Is abortion ever justified?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bobzills
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yet what ever the scenario, abortion is still the killing of a human, an innocent human at that. If mercy and justice were to truly prevail in any scenario, case, or condition, we would find that life would have been respected, from the very beginning.
Yes. The killing of an innocent child is wrong. And sometimes people try to excuse this because of intent. But I don;t see where in many cases intent would justify the killing of a child. Take for example, the game of Russian roulette. When a person spins the cartridge and puts the revolver to his head, his intent is to show off how courageous he is, not to commit suicide. But his intent does not excuse the immorality of the act of playing Russian roulette. Similarly, with taking the artificial birth control pills. A lot of people excuse them because they say that their intent is not to kill a human being. But it has been shown that most of the artificial birth control pills have an abortifacient effect. That being so, if the pill is taken for a long period of time, it will unfortunately have the effect of aborting a young child. It is like playing Russian roulette, where perhaps the first time you are not dead, but your luck will not hold out forever. Now can this killing of a young child in the form of an embryo or can the playing of the game of Russian roulette with a human child be justified on the basis of the intent of the mother? I don;t see the justification for this?
 
If abortion is to be avoided the ‘no abortion law’ has to be socially and structurally protected. If you were the nine year old Brazil girl pregnant with twins of rape by her step father how easy is it to have faith? Besides why do miscarriages occur? does God abort babies? Have we made an idol of this temporary life? Abortion can never be justified but I doubt that every baby must be born at all costs, lamentable and unjustifiable but part of our imperfect world.
You had me agreeing w/ you until the end…

The 9 year old girl was victimized - that’s true. The perpetrator should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, that does not in any way mean the resulting children should have to suffer death by abortion. Two wrongs don’t make a right in any scenario that I’m familiar with. Now that little girl has had both her right to choose her first sexual encounter (supposed to be when she’s married) as well as her right to have her first children taken away from her prematurely w/o her being capable of complete consent (since she’s only 9, she does not legally have the ability to give consent to my knowledge anywhere in the world). So in other words, she’s been victimized twice.

Equating miscarriage to God aborting babies is like equating natural death to God murdering people. Ridiculous! :eek: People die - that’s part of life. In a way God willed us all to die when He expelled Adam & Eve from the Garden. There’s no guarantee of how long any of us will live. However, just b/c everyone will eventually die is no reason to prematurely end their lives at our personal whim or even for good reason.

I take great offense when someone equates miscarriage w/ abortion. I realize the medical term for miscarriage is spontaneous abortion, however, the medical term for abortion is elective abortion. The spontaneous means there is no known reason why it occurred. The elective portion means that someone chose to abort. There is a HUGE difference in the two. As someone who has had 4 miscarriages, I have not chosen to kill any of my children. It happened for reasons I don’t fully understand (medically & spiritually), but I know that God is a loving Father, so it was not in vain. To have my pain reduced to equality w/ chosing to kill unborn children is wrong, hurtful, and patently ignorant.

God also sent His Son to redeem us and save us from lasting death. While we’re not supposed to be completely fulfilled here on Earth, we are supposed to be living our lives here to the Glory of God. How can we glorify God when we’re killing innocent members of our community/family? Jesus charged us to live our lives so that we would be good examples for our fellow humans. How good of an example is it when we’re killing innocents?
 
I agree but, what if the baby is going to be murdered any way? Her husband, the father of the unborn child threatens to kill the mother if she doesn’t have an abortion. The pro-life mother has no way to get away from the father of her child. Therefore, the mother is given the option of killing her baby or her dieing and the baby dieing as a result. Either way the baby is going to be murdered, directly or indirectly. What is she to do? What would you do if you were in her shoes? I know this is extremely rare, but it has happened. Just for the record, I’m not trying to say abortion is OK by posting this. I am and always have been pro-life.
I completely understand this situation and the woman/mother should and must do all she can to keep her child safe, that means not killing him. I know it is not always easy, but it is possible. I am a result of such a situation, my father/ my mothers husband, raped her and upon finding out that she was pregnant he threatened to kill her and me if she didn’t get rid of me.

And yet here I am. Loving wife, home school mom of 2 beautiful children and mother to three beautiful children in heaven(my personal army of saints), volunteer and most importantly ALIVE thanks to my mothers strength to over come. 🙂
 
Regarding the kidnapping, human dialysis machine scenario: though the example may be ridiculous or impossible from a scientific perspective, it is valid as a philosophical hypothetical. So simply saying it is impossible in practical terms is not a sufficient answer. However as many have pointed out, there are clear differences between the two situations (killing one’s own baby vs. forced servitude) that can be discovered through natural reason alone. The problem for me is that natural reason, or our human sense of justice, seems to be the pervasive argument in all of these posts.
All a real Catholic needs to understand is the notion that the purpose of our sexuality is to share in God’s plan of Creation, and that this new life, regardless of the circumstances of its conception, is ordained by God. We are thus obligated to cooperate with God in such obvious manifestations of His will. The kidnapped woman on the other hand has suffered an injustice. HOWEVER, since her submission to this injustice provides a corporal benefit to another (a corporal work of Mercy), she would obtain favor from God in her submission (though she suffers injustice). It is like the case of one who throws himself in front of the bus to save a child. Failure to act is not a mortal sin. However the action, a perfect act of Charity, covers many sins, can even substitute for the Sacrament of Penance. This is the Catholic view of the world. Let’s not be hung up on our rights. Rather let’s look for opportunities to be Charitable.
 
Not true, the Church does allow contraception in certain cases.
usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/ecfact.shtml
Not true. The Catholic Church, that is to say the Church founded by Christ, has taught with constant fidelity to sacred scripture and tradition, that the primary purpose of marriage is for procreation and the rearing of children. Married couples are to trust in providence as they cooperate with God. Anything to the contrary is essntially Onanism.

The US Catholic Bishops have a lot of wierd ideas, but they are not the Magisterium of Holy Mother Church.
 
You had me agreeing w/ you until the end…

The 9 year old girl was victimized - that’s true. The perpetrator should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, that does not in any way mean the resulting children should have to suffer death by abortion. Two wrongs don’t make a right in any scenario that I’m familiar with. Now that little girl has had both her right to choose her first sexual encounter (supposed to be when she’s married) as well as her right to have her first children taken away from her prematurely w/o her being capable of complete consent (since she’s only 9, she does not legally have the ability to give consent to my knowledge anywhere in the world). So in other words, she’s been victimized twice.
Well, I agree with you. But, correct me if I am wrong, in the 9 year old’s case I cited, it was medically stated that she was facing impending death from the pregnancy because of not being fully developed to carry twins. What would you do if you were her mother?

Also it is replete in the old testament where God commanded whole towns to be destroyed, the catholic church has engaged bloody crusades, we all support our countries to possess armies and wage war and we lament the loss of innocent lives but do not say armies should be disbanded.

I say NO to abortion, but if a young woman on welfare is handed $600 to terminate her pregnancy since she cannot afford to pay medical and living expenses for her child, does not know where to turn in an individualistic society and the government does not want more welfare children, then as Catholics we have to do more than insisting on laws and excommunicating people. If a woman’s life is in danger because of her pregnancy I would respect her choice and lament with her if she chose to let the child go rather than both, for in our faith, the child goes back to God.

You see, I disagree when it is made a matter of black or white for there are very many grey areas. I think everyone who says NO to abortion should have a corresponding duty to fund a pregnant woman in danger of abortion, to have and raise her baby maybe through pro life organizations that can identity and reach out to them and as well stick out their heads for those who are persecuted and detained for helping women detour from abortions.
 
Not true. The Catholic Church, that is to say the Church founded by Christ, has taught with constant fidelity to sacred scripture and tradition, that the primary purpose of marriage is for procreation and the rearing of children. Married couples are to trust in providence as they cooperate with God. Anything to the contrary is essntially Onanism.

The US Catholic Bishops have a lot of wierd ideas, but they are not the Magisterium of Holy Mother Church.
But the bishops have asid that contraception is allowed in certain circumstances and I don;t see where the Vatican has excommunicated any of them or declared any of them to be heretics. The duty of the Catholic Bishops is to teach, rule and sanctify, and it is my understanding that the bishops teaching in unison as they have done requires the full assent of faith of a Catholic even though their teaching is not up to the level of the extraordinary and universal magisterium of the Church, still it is part of the ordinary magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church and requires our assent.
Here is what the bishops have declared: “Hospitals can offer rape victims treatments that are truly contraceptive and address their other needs with compassion and respect.”
usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/ecfact.shtml
 
But the bishops have asid that contraception is allowed in certain circumstances and I don;t see where the Vatican has excommunicated any of them or declared any of them to be heretics. The duty of the Catholic Bishops is to teach, rule and sanctify, and it is my understanding that the bishops teaching in unison as they have done requires the full assent of faith of a Catholic even though their teaching is not up to the level of the extraordinary and universal magisterium of the Church, still it is part of the ordinary magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church and requires our assent.
Here is what the bishops have declared: “Hospitals can offer rape victims treatments that are truly contraceptive and address their other needs with compassion and respect.”
usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/ecfact.shtml
But a Catholic is obligated to know the tenants of his faith and to identify Heresies, with out reliance on office holders. Were this not the case, Aryanism and the subsequent Heresy coming out of the East regarding the Mary’s title as Mother of God could not have been defeated. The quote from the Bishop’s you use is really tantamount to advocating Abortion (the morning after pill), and not contraception as usually understood. Any seven year old with a Catholic sense should be able to see the problem with this and challenge them to their faces. The officials of the Vaitican, including the Popes, have contradicted the timeless teaching of the Magisterium over 200 time on almost every issue central to the faith.
 
But a Catholic is obligated to know the tenants of his faith and to identify Heresies, with out reliance on office holders. Were this not the case, Aryanism and the subsequent Heresy coming out of the East regarding the Mary’s title as Mother of God could not have been defeated. The quote from the Bishop’s you use is really tantamount to advocating Abortion (the morning after pill), and not contraception as usually understood. Any seven year old with a Catholic sense should be able to see the problem with this and challenge them to their faces. The officials of the Vaitican, including the Popes, have contradicted the timeless teaching of the Magisterium over 200 time on almost every issue central to the faith.
I don’t believe what you are advocating since according to my understanding, the teachings of the bishops fall under the category of the ordinary magisterium of the Catholic Church and Catholics are bound to submit their intellect and will to the teachings of the ordinary magisterium.
 
I think everyone who says NO to abortion should have a corresponding duty to fund a pregnant woman in danger of abortion, to have and raise her baby maybe through pro life organizations that can identity and reach out to them and as well stick out their heads for those who are persecuted and detained for helping women detour from abortions.
Next time you are in my state, PM me, I will be happy to introduce you to the wonderful people who do all these things and more.
 
I don’t believe what you are advocating since according to my understanding, the teachings of the bishops fall under the category of the ordinary magisterium of the Catholic Church and Catholics are bound to submit their intellect and will to the teachings of the ordinary magisterium.
This is true provided they’re not heretics. But the laymen who opposed Nestorious (the head of the largest See in the Eastern Empire) were praised by subsequent Popes and Councils as having acted correctly. Aquinas also wrote of the duty to correct one’s superior in matters of obvious Heresy. Satan was the head of all the Angels. Michael, his subordinate, opposed him. If a dogmatic matter has been previously defined, it cannot be changed. It matters not who tries to change it, even a Pope falls from his office if he preaches Heresy. No one has to charge him, he simply excommunicates himself. You have to know your Faith.
 
Well, I agree with you. But, correct me if I am wrong, in the 9 year old’s case I cited, it was medically stated that she was facing impending death from the pregnancy because of not being fully developed to carry twins. What would you do if you were her mother?
I would work w/ other doctors to save both my child & grand-children if at all humanly possible. We know nothing of the doctor(s) who indicate she was incapable of carrying the twins. There have been many instances of young girls (this age & younger) carrying to term w/ no long term damage. There are conservative methods that can be used in almost every circumstance - regardless of whether that’s the popular method or not. Many women are told they will die if they carry a pregnancy, but miraculously not only survive, but produce more children. Many women are told they are ‘perfect’ for carrying children only to die of an unforseen complication. Life is a risk. I’d much rather know I did nothing to kill an innocent than kill an innocent on a chance it might produce the death of another.
Also it is replete in the old testament where God commanded whole towns to be destroyed, the catholic church has engaged bloody crusades, we all support our countries to possess armies and wage war and we lament the loss of innocent lives but do not say armies should be disbanded.
God knows all and is all, so He has every right to wipe out a town, nation, the world. He made it all and its His to destroy or cultivate. I’d have to say that the instances in the bible that God metted out complete destruction were exceptions - not the rule. Wasn’t it Abraham (I can’t remember) that argued that if there were just 5 righteous men the town should be saved? Didn’t God relent? His ultimate goal, perfected through Christ, is to save us from ourselves and our sinful ways. With Christ, God fulfilled His promise & desires us to partake of His new covenant.

The Crusades & whatever bloody history you want to charge the Church with doesn’t really hold water to me. Times were different then. It wasn’t just the Church killing people for the fun of it. There was a purpose and an intent that varied significantly from killing an innocent on purpose.

Just war is entirely different from abortion. The only purpose of abortion is to kill an innocent. In just war, the innocent that suffer are collateral damage. Their deaths are not intended by anyone (except sometimes the crazy extremists).
I say NO to abortion, but if a young woman on welfare is handed $600 to terminate her pregnancy since she cannot afford to pay medical and living expenses for her child, does not know where to turn in an individualistic society and the government does not want more welfare children, then as Catholics we have to do more than insisting on laws and excommunicating people. If a woman’s life is in danger because of her pregnancy I would respect her choice and lament with her if she chose to let the child go rather than both, for in our faith, the child goes back to God.
What about the woman though? Shouldn’t we offer her assistance that doesn’t endanger her immortal soul? Especially as Catholics, we should show her compassion and give her aid. Its not the government’s job to give everyone $$ and make everything peachy. Its the government’s job to protect us. However, giving the woman $$ for an abortion does more than just terminate her pregnancy. It can (and often does) lead to more behaviors that will land the woman in the same position over & over again. As Catholics we have numerous groups available to support women in crisis pregnancies. As Americans (I don’t know your nationality, but I’m an American), we have a duty to help our brethren. However, American politicians would rather destroy the next generation on the chance of not having to pay out as much $$ in the future, without looking at the consequences. American politicians would rather put harsh limits on the pro-life movement’s crisis pregnancy centers than help them save lives (both of mothers & the unborn). American politicians would rather give their $$ to Planned Parenthood to hand out more condoms, bc, and abortions, as opposed to trying to get people out of the gutters (mentally, physically, and spiritually). A

As Catholics our first objectives need to not be monetary, they need to be spiritual. There is irreparable harm done to a woman when she aborts, whether its physical and/or obvious. Her spirituality is damaged b/c an innocent suffered death rather than being loved and welcomed. As Catholics we are not only supposed to help the innocents, we’re supposed to help everyone. It doesn’t help everyone in any situation to abort a child. The child always suffers the utmost consequences.

I feel badly for women who feel they had to abort their children for whatever reason. I don’t pity them and sometimes I actually respect their decision (if they made the best decision they could at the time w/ the information they had), but I don’t like that decision. I’m deeply sorry that these women felt the need to make the decision they did. I attempt to educate as many as possible about alternatives (medical, financial, and spiritual). I offer my time, money, and talents to the pro-life movement. Not simply b/c I want to save the cute cuddly babies, but because I want to save the souls of women who may later be tormented by the guilt of terminating their babies.
 
continued - I over-ran my character limit… 😊
You see, I disagree when it is made a matter of black or white for there are very many grey areas. I think everyone who says NO to abortion should have a corresponding duty to fund a pregnant woman in danger of abortion, to have and raise her baby maybe through pro life organizations that can identity and reach out to them and as well stick out their heads for those who are persecuted and detained for helping women detour from abortions.
Abortion is always going to be black & white until they find a way to prevent loss of life from abortion. Killing an innocent - for whatever reason - is wrong. That’s all there is to it morally. Rationalization may lead you to a different opinion, but the bottom line is that morally we are never called to intentionally kill an innocent. Some situations appear to be such that abortion is the only way out, but there is always an alternatives that may or may not lead to life for both mother & child. At the very least, without abortion, there is a chance of survival for both. I just can’t see the justification and/or shades of grey in abortion. When the babies don’t die in an abortion, then maybe I’ll see shades of grey. Until then, there is no justification for intentionally killing an innocent baby in the womb.
 
continued - I over-ran my character limit… 😊

Abortion is always going to be black & white until they find a way to prevent loss of life from abortion. Killing an innocent - for whatever reason - is wrong. That’s all there is to it morally. Rationalization may lead you to a different opinion, but the bottom line is that morally we are never called to intentionally kill an innocent. Some situations appear to be such that abortion is the only way out, but there is always an alternatives that may or may not lead to life for both mother & child. At the very least, without abortion, there is a chance of survival for both. I just can’t see the justification and/or shades of grey in abortion. When the babies don’t die in an abortion, then maybe I’ll see shades of grey. Until then, there is no justification for intentionally killing an innocent baby in the womb.
:clapping::clapping:

This is a perfect post. I also cannot see how one cannot see the black and the white of the matter. The black being the horrific murder of an innocent child and the white being the allowing the child to live. There is no other way to look at it. As a society we should all be appalled that one would even consider dismembering a fellow human for any reason.
 
This is true provided they’re not heretics.
You are using the word heretics here. Do you say that the American bishops acting in unison on this issue are heretics? This is a pretty serious accusation for you to level against the American Catholic bishops acting in unison on this issue. If they are heretics, then why should the Eastern Orthodox Church even give a small thought to reuniting with the Roman Catholic Church? And why has not the Vatican declared them to be heretics?
Generally, I don’t really see where an anonymous blogger on the internet, such as yourself, would have the authority to declare officially that all of the American bishops acting in unison on this issue to be heretics.
 
The Crusades & whatever bloody history you want to charge the Church with doesn’t really hold water to me. Times were different then. It wasn’t just the Church killing people for the fun of it. There was a purpose and an intent that varied significantly from killing an innocent on purpose.

Just war is entirely different from abortion. The only purpose of abortion is to kill an innocent. In just war, the innocent that suffer are collateral damage. Their deaths are not intended by anyone (except sometimes the crazy extremists).

As Catholics we are not only supposed to help the innocents, we’re supposed to help everyone. It doesn’t help everyone in any situation to abort a child. The child always suffers the utmost consequences.

I feel badly for women who feel they had to abort their children for whatever reason. I don’t pity them and sometimes I actually respect their decision (if they made the best decision they could at the time w/ the information they had), but I don’t like that decision. I’m deeply sorry that these women felt the need to make the decision they did. I attempt to educate as many as possible about alternatives (medical, financial, and spiritual). I offer my time, money, and talents to the pro-life movement. Not simply b/c I want to save the cute cuddly babies, but because I want to save the souls of women who may later be tormented by the guilt of terminating their babies.
Thank you:thumbsup: for your good work and insights and thoughts on the issue of abortion as concerns both women and their babies. I laud your efforts, keep them up. However, [Where are the fathers of the babies in all this? It would be good to hear those men who had their babies aborted], I think you may need to revisit your “saving the souls of women-tormented by guilt”- Christ already did so

I also think these statements of yours contradict:confused: “Thou shall not kill” means there can be no Just War. Killing can never be justified, It can be accepted and lamented and even rejoiced over when a country is victorious but from the psychological state of many soldiers afterwards. Killing can never be justified. Also many women who commit abortions do not do it for the fun of it.

Men too, need to be called to order, towards being more responsible if they would impregnate women. To bite the bullet and stick in there and if they feel they do not want to marry the mother and raise the child, give the child up for adoption or provide child support. Why is it a ‘mother kill innocent baby’ rather than the fuller picture which includes the irresponsibility of the man as well? I think the men need more redemption in this matter. I feel like in the garden of Eden here-blame shifting rather than acknowledgment of respective parts consciously played.

When abortions happen in families too, one must ask deeper questions. Let us continue to build into our young men and women that crossing puberty also includes assuming your responsibility of fatherhood/motherhood when it arises, planned or unplanned.
 
The Crusades & whatever bloody history you want to charge the Church with doesn’t really hold water to me. Times were different then. It wasn’t just the Church killing people for the fun of it. There was a purpose and an intent that varied significantly from killing an innocent on purpose.
What about the raping of holy Greek Orthodox nuns and the riding of horses in beautiful Eastern Orthodox Churches and the stealing of their precious artifacts and icons and gold and jewelry and utiing these things in Roman Catholic Churches. What was the purpose and intent of that during the Fourth Crusade?
 
You are using the word heretics here. Do you say that the American bishops acting in unison on this issue are heretics? This is a pretty serious accusation for you to level against the American Catholic bishops acting in unison on this issue. If they are heretics, then why should the Eastern Orthodox Church even give a small thought to reuniting with the Roman Catholic Church? And why has not the Vatican declared them to be heretics?
Generally, I don’t really see where an anonymous blogger on the internet, such as yourself, would have the authority to declare officially that all of the American bishops acting in unison on this issue to be heretics.
I’ll answer the question marks in order. Yes. The Roman Catholic Church is the Church founded by Chirst outside of which there is no salvation. This is why the schismatic Orthodox (who are not “orthodox”) should become Catholics. The Vatican agrees with them, which is why they have not declared them heretics.

Heres the deal, Vatican II formally taught over 200 heresies. Just a few: 1) Christ united himself to everyman through his incarnation. 2) Muslims worship the one true God 3) Then Old Covenant was never revoked 4) Religious Liberty is a good thing 5) The church esteems the Hindus.

In other words, Vatican II contradicted the irreformable teaching of the magisterium, often almost word for word. Those who signed onto this excoomunicated themselves, “ipso facto, without need of declaration” (per the 1917 code). They thus lost their offices and authority. Therefore they ahve less standing than I, because I’m still a Catholic and they’re not. This is simply an indisputable fact. the evidence is overwheling and available to anyone who seeks it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top