Is Being Pro-Choice a Sin?

[CarissaFlores]

That would be killing an innocent human being so, yes.

 

[redbetta]

Why does every abortion thread on CAF always devolve to “But there are other important issues to worry about!”

Seriously, on what other topic is “that’s not the only important problem in the world/country” is considered a valid argument?

 

[JerryZ]

Possibly there is a confusion of terminology. When people say “Pro-Choice” they are stating they are OK with terminating human life.
There is variance in “at what stage” the “termination” can occur.
I am being facetious when I say “termination” the proper word is murder.
You on the other hand seem to be separating the 2 words and equating “choice” freedom of action or simpler yet “free will”.
Now you are also trying to imply that the Catholic Church imposes some law that is separate from the law that the state (government) applies.
And again this is patently not so. The precept that murdering someone is not ok predates the Church. Even in the northern tribes of Europe and the most isolated people in other parts of the world there is one common theme. The humans have been instilled with a basic concept of justice that does not depend on any religion.
This is what the Catholic Church calls “The natural law” it has been put there by our Creator.
We can go against them but we will have to pay the price.
Of course an atheist does not believe in an after life so the point is moot for them.

As for the thread answer. Yes Pro-Choice is sinful.

Peace!

 

[Polak]

Unfortunately, there are self-interested persons, parties and businesses that focus on the exploitation of the differences and divisiveness and not on the common paths.

I don’t want to hijack this thread but the first thing I thought of when I read that was, the left.

 

[Randolph]

That would be killing an innocent human being so, yes.

Also, abortion kills millions of innocent babies worldwide per year. More than just a sin, it incurs automatic excommunication in the Church.

It’s dishonest and wrong to make moral equivalency to feeding the poor, care for sick and vulnerable , etc… —although Christ and Church bind upon us to take responsibility on those issues.

 

[Hodos]

The bad decisions in the most cases arise from the lack of opportunities.

Not really. People don’t use drugs because they lack opportunities. People don’t have children out of wedlock because they lack opportunity. People don’t drop out of high school because they lack opportunity. This is soft-pedaling destructive behaviors and saying that people have no agency to make good decisions. It is objectively false. They do these things because they make decisions to engage in sinful behaviors that have impacts upon their future prospects.

That being said, when we provide assistance to people who genuinely need it, we should not provide incentives that reward them for choosing bad behavior. This only perpetuates decisions that are against their interests in the long term.

 

[Diaconia]

Yes, of course.

To support anyone else’s “choice” to murder their child in the womb is a sin. It is ALWAYS grave matter. And when done with full knowledge and full consent it is mortally sinful.

And, when meeting the typical conditions, occurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

That’s as serious as it comes. Abortion is murder, and anyone who supports the right of other people to choose murder are also complicit.

This is precisely why so-called Catholic politicians who proudly support pro-choice positions should not be admitted to Holy Communion. Back when Obama was running for President, a couple of bishops from the US made it public and official policy that Joseph Biden was not to receive Holy Communion in their dioceses, St. Louis, MO and Scranton, PA (where he grew up), for sure; and there might have been others as well.

Abortion is always wrong. It is always wrong to support it. It is always wrong to counsel someone to consider it. AND it is always wrong to pass legislation and support laws that enable it.

Children are a gift from the LORD, like arrows in the quiver of a warrior,
Deacon Christopher

 

[blackforest]

This is to hear Catholic’s opinions on this.

Philosophically, this thread is off to a bad start.

A choice is simply a voluntary action. Catholics believe that God gave us free will, so we’re all “pro-choice” in that sense! We’re faced with choices every day and couldn’t avoid them if we tried. We can’t just decide that we’re against choices any more than we can decide we’re against oxygen!

The right question is this: Is supporting the killing of a defenseless human being in utero a sin? My answer would be that like countless other human rights violations, yes, it is.

 

[redbetta]

Yeah, you see a lot people trying to hijack any and all movements to try to push their idea of utopia. Hence why you have things like BLM talking about smashing the patriarchy or overthrowing capitalism and whatnot.

 

[NevermoreLenore]

You will never get any other answer here regarding social justice. If you don’t make being antiabortion your primary decision making issue, you support and are accused of being for murdering babies. As it happens, I do not thing legislation of any kind will alter the availability and legality of abortion. I think if the goal is to minimise and stop abortion (a very worthy goal), addressing WHY women seek abortions and building the social structures to support mothers and families will be infinitely more effective. I don’t get why people fault the woman alone for ‘getting herself into that situation’ and fail to realise women bear the burden of pregnancy. It’s awesome if and when a man sticks around–personally, I couldn’t be as good of a mother if my husband wasn’t involved at least as much as I am in parenting. But even if a man is held to child support, he can have nothing else to do with a baby if he wants. I am disappointed that some men on this forum cannot cede to the notion that women carry a significant load when they are pregnant and maybe instead of trying to undo the legalisation of abortion they should address social issues like how to keep the nuclear family, healthcare, and poverty.

I know what kinds of responses this will elicit, only if it isn’t ignored altogether as often is the case. Just wanted to throw out a different way of looking at the problem; that is, work to solve the problems that contribute to a woman seeking an abortion instead of just telling her not to do it and figure out the next 18yrs on your own, which is completely dismissive of the problems.

 

[Suudy]

A choice is simply a voluntary action.

There are good choices and bad choices. We can certainly be opposed to bad choices and support good choices.

The right question is this: Is supporting the killing of a defenseless human being in utero a sin? My answer would be that like countless other human rights violations, yes, it is.

That’s not what the OP is asking, though. The colloquial usage of “Pro-Choice” is fraught with ambiguity, but all include in some way keeping abortion legal. What the OP is asking is whether being supportive of others being permitted to choose abortion is a sin.

So, if you want to be pedantic, the right question is: “Is holding that abortion should remain legal because others may choose it a sin?”

 

[NevermoreLenore]

I am neither a socialist, democrat, republican, and absolutely I am not pro abortion. It breaks my heart and turns my stomach to know how (especially late term) abortions are carried out. But decades have passed. Should we not try a different approach? Like creating a society that is welcoming and conducive to women, especially those who do not have the father in the picture, so that they are most likely to choose life?

 

[Suudy]

You will never get any other answer here regarding social justice. If you don’t make being antiabortion your primary decision making issue, you support and are accused of being for murdering babies.

Really? That’s a rather uncharitable reading of people’s vehement opposition to abortion.

I don’t get why people fault the woman alone for ‘getting herself into that situation’ and fail to realise women bear the burden of pregnancy.

Who’s faulting the woman for getting pregnant? I think any normally educated person realizes that it takes two to make a baby. And in nearly all cases the woman–and the man–are voluntary participants. Indeed, it’s the pro-abortion crowd that continually bring up the extreme minority of cases as a bar to outlawing most abortions.

I am disappointed that some men on this forum cannot cede to the notion that women carry a significant load when they are pregnant and maybe instead of trying to undo the legalisation of abortion they should address social issues like how to keep the nuclear family, healthcare, and poverty.

Why should it be either/or? Why not both? Why can’t abortion both be illegal and “address social issues” ?

Just wanted to throw out a different way of looking at the problem;

Your suggestion is nothing new. In fact, it so very often serves as cover for the pro-abortion crowd. You know, the ones who say “Pro-lifers only care about the children before they are born, then afterward they don’t care.” It’s the “better dead than underfed argument.” The problem with that argument is that an innocent is intentionally killed.

 

[Suudy]

Like creating a society that is welcoming and conducive to women, especially those who do not have the father in the picture, so that they are most likely to choose life?

There has been government programs for decades that do exactly this. Why has abortion not gone away? Not enough spending? Or perhaps aggressive promotion by PP and their ilk?

 

[NevermoreLenore]

I didn’t say you did; I was addressing your comment that people who argue that way are socialist, etc

That’s a rather uncharitable reading of people’s vehement opposition to abortion.

I don’t agree. In prior threads of this nature I’ve been called vicious names like ‘baby murderer’ (never mind that I’ve never had an unwanted pregnancy). Even your reactions–you don’t address my perspective that we need to create a society more conducive to enable women to choose life.

think any normally educated person realizes that it takes two to make a baby.

I’m saying that if a poor, underemployed or disadvantaged woman ends up pregnant (or any woman for that matter) she might have the support of the father, but if he isn’t interested it is her burden alone. Pregnancy, and the ramifications of having a baby, is unique to women.

Your suggestion is nothing new. In fact, it so very often serves as cover for the pro-abortion crowd.

:woman_facepalming:t2: No, it isn’t new, but it is consistently dismissed. Conflating my opinion that we need better social programs and healthcare as ‘cover for the pro abortion crowd’ seems uncharitable… as it is nothing of the sort. As a psychologist and victim advocate, I’ve seen a lot of people and I’m saying what everyone here sees as a black and white issue looks like a whole lot of grey to a scared pregnant woman.

We should provide the opportunities for good decision-making. The bad decisions in the most cases arise from the lack of opportunities. Loss of hope effectively turns off rational decision making. There can be little rational decisions when the opportunities to make ones are lacking.

THIS. Very much this.

Why does every abortion thread on CAF always devolve to “But there are other important issues to worry about!”

Actually, the discussion is that in addressing those ‘other important issues’ we would be removing many of the obstacles that make a woman consider abortion. I agree with you all–abortion is unequivocally wrong. I’m saying let’s try another approach.

I’m bowing out. It’s been a rough week so far and I don’t need to get further beat up participating in an online discussion. I just cannot fathom why people won’t consider preventative solutions instead of continuing to only look at making abortion illegal.

 

[Katie777]

It’s a sin. Every baby is a blessing.

 

[Katie777]

Commercial contraception is a sin too. Playing God is a sin and that’s what it is

 

[Katie777]

The correct answer is abstinance; prayer and nfp.
Period.

 

[Suudy]

Even your reactions–you don’t address my perspective that we need to create a society more conducive to enable women to choose life.

Yes, I did. I acknowledged it. I even emphasized it as part of a both/and solution. Not an either/or.

I’m saying that if a poor, underemployed or disadvantaged woman ends up pregnant (or any woman for that matter) she might have the support of the father, but if he isn’t interested it is her burden alone. Pregnancy, and the ramifications of having a baby, is unique to women.

Many argue–and I find it quite persuasive–that this is as much the fault of the government as it is of society. Government actions, such as no-fault divorce, have reduced the incentive for women to avoid pregnancy. And I’m not talking about the severe minority of cases, such as rape and incest. There is both a culture and government problem. The government at best turns a blind eye on the moral and social conditions that lead to unwanted pregnancies. Indeed, we have the government actively encouraging acts, such as money to abortion providers, talk about “wearing masks during sex” (which only makes sense for couples not in the same household), providing subsidized contraception (which is only effective if actually used, and that’s ignoring the other issues related to its use), etc.

No, it isn’t new, but it is consistently dismissed.

Who dismissed it? Myself and others here have considered it part of a combined effort, including making abortion illegal. Again, it’s not either/or. Nobody is dismissing this approach. The point is, for the large part it already exists. Perhaps not to the degree you would like. But this approach has not been ignored.

Conflating my opinion that we need better social programs and healthcare as ‘cover for the pro abortion crowd’ seems uncharitable…

I didn’t say you were doing this. I said this position is serves as for for the pro-abortion crowd. As you’ve noted. You aren’t pro-abortion, so this doesn’t apply to you.

As a psychologist and victim advocate, I’ve seen a lot of people and I’m saying what everyone here sees as a black and white issue looks like a whole lot of grey to a scared pregnant woman.

I agree. It isn’t black and white. Neither was the abolitionist position in the lead-up to the civil war. Yet, here we are, 150 years later and everyone agrees slavery was wrong. In hindsight, we bonk our heads and say “What were we thinking?!” But in the moment in the early years of our republic, it wasn’t so obvious.

I firmly believe it will be the same here. Right now, in the thick of it, emotions run high and long standing patterns are hard to overcome. But I do think in 100+ years we will look back and say “OMG! How depraved were we!”

 

[openmind77]

.
This is to hear Catholic’s opinions on this.

I think the opinion of most Catholics and the Catholic Church regarding this issue is already quite clear. So I am not sure why you are asking the question.

But the real answer to this question will only be available to us when the Christ returns. I am pretty certain that this event will take place quite soon - possibly in less than a year. My personal opinion is that the Christ will ask people to not be so judgmental and learn to mind their own business.