How to re-educate so that people will understand about abortion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter St_Francis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Drawmack said:
You are aware that most denominations don’t excommunicate right?
Click to expand...
Hope you’re not having a private exchange -
but clearly most denominations have dropped many teachings and practices of our Faith.
 
Drawmack said:
You are aware that most denominations don’t excommunicate right?
Click to expand...
You are aware that isn’t what I asked you, right?

If not, let me ask again, what are the clear teachings of your denomination on this matter?

…and if they don’t excommunicate anyone, does that mean that they really don’t care one way or the other, ( in your opinion, of course.)
 
Drawmack said:
I would like to point out some things here. The definition of excommunication says that it is for particularly grave sins. The Catholic Encyclopedia says that the punishment must fit the crime and excommunication is the most severe punishment – in other words, excommunication is only handed out for the most severe crimes.

Jesus said, "“But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to have a large millstone tied around your neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea.”

From what I have just stated is it clear that excommunication is not related to the clarity of the sin. This is a defense that you, or someone else, made up. According to official Catholic teachings excommunication has to do with the gravity of the sin and not its clarity.

Also, according to Jesus’ words murder is not the worst sin. Causing a child to sin is the worst sin. I think it is easily arguable that abortion does not cause a child to sin, unless dieing is a sin. Yes, abortion is murder and murder is a sin, but abortion does not cause the child to sin. However, molesting a child directly causes the child to sin because of the things they think when they are being raped. This is not even to mention the chances that the child will become sexually promiscuous, or the number of women in the adult entertainment industry who were molested. So, according to Jesus raping a child is worse than murdering a child – according to the Catholic Church murdering a child is worse than raping them – I can’t reconcile that.
Click to expand...
You know, every time you post, you prove my point about the general understanding of the evil of child abuse and general confusion about the evil of abortion.
So, the Catholic Church has circulated and publicized his photo so everyone would know who he is they way they circulated and publicized the photo of the mother and doctors? The Catholic Church publicly condemned him so everyone would know that he is to be considered anathema the way they did the mother and doctors? Honestly, I’m surprised they didn’t just move him to a different parish a couple hundred miles away.
Click to expand...
Where did the Catholic Church circulate and publicize the photos of the mother and the doctors?
Can you get an abortion without being pregnant?
Click to expand...
Your desperation is showing here. Pregnancy is not the root *cause *of abortion. Not wanting to be pregnant is the root cause of abortion.
The Catholic Church clearly teaches that aborting a child is excommunicable and raping a child is not. The Catholic Church clearly teaches that excommunication is for **certain of **the most severe sins. I am not saying they teach that is it alright, I’m saying they condone raping a child by not being as astute on it as they are on other things, like pulling the pope’s hair.
Click to expand...
Certain of… which you keep leaving out of the quote which *you *originally quoted, so I put it back in. *Certain of… detrimental to Christian society. *

Drawmack, we are just going around in circles. I have done my best to show the Catholic point of view about this issue. I think that the work you are doing with workshops is excellent–that was a wonderful idea and a great way of getting the news out. However, I really don’t have time to continue to repeat my replies to you, and I would suggest that your comments are not really showing those who hold your point of view in a good light.

I am very sorry that you chose to leave the Catholic Church. Being an institution populated by humans, it has all sorts of problems, but being an institution founded by Christ, it contains all the Truth He has given us. Neither you nor I would find another institution with fewer problems, but no other has what the Church has in terms of goodness.
 
Drawmack said:
I am not saying they teach that is it alright, I’m saying they condone raping a child by not being as astute on it as they are on other things, like pulling the pope’s hair.
Click to expand...
I had initially missed this little tidbit of information.
But now I have to wonder, what church document was the ‘pulling the Pope’s hair’ pulled from?

Is this another lie?
 
St_Francis said:
You know, every time you post, you prove my point about the general understanding of the evil of child abuse and general confusion about the evil of abortion.

Where did the Catholic Church circulate and publicize the photos of the mother and the doctors?

Your desperation is showing here. Pregnancy is not the root *cause *of abortion. Not wanting to be pregnant is the root cause of abortion.

Certain of… which you keep leaving out of the quote which *you *originally quoted, so I put it back in. *Certain of… detrimental to Christian society. *

Drawmack, we are just going around in circles. I have done my best to show the Catholic point of view about this issue. I think that the work you are doing with workshops is excellent–that was a wonderful idea and a great way of getting the news out. However, I really don’t have time to continue to repeat my replies to you, and I would suggest that your comments are not really showing those who hold your point of view in a good light.

I am very sorry that you chose to leave the Catholic Church. Being an institution populated by humans, it has all sorts of problems, but being an institution founded by Christ, it contains all the Truth He has given us. Neither you nor I would find another institution with fewer problems, but no other has what the Church has in terms of goodness.
Click to expand...
**

St. Francis, again you have been very clear and charitable in your posts.
Pointing out the fact that the poster has left the Church is quite enlightening to me.
It’s a fact that explains his inability/unwillingness to grasp your points.**
 
vz71 said:
I had initially missed this little tidbit of information.
But now I have to wonder, what church document was the ‘pulling the Pope’s hair’ pulled from?

Is this another lie?
Click to expand...
Assaulting the Pope is excommunicable. Pulling someone’s hair is assaulting them. Thus, pulling the Pope’s hair is excommunicable.
 
I thought the most interesting offense was reading a book the Church didn’t like.
 
The original thread is to re-educate about abortion. The discussion of excommunication seems beyond that.

I have not read all 54 pages, so perhaps, or not, I address prior comments.

Re-education should include teaching the SCIENCE of life. The fertilized egg, at the moment of conception, contains ALL the DNA and chromosomes of a SEPARATE HUMAN BEING. Separate from the mother, separate from the father. Yes, this new life is alive is totally dependent on the mother for upward to 40 weeks. But, it is alive and it is growing.

Re-education should include a detailed time line of the development of this new life. The time line should include pictures of developing babies, NOT of aborted babies which are shocking and offensive and tend to shut down positive communication.

Re-education should include the role and responsibility of the father. We should not let the pro-abortion people get away with ignoring the father’s responsibilities.

Re-education should include the “GOLDEN RULE.” We all know that each baby should have a loving mother and father, who are married. So respect requires us to FIRST be married, so that any baby that results from sex will have a loving mother and father. Those of us who have that should ensure we do the same for our children. Those of us who did not have two loving parents, should know what that costs us and see to it we do not cheat our children.

Re-education should include empathy. In a more diplomatic way, the blunt direct message should be, “Aren’t you glad your mother did not abort you?”

Re-education should include teaching that sex is the highest form of communication between two people. It ought to be reserved for that special someone who has shown worthiness at all other lower levels of communication. Sleeping around is out. No self-respect in that. No love in that. Risk of disease and unwanted pregnancy, and loss of reputation in that. Sleeping around makes it much harder to gudie our own children when we finally have them and they are coming of age.

Re-education should include teaching the need for personal responsibility for all our actions. We are required to accept responsibility for car accidents and damage to others from our carelessness. Given the above points, we cannot expect to released from the responsibilty for the children we create.

Re-education should teach that life is indeed a gift from God. We should not reject God’s gift. Again, given the above points, we would be in proper position to accept God’s gift of new life. True love is not selfish or irresponsible.

I know some or all of this is taught, but much of it is NOT in the spotlight. We need to appeal to the better nature of MEN and women. Angry confrontation won’t win the war for life.
 
GratefulFred said:
The original thread is to re-educate about abortion. The discussion of excommunication seems beyond that…

I know some or all of this is taught, but much of it is NOT in the spotlight. We need to appeal to the better nature of MEN and women. Angry confrontation won’t win the war for life.
Click to expand...
Fred, you have made some very good points. Another thing you have made me re-consider is the definition of the type of rhetoric some people are against. I have advocated not “toning down the rhetoric” in this thread, but you have made me think that perhaps the two sides of that little side discussion were talking about different things :o so I will have to be more careful in the future.

Drawmack’s program-- a scientifically-based 2-day workshop for pregnant women to cover her state’s informed consent laws–seems like the most feasible suggestion: I have to admit that mine were more like wishes than possibilities! And your suggestions towards an outline of what such a program could contain are great. Maybe interested people could work with an organization like Priests for Life to develop something like this and volunteers could be trained to present the program to schools and churches. I think that this would be a great project.

I know that some abortionists have said that they have presentations in schools, and I wonder if PP does too. I think that any school system which allows them in should allow a program like this (stripped of religious content, of course 😦 ). Private schools and churches would probably be very amenable.
 
St_Francis said:
I think that any school system which allows them in should allow a program like this (stripped of religious content, of course 😦 ). Private schools and churches would probably be very amenable.
Click to expand...
Private schools and churches won’t have to strip the religious content.🙂
 
vz71 said:
Private schools and churches won’t have to strip the religious content.🙂
Click to expand...
Personally, I think the message can reach more people if it does not have a Christian, or religious, focus. Not, that I (personally) am against a Christian based program; I simply think that one without a religious focus could be given at a broader range of venues.

However, from the way it was laid out there could be a two day program that covers all the science and all the social programs and then a third day that is Christian focused. Then in non-Christian venues it is a two day workshop and in a Christian venue it is a three day workshop.
 
Drawmack said:
Personally, I think the message can reach more people if it does not have a Christian, or religious, focus. Not, that I (personally) am against a Christian based program; I simply think that one without a religious focus could be given at a broader range of venues.

However, from the way it was laid out there could be a two day program that covers all the science and all the social programs and then a third day that is Christian focused. Then in non-Christian venues it is a two day workshop and in a Christian venue it is a three day workshop.
Click to expand...
If I were being paid by the number of people I converted to the ati-abortion side, I would follow the 2-day presentation with one for Catholics, one for Muslims, one for Hindus, one for Muslims, one for atheists, …
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top