How can a Christian be pro choice ??

[Evania]

Come on, safe for the WOMAN, okay?? Let’s not be so square here.

There are many articles showing that this verse doesn’t just mean to multiply numerically. Here’s one: catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=2266

Also, how do you reconcile this with Peter’s declaration that “it is better for a man not to marry”?

Everyone keeps calling abortion murder. Murder murder murder. That’s a very one-sided view of what abortion is.

Abortion is an understanding that the world is overpopulated and resources are being depleted, and that women are the primary victims of unwanted pregnancies (which are usually a result of sin anyway). And rather than have the woman suffer from poverty from childrearing, and have the child suffer from a flawed foster system or parents that aren’t ready, it is better to make the tough decision to terminate this pregnancy for the benefit of the woman and society.

It is an understanding that family planning is essential in modern society, and women are capable of intelligent choices. It is a tough decision but one that is made with much consideration.

And this is tough, but** the baby does not get to control of consequences of his or her birth**. I wish I could’ve been born to taller, more athletic parents so I could be the jock or Marine that gets all the girls. But that’s not my choice, eh?

Is it really glorifying to God to just let society raise millions of babies that it isn’t ready for, and let women suffer in poverty from it?

The Holocaust and slavery argument is not analogous, because in those cases, we are referring to people already born. Again, one must be born to have rights in the USA. Furthermore, from a scientific perspective, a fetus is a parasite. Why? Because the woman’s health is being compromised during pregnancy by the growth of the fetus. Look at any pregnant animal and this is evident. There are studies showing that male babies are weaker at birth because the female body attacks the XY chromosomes as foreign bodies.

You sound full of hate. Babies are NOT parasites. They are made in the image and likeness of God. If you were Christian, you would recognize that God does not send mistakes. Murder, yes I still say it’s murder, does not better society.

 

[Spudbynight]

Again, one must be born to have rights in the USA. Furthermore, from a scientific perspective, a fetus is a parasite. Why? Because the woman’s health is being compromised during pregnancy by the growth of the fetus. Look at any pregnant animal and this is evident. There are studies showing that male babies are weaker at birth because the female body attacks the XY chromosomes as foreign bodies.

NEWSFLASH - There IS a world outside the USA.

Abortion is legal in some countries, permitted in specific circumstances in some and banned completely in others.

I don’t live in the USA indeed that applies for the majority of humanity.

The legal status of abortion has no relevance to its morality. I find it rather disconcerting that someone who claims to be a Christian is trying to set the law of man over the law of God.

I have never heard any arguments that seek to deny the humanity of the unborn that can’t also be applied to those who have been born.

 

[ephesians4]

because in those cases, we are referring to people already born. Again, one must be born to have rights in the USA. Furthermore, from a scientific perspective, a fetus is a parasite…

“People already born” is still a non-human human argument.

“because in those cases, we are referring to communists. Again, one must be communist to have rights in our state. Furthermore, from a scientific perspective, a capitalist is a parasite…”

“because in those cases, we are referring to communists. Again, one must be a good scientific atheist to have rights in our state. Furthermore, from a scientific perspective, a priest is a parasite…”

“because in those cases, we are referring to human beings. Again, one must be a human being to have rights in our state. Furthermore, from a scientific perspective, a slave is a parasite…”

“because in those cases, we are referring to human beings. Again, one must be capable of work to have rights in our state. Furthermore, from a scientific perspective, a disabled person is a parasite…”

and the obvious example

“because in those cases, we are referring to human beings. Again, one must be human to have rights in our state. Furthermore, from a scientific perspective, a Jew is a parasite…”

Find another tack. If there is a serious ethical question that human beings are being murdered, the non-human human position will not do, must not be allowed to do and I submit that all of us as human beings are duty-bound to question and reject it wherever we see it.

That is whether you agree with it or not - if someone is telling you people are being murdered you need to immediately get out of your comfort zone and shine a light on your beliefs - and if the most compelling argument against that conclusion is the “non-human human”?

…

 

[Helena_K]

No Christian can be ‘pro choice’ and reasonably describe themselves as a Christian.

Approval of abortion is approval of murder, and that is fundamentally at odds with everything Christians are taught to believe.

There are no two ways about it.

What about the fact that abortion (at least in the early stages of pregnancy) has been legal in most Christian societies for most of human history. It was considered wrong, yes, but a relatively minor sin not worth illegalizing…and this is true even with the RCC itself.

Does that mean that most Christians in most of human history weren’t really Christian, including Catholics…including some past popes and even saints?

If not, where do you draw the line? That is to say, after what year specifically would a person being pro choice no longer be able to truthfully categorize themselves as a Christian?

I’m not defending abortion, to be clear, so please don’t muddle this by posing pro life arguments, because I am not arguing in favor of abortion.

I’m questioning if you would consider most past Christians, including popes and saints, not Christian if they were okay with legalized abortion…and if not, at what exact year did being pro choice mean you could not also be a true Christian?

 

[manualman]

Murder is a much different word from kill. As you know, there are times when killing is sanctioned in human society.

If “human society” is the standard you set for acceptable morality, then nearly anything is on the table. After all, there have been human societies in which cannibalism and human sacrifice to imagined gods were considered morally acceptable, GOOD even! Not so long ago in our own society, enslaving another human being was a perfectly respectable behavior (and fully sanctioned under law).

The above are why the standards of ‘human society’ are a poor protection against brutality and barbarism. What is needed is a moral code that is immune to such rationalizing and capricious redefinitions. As luck would have it, there is such a moral code: catholic moral theology. Even there, there ARE times when killing may be an unfortunate necessity, such as just war scenarios in which NOT resisting, even killing (if necessary to resist) an aggressor bent on evil intentions will result in a greater number of deaths. But those are the ONLY times when intentional killing is not murder. It simply is not credible to claim that a tiny unborn child is an evil agressor bent on mayhem and destruction.

You are to be commended for your sympathy for women in crisis pregnancies, but you have failed to comprehend the reality of the “solution” you propose. St. Paul famously described the way in which truth without love is a useless, empty thing at best (an unmerciful and brutal thing at worst). But equally dangerous is love divorced from truth. In such a case, love is demeaned to mere sentimentality and can enable horrifc evils without ever intending to. This latter is the danger you’ve befallen.

 

[Evania]

I’m questioning if you would consider most past Christians, including popes and saints, not Christian if they were okay with legalized abortion…and if not, at what exact year did being pro choice mean you could not also be a true Christian?

The answer to your questions are: How can you be a Christian if you don’t follow God’s law? God’s law doesn’t change simply because mankind has deemed something “legal”. God is eternal. He said Thou Shalt not Kill. He said that we are made in His Image and Likeness. He said that "Whatever you do for the least of my brothers and sisters, you do unto me. He also says that we are knitted together by His Hand in the womb, and are wonderfully and fearfully made. If you are willingly being disobedient to His laws by supporting the murder of the least of His brothers and sisters by destroying them in the womb while knowing they were made in the Image and Likeness of the God you are “following”, then it’s safe to assume that the individual is not following Christ. As a result, if a person is not following Christ, then how are they a Christian?

As for an exact year, I guess that would be different for each person. What year did you stop following God’s commands? I guess that would be your answer.

You claimed that most past Christians including Popes and Saints have supported abortion. Will you list a few Popes and Saints for us please?

 

[Helena_K]

I’m questioning if you would consider most past Christians, including popes and saints, not Christian if they were okay with legalized abortion…and if not, at what exact year did being pro choice mean you could not also be a true Christian?

The answer to your questions are: How can you be a Christian if you don’t follow God’s law? God’s law doesn’t change simply because mankind has deemed something “legal”. God is eternal. He said Thou Shalt not Kill. He said that we are made in His Image and Likeness. He said that "Whatever you do for the least of my brothers and sisters, you do unto me. He also says that we are knitted together by His Hand in the womb, and are wonderfully and fearfully made. If you are willingly being disobedient to His laws by supporting the murder of the least of His brothers and sisters by destroying them in the womb while knowing they were made in the Image and Likeness of the God you are “following”, then it’s safe to assume that the individual is not following Christ. As a result, if a person is not following Christ, then how are they a Christian?

As for an exact year, I guess that would be different for each person. What year did you stop following God’s commands? I guess that would be your answer.

You claimed that most past Christians including Popes and Saints have supported abortion. Will you list a few Popes and Saints for us please?

St Augustine, St Jerome, Pope Innocent III, St Thomas Acquinas, Pope Gregory XIV all stated that abortion was acceptable if done early in the pregnancy, before the quickening…that while perhaps sinful, it was not murder, and should be punished only with penance, not legal consequences.

There were also various time periods thorughout Catholic history when Catholic enclaves were held which stated that abortion was not murder if done early in the pregnancy (for instance, in the 4th and 7th century, 11th century, 12th century, 16th century), so one can assume that a Pope living during any of these time periods who did not work to undo these guidelines can be assumed to agree with them.

So is it your claim that St Augustine was not a Christian?

Also, what about back in the days when regular Catholics did not read the Bible themeselves, were uneducated and usually illiterate, and were utterly dependent on Church officials for their religious instruction? If I am an illiterate, uneducated peasant in the 700s, and my Church officials and even the pope tells me that abortion is not murder, how can you possibly hold me accountable for believing that to be true, and say I am not really a Christian? Even if you hold the Church officials accountable and say, they should have known better, and they had full access to the Bible and other religious texts…is it really fair to hold that same standard to some poor bloke who doesn’t know anything about God or Catholicism other than what he is taught by his Church officials?

What about time periods when the Church itself, at the highest levels, even the Pope, was in agreement that early stage abortion was not murder and should not be treated as a big deal or banned…does that mean that during those time periods, there essentially was no Catholic Church, that the Church at that time would have been a false Church and Catholicism was only reinstated once a new pope, like, for instance Pope Pious IX in the 1800s reversed this previous stance and said that abortion is murder and is to be banned even in early pregnancy?

 

[Evania]

Could you post any links to actual church documents where we can read this?

 

[Helena_K]

Could you post any links to actual church documents where we can read this?

Here’s a few:

St Augustine’s “On exodus”

St Jerome’s “Epistle”

St Thomas Acquinas “On the Truth of the Catholic Faith”

The Catholic Council of Vienne in 1312

Also I don’t think I mentioned that Pope Gregory XIV also stated abortion was only murder after the quickening. This was part of the Apostolic Constitution Effraenatam of Pope Sixtus V (1588).

For Pope Innocent III, I believe this was expressed in a decretal in 1211, when he was advising the appropriate punishment for a case of abortion. The Pope found that this was not murder because it had happened prior to the quickening. What is most interesting about this decretal is the language specifically said that the Church did not consider a fetus to be “alive” prior to the quickening.

 

[Slaney]

I’ll stick to the Catholic Church teaching on the subject !

CCC 2271** Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.** Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.

CCC 2272 **Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,” “by the very commission of the offense,” **and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

CCC 2322 From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a “criminal” practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of** excommunication **for this crime against human life.
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

CCC * Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. *. . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."

 

[Helena_K]

I’ll stick to the Catholic Church teaching on the subject !

CCC 2271** Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.** Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.

CCC 2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,” “by the very commission of the offense,” and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

CCC 2322 From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a “criminal” practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of** excommunication **for this crime against human life.
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

CCC * Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit*, “if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence.”

As far as I can tell, the Church has been consistant in classifying abortion as a sin.

But that is very different than saying it is murder and that the Church has a priority to prevent it. The issue I’m having is that there have been many points in Catholic history in which abortion, while still wrong, was classified as a sin that just required penance - it was treated as a sexual sin, not as murder. There have been times where the Church has outright said it is not murder, and in fact, the Church has issued papal decrees specifically stating that a fetus early in the pregnancy is not alive, and not ensouled.

I mean, I don’t think that past popes and saints thought this because they were evil, baby hating murderers. I think that they were honestly trying to understand the will of God, and that was their genuine understanding of things. Does being wrong, even about something very important, like abortion, immediately invalidate one’s faith? Does it invalidate the faith of every lay person who looked to that particular pope or saint for guidance?

I’m not arguing that such Church officials were correct in this. But I also don’t think it’s fair to say that they weren’t even Catholics, and that Catholics who lived under these Church officials at this time and depended on the information given to them by Church officials were not Catholics either, just because they made the “mistake” of believing what they were told by the Church.

I do not believe an illiterate 12th century peasant who does not think abortion is murder because the Church tells him it isn’t murder should then be considered a heretic and not a true Catholic. How was he supposed to come to a different conclusion, when he was utterly dependent on the Church hierarchy for his religious instruction?

What year did you stop following God’s commands? I guess that would be your answer.

But what if *you don’t know *that you aren’t following God’s commandments, because the Pope tells you that an early fetus isn’t a person, isn’t alive, and so killing them isn’t breaking a commandment, and you’ve been taught to defer to the Church hierarchy for your religious opinions?

 

[Slaney]

St Augustine, St Jerome, Pope Innocent III, St Thomas Acquinas, Pope Gregory XIV all stated that abortion was acceptable if done early in the pregnancy, before the quickening…that while perhaps sinful, it was not murder, and should be punished only with penance, not legal consequences.

There’s a rebuttal to the above HERE !

 

[davidn87]

If abortion is going to happen regardless of the law, then I want it to be safe, legal and rare. If you are against abortion, don’t have one.

But it can never be safe. And as long as abortionists know they can make money from it, it’ll never be rare.

And as for that second sentence…sigh.

And CaliLobo, veganism?

Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you; and as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything.

 

[manualman]

St Augustine, St Jerome, Pope Innocent III, St Thomas Acquinas, Pope Gregory XIV all stated that abortion was acceptable if done early in the pregnancy, before the quickening…that while perhaps sinful, it was not murder, and should be punished only with penance, not legal consequences.

I’m going to charitably assume that you’re merely misinformed rather than deliberately posting such despicable lies.

Abortion apologists constantly try this tactic and even some well meaning people fall for it. There is a HUGE difference between the question of “Is abortion morally acceptable?” and “When does God infuse the soul into a new human being?”

In every case, the abortion apologists are trying to turn honest inquiry and discussion on the latter question into doubts about the former. Let’s be clear: Abortion has ALWAYS been condemned as gravely sinful. Always. By every catholic of virtuous note in history. All.

What has been confusing is that science did not until recently know of sperm and egg. Some Early Fathers thought of the man’s ejaculant as “seed” and the woman’s womb as “soil.” In this faulty pre-scientific understanding of the mechanics, it was natural that there was some question and doubt about when and where the “seed” became a human being. It would take Augustine or Aquinas about a millisecond between understanding the modern science of sperm and egg to make the connection as to the time in which the change in substance occurs between “seed” and person. They just never had the chance because of the inadequate scientific understanding of reproduction in their day. See how it might be possible to wonder when the soul was infused in this model of reproduction? Is the seed already a new life inside the man? What is it about the womb that would instantly change the seed into a person? That sort of question.

But even back in their day, when they were unsure when the “seed” became ensouled, none of them tolerated abortion, condoned it or minimized its seriousness. They sometimes refrained from calling it murder (many EFs DID cal it murder) because they lacked the scientific knowledge to know that for sure. We don’t have any excuse for failing to call abortion what it is: Infanticide. Murder.

 

[fix]

Here’s a few:

St Augustine’s “On exodus”

St Jerome’s “Epistle”

St Thomas Acquinas “On the Truth of the Catholic Faith”

The Catholic Council of Vienne in 1312

Also I don’t think I mentioned that Pope Gregory XIV also stated abortion was only murder after the quickening. This was part of the Apostolic Constitution Effraenatam of Pope Sixtus V (1588).

For Pope Innocent III, I believe this was expressed in a decretal in 1211, when he was advising the appropriate punishment for a case of abortion. The Pope found that this was not murder because it had happened prior to the quickening. What is most interesting about this decretal is the language specifically said that the Church did not consider a fetus to be “alive” prior to the quickening.

So as science changed church teaching was refined not reversed. Murder is still murder.

 

[Helena_K]

There’s a rebuttal to the above HERE !

I haven’t looked into this entire thing…but it seems to be rather dishonest.

First, it lists a whole bunch Catholic leaders saying abortion is murder. I certainly agree that throughout the course of Catholic history, there have been those who have always maintained that life begins at conception and abortion is always murder.

This doesn’t invalidate the fact that there have been Church leaders who have said otherwise.

Also, a lot of the quotes in there just refer to the sinfulness of abortion, not classifying it as murder that should be outlawed. For instance:

Most importantly, the Catholic Church has never “approved of” or “condoned” abortion in any part of its history. It has never taught that the time of ‘ensoulment’ of the unborn child depended on its sex

This is a rather dishonest ploy because it moves the goal post. That the Church never approved or condoned abortion does not then mean that they always considered abortion murder, rather than a sin in the way that mastrubation or oral sex is a sin.

Also, this article is not a refutation. It lists claims about various Church officials who have said abortion is not murder if done before the quickening, then the site claims it is a lie, but never does anything to demonstrate how this is a lie.

So for instance, they quote St. Augustine talking about the sinfullness of abortion. I don’t think anyone claims that St. Augustine thinks abortion was not a sin…but that does not invalidate him ALSO saying:

"‘the law does not provide that the act (abortion) pertains to homicide, for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation.’” (Exodus 21.22).

Reading St. Augustine’s other writings, he sees sins such as lust and greed as just as evil as abortion and describes them with as much disdain. Yet I doubt that many people here would say “if you have ever had premartial sex, youa re not a Catholic.” or “If you do not think premarital sex should be illegal, you are not a Catholic,” in the way they would say “if you are in favor of legal abortion, you are not a Catholic.”

So in general, this article is just very poorly done. It only claims that Catholics have consistantly seen abortion as a sin, and I don’t think many claim otherwise. But many things are sinful that Catholics do not necessarily believe should be illegal (remember, pro choice is not necessarily an endorsement of abortion, it is an endorsement of its legality). It also establishes that Catholics have existed throughout history who have thought abortion was murder. But they in no way refute the fact that there have been Catholics, including popes, who have said otherwise.

Remember, pro choice does not mean “I love abortion and think there is nothing wrong with it.” Some people believe abortion is not wrong, sure. Some others think it is wrong, but not wrong to the point that it should be considered murder and illegal. I for one think that if you think abortion should be legal, you are pro choice, even if you think abortion is wrong or a sin. I think a Catholic theologian who said that abortion was a sin, but was not murder and should not be illegal is “pro choice” even if they have the opinion that abortion is wrong.

Now if you are defining pro choice as someone who thinks abortion is a sin, rather than someone who thinks abortion can be a sin but should be legal, then that would be a different story, and we would be working off of two different definitions of the phrase.

The Catholic Church has always taught that abortion is murder

 

[Helena_K]

Apologies my last post got cut off.

This article claims “The Catholic Church has always taught that abortion is murder.”

This is not correct. The Church has always taught that abortion is sin. Not that it is murder.

Gratian’s Decretum of 1140 stated “He is not a murderer who brings about abortion before the soul is in the body.” This opinion was sustained in The Decretals of Pope Gregory IX in 1234. These were documents on which the Church based canon law, so I do not see how you can claim that the Church always taught that abortion is murder.

So again, looking at a peasant in the 1200s. He is illiterate and uneducated and all he knows of God’s law comes from his parish priest. His parish priest has told him that while abortion is a grave sin, it is not murder, and while penance is appropriate, legal penalties are not. As a result, this peasant believes that while abortion is a sin, it is not so bad that it should be considered murder and illegalized. This would make him anti abortion, but still pro choice. The contention here is that, as such, he has no right to call himself a Catholic.

I disagree. I think the man is still a Catholic. I think St. Augustine was a Catholic. I think Pope Gregory IX was still a Catholic.

 

[Brendan_64]

If you are against abortion, don’t have one.

Tell that to the child that gets killed in the abortion.

You might as well say, “If you are against murder, then don’t murder anyone”.

All supporters of legalised abortion conveniently ignore the fact that a living human being is killed in the process. A living human being that has had no choice in the matter.

 

[Helena_K]

So as science changed church teaching was refined not reversed. Murder is still murder.

That’s not my point. Keep in mind, I am not claiming that abortion is not murder or trying to justify abortion today based on past Church teachings.

I am only claiming that I do not think not** believing that abortion is murder and as such should be illegal means one is not a Catholic, as is being claimed here. For if this is true, some of the foremost theologians in the history of the Church cannot be said to be Catholic. If one’s opinion is that past Church leaders who said abortion was not muder and shouldn’t be illegal can still be considered Catholic, but a person with this opinion today** cannot be considered Catholic, then the obvious question is: okay, where do you draw the line? At what point in history exactly did believing in legal abortion invalidate one’s Catholicism, if that was not the case in the past, but is the case today?

Remember the scope of this conversation is very narrow. I am not trying to address the ethics of abortion as a whole, only the idea that someone can’t be Catholic and be “pro choice” (defining pro choice as the belief that abortion should be legal and not defined as murder).

 

[Brendan_64]

I am only claiming that I do not think not** believing that abortion is murder and as such should be illegal means one is not a Catholic, as is being claimed here.

The following are from Canon Law.

Canon 1398: “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”

Canon 751: “Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

Canon 1364 §1: “an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”

To me the logical conclusion of the above is:

1. The Church is clear on it’s position that abortion is wrong, so much so that any individual who has one is in effect excommunicated.
2. So anyone who obstinately denies or has obstinate doubts about the grave sinfulness of abortion is guilty of heresy.
3. Anyone guilty of heresy is in effect excommunicated.

If in doubt one should, in the first instance, speak to a priest…