Morality in 21st Century

  • Thread starter Thread starter SeraficLeo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Both can be wrong.
Killing a baby is always wrong, born or unborn.
Killing trees/plants/animals for no reason but greed is also wrong.

Why does it have to be either/or?
 
I really do not understand the vitriol against Pope Francis.

Popes with their hand in the money jar? Sure.

Also, what does Pope Francis have to do with the question? At all? He’s staunchly against abortion by his own words. He’s also for good stewardship of the earth, which is commanded by Scripture and the Catechism. He also is concerned about reaching out to groups ill-served in the past by the Church.
SeraficLeo said:
Way off point. Under Pope Francis, do you believe people think killing a tree is worse than killing a baby?
Click to expand...
Pope Francis’ teachings on human life and dignity are part of the reason I am still pro-life.

Honestly, the fact that someone who is formally a Lutheran needs to defend any of the past three Popes to anyone is utterly absurd.
 
Did Pope Francis say they are the same? A link would be appreciate.
 
CilladeRoma said:
unborn.
Click to expand...
I am thinking we should change this to “as yet born.”
One thing only I can even look at liberal parties these days is the idea we should support a child and mother. I’m Canadian I already got hosed on taxes because I believed in supporting the elderly and those in need. I know America has added baggage but we can fix this.
 
Do democrats say an as yet born child is not human and has value? Do you disagree though that the “culture” they promote pretends they are disposable waste?
 
Last edited:
I’d like to see something that Pope Francis has said that equates trees with babies.
 
You started the discussion, you should back up your claims with evidence.
 
MiserereMei said:
Honestly, the fact that someone who is formally a Lutheran needs to defend any of the past three Popes to anyone is utterly absurd.
Click to expand...
You do have to wonder sometimes. As someone who is formally a Calvinist I’ve had to defend Pope emeritus Benedict XVI in front of “progressivist” Catholics, and Pope Francis in front of “traditionalist” Catholics (I’m lacking better words here, but I know those I used are not quite fair, hence the quotation marks).
SeraficLeo said:
Do you believe under Pope Francis the morality he promotes is making killing a tree worse than killing a baby?
Click to expand...
I, for one, believe that the Pope is, as he should be, concerned with the preservation of God’s creation, first of new human life, and then of the planet He gave us to make said new human life possible.
 
SeraficLeo said:
40.png
goout:
yea, it is.
You are conflating a moral theology error with the Pope’s thoughts or words.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your opinion.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by the word “appreciate”?
 
SeraficLeo said:
In my humble opinion neither he nor anyone in the Magisterium is seriously promoting this ethic.
Click to expand...
Coming from a mostly liberal Protestant church in a mostly liberal society, this is not what I hear when I listen to the Catholic Church. I hear the only voice I know of who dares speaking up for life.

Yes, of course ; but as we know neither the day nor the hour of that, I still think our duty meanwhile is to be good stewards of the world He created. I’m not seeing this as an overemphasis, but I also live on a continent, Europe, where climate issues are seen as evidences and not as something controversial, so there may be a cultural bias on my part here.
 
SeraficLeo said:
I honestly don’t think there even could be an overemphasis on not polluting or wastelanding environments. My question is only if under Pope Francis do people believe killing a tree is worse than killing a baby?
Click to expand...
Did you just demonstrate the answer to your own question about Pope Francis?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top