) to be in the order.I might make a branch eventually for woman assuming things work out.

 

[SpectatorX]

Let me say I’m sorry for getting so worked up about this post. But some people have really jumped down my throat on this . I will admit there are a lot of good posts and arguments on all sides of the debate…

But I’m really hurt by the people who think I’m “pro-choice” just because I argued for a broader definition of “pro-life.” I think abortion is murder no exceptions. I clearly stated that in some of my previous posts.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says capital punishment should be used only rarely. Personally I think it needs to go a step further and call for the outright abolition of the death penalty. Many Catholic laypeople, theologians, bishops, and clergymen have called for the same thing.

Many Catholics like myself are staunch pacifists and believe war is wrong. We take the “just war” theory to a whole new level and say all armed conflict unless absolutely necessary is wrong. The Sisters of Mercy of the Americas are one of my favorite religious orders.

Every year hundreds of Sisters of Mercy and other volunteers like myself go out and we protest at various military bases including the school of the Americas for the end to wars.

I’ve marched in many pro-life rallies (abortion centered), I’ve marched in anti-death penalty rallies. I’ve marched in rallies for suicide and bullying awareness.

The list goes on what I’ve done. But to insinuate just because I advocate for a number of “leftist” causes doesn’t mean I’m an anarchist or communist. I think the fact I’m a Catholic Worker makes a number of people uncomfortable

I think Communism is a horrible system. I admit I’ve been really one sided in this but I think we all need to calm down.

I hold the belief in the same one, holy apostolic church as everyone else. I’m all for the Church and her work. But people need to take a chill pill…

You seem to be another victim of substitutive reasoning, a logical mode which often equates certain words or phrases with certain affiliations. But for the grace of God, I would have jumped on the same train; the “abortion’s bad but so are these things” argument has long been a standard for urging people to overlook pro-choice positions in voting booths to the extent that it is difficult to blame one for misunderstanding when similar word patterns are used for different ends - especially in the absence of a disclaimer. If the purpose of your OP was indeed to bellow “a curse on both your houses” to our two party system rather than propose a flawed dichotomy, I would like to echo a hearty “hear, hear!”

 

[mrld20]

If a politician is pro-choice I won’t vote for them… But at the same time I won’t vote for a pro-life person who doesn’t support the welfare system, someone who supports lower taxes, war etc…

There are plenty of pro-life Democrats out there who support the welfare system, support higher taxes, and are against war…

One of my college professors when I did dual enrollment classes in high school was Father Robert Drinan. He was militantly anti-war, supported higher taxes, and was a Democrat who served in Congress all while being an active Jesuit priest!

There are plenty of options on voting… But if a Catholic is a Republican and that said Republican supports typical Republican positions outside of being pro-life; I won’t vote for him pro-life or not.

Just like if a person is pro-choice I probably won’t vote for them even if they are a Democrat who subscribes to most of my views. However, if they are so called “neutral” while being personally pro-life and and offer a comprehensive plan to reduce abortions drastically then I can get behind them and vote for them.

But being pro-choice is generally a dis-qualifier from getting my vote. And if faced with a conservative goose stepping Republican as the alternative… I’ll just stay home…