How can pro-choice Catholics seriously call themselves practicing Catholics?

[VanitasVanitatum]

Okay then.

 

[Aquinas11]

I’m simply asking for consistency

A pro-abortion, “practicing Catholic” who is asking for consistency?

 

[Benjinho]

Benjinho:

Exact date of conception is usually difficult if not impossible to know, whereas date of birth is a visible, easily identifiable date and time. The issue falls to pragmatism, not to whether a person prior to birth or at conception should be considered the same as a newborn or child.

Unless you’re having sex constantly, it’s not hard to pin down the day of conception. At least for most people. And in some cultures, no one really knows what day they were born because it’s not seen as a significant event. So there’s no reason not to celebrate “conception day.”

As far as personhood arguments go, a toenail clipping or even most living human cells don’t have the capacity to form a baby and his/her placenta in the womb.

Oooo…sciency stuff. Actually, you can pretty much take any cell (they all contain the same DNA!) and clone a human being. So sure, a toenail clipping will do just fine. And if you reply that it hasn’t been done, that’s irrelevant–it COULD be done, if not now, in the future.

And the blastocyst that fails to implant is essentially a person that died before having the chance the grow, the same as a miscarriage.

I’m going to go back to this point, because it shows the inconsistency of the pro-life position. It’s estimated that 50-80% of fertilized cells fail to implant themselves on the wall of the womb. They are flushed out. “miscarriage” if you like. But the pro-life position is that these cells are “human beings” complete with rights (although I’m at a loss to find any) and a soul. And yet where are the funeral Masses, the burials, etc.? I’ve made this point multiple times before, and some of my good buddies here have just dismissed it with a wave of the hand…impractical, etc.

1. The conception date is an estimate regardless of how likely that estimate is. Date of birth is not an estimate, it’s known as a fact. Cut and dry.
2. Toe nail clippings, skin cells (at least the most superficial layer), and hair cells do not contain any DNA, although they are derived from skin cells that do, the DNA and such is degraded before they become “tough.” Moreover, induced pluripotency (i.e. stem cells that can change into any cell in the human body) is currently unable to go as far as clone entire human beings. As you said, it may be able to in the future, but that wouldn’t be the natural state of the cells, it’d be induced artificially, whereas a human zygote is able to grow in utero naturally.
   If induced pluripotent stem cells ever do come that far to form a human zygote, they’d be considered people as the zygotes formed during IVF are, most of which die. That’s part of the reason IVF is consider immoral by the Catholic church.
3. It’s impossible to know when such zygotes have formed in women and failed to implant because pregnancy tests rely on hormones released after implantation to maintain the placenta. That’s why there aren’t any funerals, not because the zygotes are not considered people.

 

[Horton]

And of course as I just pointed out, 50-80% of NATURALLY conceived cells are not viable.

And that has nothing to do with abortion. It certainly has nothing to do with whether the “cells” are a human being or not.

I am a life-long practicing Catholic. I go to Mass every Sunday. I take Communion. And I am pro-choice.

Does your priest know you support abortion? You do know abortion is an intrinsic evil and cooperation with it is grave matter?

 

[Benjinho]

Erikaspirit16:

And of course as I just pointed out, 50-80% of NATURALLY conceived cells are not viable.

And that has nothing to do with abortion. It certainly has nothing to do with whether the “cells” are a human being or not.

This point is more of a philosophical one trying to point out an inconsistency in pro-lifers’ logic, but I have cleared that up because no one can know when this actually happens and thus do not hold funerals for these lost conceptions

 

[Horton]

I do know of a couple who did have a burial for a recent miscarriage.

 

[Thorolfr]

What you are calling a “Human being” - most people call a “person”. So to get our terminology straight:

Human life = biological and scientific. Science knows when human life begins. At conception.
What you call “Human being” = Person = a philosophical concept NOT scientific. Science CAN’T determine when personhood begins, it is arbitrary based on your own ideas of what a “person” is. And there will never be enough consensus to make it mean anything.

I find this response a little maddening. If someone here in CAF says, for example, that homosexuality is “natural” because it occurs in the natural world and has been observed and documented there by scientists in many other species besides humans, they will be told that this is irrelevant because that “natural”, the kind that exists in the natural world described by scientists, is unimportant when talking about humans. The important “natural” is the one used in the philosophy called “natural law” (which is not scientific) where homosexuality would be “unnatural”. They will say that it is “natural law” which tells us what reality is. So, in that case, a particular philosophy trumps science as the measuring stick used to make decisions about whether something is right or wrong, natural or unnatural. But in this discussion, it is science that is supposedly most important, not philosophy.

 

[Moose]

There is NO SUCH THING as a devout, loyal, faithful Roman Catholic who is pro-choice.

Your position is delusional. In addition, it brings great scandal to the Church and for that there is remarkable guilt.

You cannot change the Tradition, history, theology, FAITH of the Church to meet your less than perfect expectations.

This stand is prototypically problematic and cannot be excused, explained, exonerated.

“Pro-choice Catholic “ - it’s actually a farcical claim.

Good luck - I shall pray for your soul. May others do likewise…

 

[Thorolfr]

Science IS reality. Denying science makes a debate not worth participating.

But elsewhere here in CAF, I’ve been told that the philosophical system called “natural law” is reality.

 

[graciew]

Erika, my info comes in Spanish…I do not mind sharing my sources if you wish to translate them.
And it is precisely the country you cited where I come from and it is the 40 you cited that I mentioned ( 43 in 2016) that included all sorts of spontaneous abortions,…
Of course each person is important. That is why we are trying our best to improve so that mom and baby are safe and sound always.But we had this out of the blue national debate for at best say less than 5 or10?cases … Was that really a serious flaw in our Public Health System or some sort of abandonment of women? No… We can improve always, and we have areas where this is necessary.
We had our focus on femicide, which was something to work hard about, but then here came the stampede out of nowhere…

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

The converse would be that the secular world can only use philosophy to justify abortion or science to justify homosexuality.

 

[Thorolfr]

This point is more of a philosophical one trying to point out an inconsistency in pro-lifers’ logic, but I have cleared that up because no one can know when this actually happens and thus do not hold funerals for these lost conceptions

Since up to two thirds of embryos fail to thrive and develop, if we could p(name removed by moderator)oint exactly when all these millions and millions or even billions of embryos died, could we really have funerals for all of them?

 

[Erikaspirit16]

A human being isn’t a stage of development.

On this we agree. Which is why as soon as you say “human being” a whole host of logical consequences follow from that–but are either ignored or denied by people on this thread. But of course we mean totally different things by “human being.” By the way, feel free to go back to my earlier post, #172 I think—

“Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God”

Here is a case where the Church is trying to explain what a “human being” is–and of course it’s nothing like the pro-life definition. And you can legitimately say “Well, wait a minute–they weren’t trying to define what I mean by “human life” when I’m discussing embryos.” And they weren’t. I’m sure it didn’t enter their minds (although it should have…once again, we have cherry picking and inconsistency). But my point in citing that is that although the Church clearly says “human life” (I’ll leave it in quotation marks) begins at conception, they don’t expand on that. What is “human life”? What is “conception”? And when they DO issue a statement about human beings as the image of God, what they describe is what I would describe–not what the pro-life supporters would describe.

 

[Benjinho]

Benjinho:

This point is more of a philosophical one trying to point out an inconsistency in pro-lifers’ logic, but I have cleared that up because no one can know when this actually happens and thus do not hold funerals for these lost conceptions

Since up to two thirds of embryos fail to thrive and develop, if we could p(name removed by moderator)oint exactly when all these millions and millions or even billions of embryos died, could we really have funerals for all of them?

Probably not realistically, but maybe a collective funeral like one would have for a mass grave of unidentifiable bodies.

 

[prayerrider]

An acorn is not an oak tree. A tadpole is not a frog. A fertilized chicken egg is not a chicken

All of those examples are immature forms of the exact same species as as their adult forms–and have the same essence. A human zygote, embryo, or fetus are immature, developing forms with the exact same essence as the adult human being. Same species, same essence.

• To kill a human being is homicide.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Since up to two thirds of embryos fail to thrive and develop, if we could p(name removed by moderator)oint exactly when all these millions and millions or even billions of embryos died, could we really have funerals for all of them?

Read my earlier post today about Pence (just search on “Pence”). Indiana passed exactly such a law in 2016–and that’s exactly what they did. Instead of treating the remains as “medical waste,” the law requires such remains to be buried. And of course they can only do that for remains that are identified.

Benjinho claims to have “cleared up” my (and others) objections about consistency of position, but of course he (?) did no such thing. For example, at the point in the Mass where you pray for the dead, they could throw a line in there about “and all the human beings who are the victims of miscarriages this week,” but of course I don’t think anyone does that. So you’ve got a contradiction: on the one had, pro-lifers are saying “These miscarriages are all human beings” and on the other hand they’re not treating them like human beings.

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

Because it [birthday vs. conception day] has no relevance to this debate.

Scientific is not reality? LOL.

No relevance? I’m simply saying that as soon as you say “A human being begins at conception” you have a whole host of logical consequences that flow from that statement. You (and others…) are acting as if you can make that statement in isolation, with no regard for logical consequences. In other words, you are not being consistent.

If you truly being the beginning of each human life begins at conception, that should be an event worth celebrating. And a birthday is just one of a long series of “developmental” events and relatively inconsequential.

As for science, I’m all for it. But I’m not for taking bits and pieces because I agree with those and rejecting other bits and pieces because I disagree (on religious grounds–not scientific). You can’t pick and choose your scientific facts. And pro-life advocates do just that.

You’re implying nobody celebrates when they get pregnant? Really?

Whether you’re “for science” or not isn’t relevant. It’s science! Doesn’t change just because you or I may not like the facts that science shows us. And I’m not picking or choosing anything, I said human life begins at conception because it does. Science says so. This nullifies most abortion rights arguments right in their bud.

Perfectly understandable why pro choicers thus turn to personhood as the foundation of their argument because the science doesn’t back them up but personhood is out of the domain of science so it works for them.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

and all the human beings who are the victims of miscarriages this week,”

Are there special shout outs for other specific types of death?

“These miscarriages are all human beings” and on the other hand they’re not treating them like human beings.

You mentioned Pence passing a law for them in the same post.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

I said human life begins at conception because it does. Science says so.

I guess you didn’t read my post about what a nebulous concept “conception” is earlier this morning. Have a look.

And although you kindly defined what you meant by “personhood,” I am still bewildered by your statements that somehow–without explaining how–you just dismiss those arguments. If something is a “human being” that means to me that it has certain characteristics, rights, abilities, etc. We could debate exactly what those might be, and that would be fine, but as far as I can see the pro-life argument is simply that this blob of cells has unique human DNA (after a day or so…) and that makes it a “human being” and thus has precisely one right: the right to life. That implies the blob of cells has the same status as any other human being. Sorry, I don’t buy it.

 

[HopkinsReb]

edwest211:

You have made no point.

The point is that it isn’t at all strange to think that black neighborhoods suffer in innumerable ways. They’re saddled with inefficient infrastructure. Is it really any wonder that abortion clinics target them? Is it really that surprising? It shouldn’t be.

Not to mention that the founder of Planned Parenthood wanted to weed out black folks.