Justifying Sin Through Ignorance?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aureole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Aureole

Guest
A friend of mine and I have come into an impasse of sorts. He gave me a hypothetical situation where someone could justify abortion, I of course denied it.

Basically he said that if someone is truly ignorant of the human child in the womb that they are not committing a sin. I said that the murder of the child in the womb cannot be truly ignorant thus it is a sin.

Basically I’m asking for a bridge to the impasse, so what say you all? (Sorry if it’s vague, but that’s what we’re working on.)
 
Unless I’m totally misunderstanding your friend’s argument, it’s ridiculous.
The reason that people have abortions, that abortionists do abortions is because the woman is pregnant.
Since she is human, the baby is human.
Since this is the only reason to have an abortion, then if the woman and/or the abortionist doesn’t know that she is going to have a baby, there would be no abortion.
Now, if he is saying that someone has a D&C for other reasons, & does not know about the pregnancy…I mean, sometimes, if there is a case of hemorrhage, if there has been a miscarriage, something like that, then it is sometimes done to slow down or stop the bleeding. (In which case, she is NOT pregnant).
But, this would be known–Do you see what I mean?? The doctor is going to find out what is wrong with the patient before she is treated. In the process of tests, a pregnancy would be revealed, if it existed.
You can’t just throw out all the knowledge that we have from medicine, & say “if nobody knew”. The fact is, that knowing is precisely what leads to the abortion.
He’s trying to have it both ways…
 
40.png
Aureole:
A friend of mine and I have come into an impasse of sorts. He gave me a hypothetical situation where someone could justify abortion, I of course denied it.

Basically he said that if someone is truly ignorant of the human child in the womb that they are not committing a sin. I said that the murder of the child in the womb cannot be truly ignorant thus it is a sin.

Basically I’m asking for a bridge to the impasse, so what say you all? (Sorry if it’s vague, but that’s what we’re working on.)
Click to expand...
LOTS of people have been seriously misled to believe that an embryo or fetus is not a real person. Not being one of those people, I don’t know if this constitutes real ignorance, or if their knowledge of natural law overcomes it and they choose the ignorance of their own free will. Regardless, ignorance does not destroy all culpability of sin.
 
I think your friend might be talking about the “Morning After” pill, which is billed as emergency contraception after the fact. The pro-choice crowd says it is not like abortion because the woman does not know if she is pregnant when she takes it. The only reason that a woman would take it though is if she wished to terminate any possible pregnancy. I don’t think God is fooled though.
 
40.png
Aureole:
Basically he said that if someone is truly ignorant of the human child in the womb that they are not committing a sin. I said that the murder of the child in the womb cannot be truly ignorant thus it is a sin.
Click to expand...
well, if the woman does NOT know she is pregnant, i.e. she is 2,3,4,5 weeks or so, and takes some type of medication that causes
  1. the embryo to die,
  2. the embryo to be purged, or
  3. some other type of event that kill the embryo, i dont think she can be held responsible.
otherwise, wed have to pull many allergy medications, blood pressure medications, and other drugs that have very harmful effects to a fetus.

you cant tie a sexually active woman down with the premise she “might” be pregnant, and force her to avoid every activity that could possible kill the embryo. more than 1/3 of american women would be in bed most of their lives “just in case”.

that would be only if the woman did not know and continued with her daily routines and medical regimen. sheesh, even burger king could have damaging effects to a embryo for all we know nowadays.
 
You know, Bio, not a bad point. Women of child-bearing years should look through package inserts to decide if it is worth the risk to take the medication, just in case. I know when I lived on the East Coast and had allergies, I never took allergy medicine, just in case I might become pregnant. Didn’t seem worth it to me.
 
Okay thanks for the answers everyone. We were talking about walking into the clinic for the abortion, not medication. So, to get this very clear, if one truly believes (Hypothetically speaking of course) that the human child in the womb is not a human person and they have an abortion they are culpable? What about punishments, would it still entail the latae sententaie excommunication?
40.png
Madia:
You might want to check out the Catechism’s sections on ignorance:
scborromeo.org/ccc/index/i.htm

Particuraly 1790-1794:
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a6.htm#1790
Click to expand...
Thanks, that’s what I was basing my argument on. Well that and another section on natural law which I cannot find at the moment.

Thanks again for all your responses.
 
So does anyone know if someone who truly believes they are not killing a human, through no fault of their own, still suffers the latae sententaie excommunication? Should this be answered by an apologist perhaps? Can someone even be truly ignorant of the human life in their womb?
 
As Paul said to the Romans, “He who does not know the law, shall be judged without the law, for it is not haering the law that God looks for, but obeying the law.”

Basically as Paul said, and the cathecism states, if one is ignorant through no fault of their own about something that is right or wrong, then they are not accountable to it. So it really depends on how much knowledge the person has when they commit the wrongdoing. It is hard to determine, but ultimately only God knows what is in the human heart.

And the saying, “When in doubt… don’t” would be applicable in these circumstances.
 
40.png
jdnation:
Basically as Paul said, and the cathecism states, if one is ignorant through no fault of their own about something that is right or wrong, then they are not accountable to it.
Click to expand...
Correct, and this is for God judge. It’s if you know or should have known given your circumstances, then you are culpable. Not knowing because you’d rather not think about it is not an excuse. Again, all for God to judge.
 
40.png
jdnation:
As Paul said to the Romans, “He who does not know the law, shall be judged without the law, for it is not haering the law that God looks for, but obeying the law.”

Basically as Paul said, and the cathecism states, if one is ignorant through no fault of their own about something that is right or wrong, then they are not accountable to it. So it really depends on how much knowledge the person has when they commit the wrongdoing. It is hard to determine, but ultimately only God knows what is in the human heart.

And the saying, “When in doubt… don’t” would be applicable in these circumstances.
Click to expand...
40.png
Genesis315:
Correct, and this is for God judge. It’s if you know or should have known given your circumstances, then you are culpable. Not knowing because you’d rather not think about it is not an excuse. Again, all for God to judge.
Click to expand...
Okay, thanks guys.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top