Mormon pro-life? Hardly.

[hmm]

It’s the ‘right now’ that is the problem. Change that to ‘all the time’ and it’s closer to the mark.

I don’t think so… 180 years ago, there were no Mormon statistics to compare with Catholic statistics (had “statistics” even existed)… so “all the time” wouldn’t be accurate either. What we know are the numbers now, defined as “our generation” or “past 100 years”, whatever you prefer. That’s all we know. And right now (read: our generation), we know that people affiliated with the Mormon Church have less abortions than people affiliated with the Catholic Church.

Not to mention (again) how those numbers speak nothing about the teachings of the church the people are affiliated with. You seem to like generational numbers to proclaim truth, I like millennium-old dogmas to proclaim truth because I think to myself, “which one will stand the test of time?”

that’s just how I see it.

 

[Stephen168]

Not to mention (again) how those numbers speak nothing about the teachings of the church the people are affiliated with.

Which is what this thread is about: The Mormon Church is no longer pro-life. The Mormon Church teaches it is OK to murder an unborn baby because of what its parents did. Right now that includes rape and incest but from a rational point of view: why stop there? Already another Mormon has suggested they add poverty to the list; after all that is the parents fault, too. Mormons can claim to be anti-abortion but they have no moral rational foundation to make that claim on. While the Catholic Church sticks with the ancient Christian teaching against the murder of unborn babies.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Ah, but there you have it all wrong. It is we who view the unborn as being equal to, and having the dignity of, everybody else. You, however, give them precedence over everybody else.

What the Catholic church does is say that a fetus is more important than everybody; not ‘equal,’ but superior. The fetus must be protected even if doing so ensures the death of both mother AND child. That’s not calling the child ‘equal.’ That’s something very different. Using the above analogy, it is saying that it is better that both victims die than that one be rescued at the expense of the other; not a single tragedy, but doubled—and why?

We see that child as a child. As a human being. If the choice must be made to end that life, we know that this is what is happening–and so we don’t do it unless there is no other option available.

This is not Catholic teaching as many here have pointed out, including one LDS poster who used to post.

 

[dianaiad]

Looks like we have a strawman on the field.

Yes? (she asks sweetly…) And could you point that out for us, please?

 

[dianaiad]

I don’t think so… 180 years ago, there were no Mormon statistics to compare with Catholic statistics (had “statistics” even existed)… so “all the time” wouldn’t be accurate either. What we know are the numbers now, defined as “our generation” or “past 100 years”, whatever you prefer. That’s all we know. And right now (read: our generation), we know that people affiliated with the Mormon Church have less abortions than people affiliated with the Catholic Church.

Not to mention (again) how those numbers speak nothing about the teachings of the church the people are affiliated with. You seem to like generational numbers to proclaim truth, I like millennium-old dogmas to proclaim truth because I think to myself, “which one will stand the test of time?”

that’s just how I see it.

All right, make that 'for as long as Mormons have been around."

I have to ask; is a dogma that is ignored standing the test of time? I would say…well, not really, no.

 

[dianaiad]

Which is what this thread is about: The Mormon Church is no longer pro-life. The Mormon Church teaches it is OK to murder an unborn baby because of what its parents did. Right now that includes rape and incest but from a rational point of view: why stop there? Already another Mormon has suggested they add poverty to the list; after all that is the parents fault, too. Mormons can claim to be anti-abortion but they have no moral rational foundation to make that claim on. While the Catholic Church sticks with the ancient Christian teaching against the murder of unborn babies.

That is the second time you have made that claim, and this is the second time I have asked you to provide the name of the Mormon who said this.

 

[dianaiad]

This is not Catholic teaching as many here have pointed out, including one LDS poster who used to post.

You mean that it is permissible for a Catholic woman whose life is at stake to have an abortion to save it?

 

[TheosisM]

All right, make that 'for as long as Mormons have been around."

I have to ask; is a dogma that is ignored standing the test of time? I would say…well, not really, no.

This sounds like relativism. The truth is the truth regardless of whether there are 10 people that believe it or 1 billion. The Catholic Church will not change its stance on abortion because of what many American Catholics are doing or believing. Even if all the Christians in the world began to doubt that Jesus is the Savior, it would still be true, and would still be proclaimed by the Church. Our dogmas do not depend on how many people are actually practicing what they preach (or should be preaching), but on what the truth is.

 

[TheosisM]

True, I should have been more careful and written 'Catholic women who have abortions," rather than just “Catholic women.”

That’s probably true. If so, then the Catholics have another problem: someone isn’t teaching these women correctly about how this all works. So…perhaps those who criticize the Mormons for their stand on abortion should look to their own houses, and teach their own sisters about this stuff, instead?

I personally do not criticize Mormons on their actual practice, since in practice they are pro-life, and support that position.

The issue here is that especially in the West, there is a large percentage of cultural/cafeteria Catholics, who pick and choose what they believe, are Catholic in name only, go through the rituals because they “should”, etc. Therefore, I am not surprised at the percentages I see of American Catholics going to Confession, or believing in the Real Presence, or this abortion issue. Therefore, I see no correlation or causation between the firm Catholic position on abortion, and what the statistics say on American Catholics. What I do see a correlation between is this “cafeteria Catholicism” and all deplorable statistics among American Catholics, including Confession, the Eucharist, weekly Mass attendance, abortion, etc. It is part of a larger issue, and cannot be seen in isolation.

What Catholics here are trying to emphasize is the official, universal/worldwide, ancient position of the Catholic Church on abortion, and contrasting it with the official position of the LDS Church on abortion. While we recognize what the statistics say on American Catholics and abortion, we also recognize that they are in conflict with the Church’s teaching.

 

[kikkichan]

You mean that it is permissible for a Catholic woman whose life is at stake to have an abortion to save it?

My impression is, No, It’s not permissible to sacrifice another life in order to save your own. I don’t have supporting documentation handy, but this is consistent with Catholic teaching

–kc

 

[ParkerD]

Soren1,
You have no idea what you’re talking about beyond these first two sentences. It is ridiculous to present abortion law as an all-or-nothing question as to the kinds of cases that come up in real life, but there is no question that the far majority of cases in current society should be legally prohibited by law and moral practice.

The sickness is in society at large, and spread like a plague to the judicial system and some executive leadership. The cure is in society coming unto Christ, repenting of the selfishness that leads young men and men to treat women as objects and leads young women to disconnect their body from their spiritual soul and to allow their body to be used by men in a false appeal for a relationship, when the men have no lasting relationship in mind and show it by the number of unwed mothers and single parent households. The cure is also in the men shouldering the moral and ethical burden of being the breadwinner for the family they father, and allowing the mother to be the nurturer of her family and be a stay-at-home mom for her young children in the home.

Stephen,
I suppose that I need to clarify the above since if I have understood your words about “poverty” I am guessing you were talking about this post. I was addressing the Catholic side of the issue of actual abortions that seem to occur within the ranks of its members.

As Dianaiad has noted, the LDS church is totally known by the members to be supportive of those needing help within their membership–particularly young expectant mothers–so of course my post was not talking about Mormon women contemplating a decision about abortion–I was talking about the potential choice of young women, perhaps still in high school, who are Catholic or Protestant (not LDS), who view their alternatives and do not see the young man in the relationship step forward and shoulder the burden of accepting the responsibility for the baby’s future welfare by marrying the young woman immediately and committing to the relationship for a lifetime, including earning the livelihood for the family. This observation can be made based on the high percentage of unwed mothers and the growing percentage of single parent (meaning mother-only) families in United States statistical norms. I certainly did not imply nor infer that this is acceptable behavior at all, but it is a sickness within society and it begins with the men and young men–not the young women.

I will repeat–the men and young men in modern society have the primary sickness leading to abortions, and it is a sickness of selfishness and the objectification of women and non-acceptance of the lifelong responsibility that they should feel if they are going to have a relationship with a woman that will bring about a pregnancy–meaning that they have just entered into a life-long commitment with the woman and with the baby, and if Catholic men or the young men and men with whom Catholic women are having a relationship, would squarely accept that responsibility, then the high abortion rate among Catholics would go down–no question about it.

So, Stephen, I hope I have made myself clear. I was not justifying abortion choices by anyone, but was strongly suggesting that the way out of the morass for the millions who are in it (many of them Catholics), is for the men (I assume Catholic women associate with Catholic men, though perhaps not?–just an assumption) to accept the burden of their social and moral responsibility–a life-long responsibility. Did you catch that?

 

[Stephen168]

My impression is, No, It’s not permissible to sacrifice another life in order to save your own. I don’t have supporting documentation handy, but this is consistent with Catholic teaching

–kc

What you seem to be describing is self-defense. Catholics do have the moral right to defend themselves.newadvent.org/cathen/13691a.htm

 

[Stephen168]

Stephen,
I suppose that I need to clarify the above since if I have understood your words about “poverty” I am guessing you were talking about this post. I was addressing the Catholic side of the issue of actual abortions that seem to occur within the ranks of its members.

As Dianaiad has noted, the LDS church is totally known by the members to be supportive of those needing help within their membership–particularly young expectant mothers–so of course my post was not talking about Mormon women contemplating a decision about abortion–I was talking about the potential choice of young women, perhaps still in high school, who are Catholic or Protestant (not LDS), who view their alternatives and do not see the young man in the relationship step forward and shoulder the burden of accepting the responsibility for the baby’s future welfare by marrying the young woman immediately and committing to the relationship for a lifetime, including earning the livelihood for the family. This observation can be made based on the high percentage of unwed mothers and the growing percentage of single parent (meaning mother-only) families in United States statistical norms. I certainly did not imply nor infer that this is acceptable behavior at all, but it is a sickness within society and it begins with the men and young men–not the young women.

I will repeat–the men and young men in modern society have the primary sickness leading to abortions, and it is a sickness of selfishness and the objectification of women and non-acceptance of the lifelong responsibility that they should feel if they are going to have a relationship with a woman that will bring about a pregnancy–meaning that they have just entered into a life-long commitment with the woman and with the baby, and if Catholic men or the young men and men with whom Catholic women are having a relationship, would squarely accept that responsibility, then the high abortion rate among Catholics would go down–no question about it.

So, Stephen, I hope I have made myself clear. I was not justifying abortion choices by anyone, but was strongly suggesting that the way out of the morass for the millions who are in it (many of them Catholics), is for the men (I assume Catholic women associate with Catholic men, though perhaps not?–just an assumption) to accept the burden of their social and moral responsibility–a life-long responsibility. Did you catch that?

Actually I wasn’t thinking of that post but thanks for the ethnocentric anti-catholic rant. My daughter is a volunteer at Catholic Charities working with expectant and single mothers and very few of them are Catholic. Your rant would be a surprise to her. She does this in support of the Catholic Church’s consistent teaching against the murder of unborn babies.

 

[Cathhsmom]

Catholic20064,
I don’t plan to visit this forum much at all in the future, but considering the frequent references to abortion by one such as yourself, I’ll lay out some statistics and you can do likewise to show how “pro-life” you really are when it comes down to the nitty-gritty of life.

Here you go:

I have eight children, including that the youngest has a tracheotomy and a feeding tube which have been quite a challenge but certainly worth it, and she is the sweetest child one could imagine at age 12.

I have eight siblings, three of whom have eight to nine children each, and the others have had health issues leading to smaller family sizes but not by choice. Three sisters have adopted children who have been welcomed into our extended family with not the slightest difference in treatment.

I have perhaps 50 cousins, most of whom are happily married (a few divorces, but that is the exception), and to my knowledge not one abortion has taken place among this group. (I don’t know about other families since that is not a thing discussed.)

So, all you great talkers, show that you live like you talk by explaining how you have chosen pro-birth parenting with your many, many children and been pro-fatherhood in encouraging youth about marriage, and been pro-supportive of womanhood as an equal partner and never been neglectful of the most important duties of life, which happen within the walls of your own home.

I’ll check back in a day or so and be interested in whether anyone demonstrates the reality that they have lived like they talk.

Well, my mom was raised Mormon. She had 2 siblings. (Grandma had fertility issues.) Each of the kids had 3 kids each. My mom got married 5 times, divorced 4, got excommunicated, and then re-baptized in the church when she married her 5th whose father had been state president. I don’t know of any abortions in the family, but that is not something that they would have talked about. My grandma is against it.

As for myself, have 4 kids on earth and one we miscarried. Use NFP, and are open to more life, but have my own fertility issues. Married only once. Still married. My Mormon cousins vary from the unmarried to the married to same guy with 2 kids to the divorced and 2 kids with 2 dads. Every family has its faults. We are sinful human beings. The true point is that our churches should lift us up to being better than we are, not giving into us since we want something even if it is not truely good for our souls.

 

[ParkerD]

Well, my mom was raised Mormon. She had 2 siblings. (Grandma had fertility issues.) Each of the kids had 3 kids each. My mom got married 5 times, divorced 4, got excommunicated, and then re-baptized in the church when she married her 5th whose father had been state president. I don’t know of any abortions in the family, but that is not something that they would have talked about. My grandma is against it.

As for myself, have 4 kids on earth and one we miscarried. Use NFP, and are open to more life, but have my own fertility issues. Married only once. Still married. My Mormon cousins vary from the unmarried to the married to same guy with 2 kids to the divorced and 2 kids with 2 dads. Every family has its faults. We are sinful human beings. The true point is that our churches should lift us up to being better than we are, not giving into us since we want something even if it is not truely good for our souls.

Cathh(name removed by moderator),
Congratulations on having a wonderful marriage and family! (I hope your mom is finally happy now–sounds like a hard life.) Thanks for sharing, and Merry Christmas to you and your family.

 

[dianaiad]

This sounds like relativism. The truth is the truth regardless of whether there are 10 people that believe it or 1 billion.

True…but it depends upon the goal. If the goal is to be on the record that abortion is wrong and a mortal sin no matter what or why it is done, then sure, you have that. However, if the goal is to eliminate abortion—or at least to drastically reducing it, then no, I wouldn’t call the Catholic position as successful as ours.

When the way you guys do things is as successful in reducing/eliminating abortion as our way is, THEN you may criticize us for being ‘pro-abortion,’ or not ‘pro-life.’ Not until then. Because we ARE pro-life. Very much so. We understand that in some tragic circumstances, being pro-life means that if it is a choice between two lives ending, and one life ending, then ‘pro-life’ goes with the action that saves one of those lives. Insisting that the mother die along with the baby isn’t being ‘pro-life.’ It’s just being anti-abortion. There is a difference, just as there is a difference between being ‘pro-choice’ and ‘pro-abortion.’ In fact, it is quite possible to be ‘pro-choice’ AND “pro-life.”

It is not possible, however, to really call oneself ‘pro-life’ and be so anti-abortion that you would advocate the death of the mother rather than allowing her to end the pregnancy that is killing her.

The Catholic Church will not change its stance on abortion because of what many American Catholics are doing or believing.

Actually, this is a world wide phenomenon.

Even if all the Christians in the world began to doubt that Jesus is the Savior, it would still be true, and would still be proclaimed by the Church. Our dogmas do not depend on how many people are actually practicing what they preach (or should be preaching), but on what the truth is.

Ok. You preach what you believe the truth to be. I have no problem with that. Go ahead.
The problem I have is this: that you, who have this zero tolerance policy towards abortion, are criticizing the Mormons.

It’s…the guy who never brushes his teeth criticizing the kid for only brushing three times a day.

It’s rank hypocrisy.

The problem is incredibly serious; lives are being lost every day. Real lives are ended every day, and here it really is 'By their fruits ye shall know them." The ‘fruits’ of the Catholic position on abortion result in three times more DEATHS than the Mormon position does.

…and that, m’friend, is fact. If your goal is to save the lives of the unborn, rather than to get brownie points for letters written upon parchment, then stop criticizing us–and start talking to Catholic women.

 

[dianaiad]

I personally do not criticize Mormons on their actual practice, since in practice they are pro-life, and support that position.

The issue here is that especially in the West, there is a large percentage of cultural/cafeteria Catholics, who pick and choose what they believe, are Catholic in name only, go through the rituals because they “should”, etc. Therefore, I am not surprised at the percentages I see of American Catholics going to Confession, or believing in the Real Presence, or this abortion issue. Therefore, I see no correlation or causation between the firm Catholic position on abortion, and what the statistics say on American Catholics. What I do see a correlation between is this “cafeteria Catholicism” and all deplorable statistics among American Catholics, including Confession, the Eucharist, weekly Mass attendance, abortion, etc. It is part of a larger issue, and cannot be seen in isolation.

What Catholics here are trying to emphasize is the official, universal/worldwide, ancient position of the Catholic Church on abortion, and contrasting it with the official position of the LDS Church on abortion. While we recognize what the statistics say on American Catholics and abortion, we also recognize that they are in conflict with the Church’s teaching.

Actually, more Catholics actually attend church services regularly in the USA than in almost any other nation on earth except Rome.

 

[dianaiad]

My impression is, No, It’s not permissible to sacrifice another life in order to save your own. I don’t have supporting documentation handy, but this is consistent with Catholic teaching

–kc

This is not a case of choosing which life to save. It’s a case of…one is doomed no matter what; do we save the other one? In that case, it is permissible, since it is not a case of killing one, but of saving one.

You guys make this distinction all the time.

 

[TheosisM]

True…but it depends upon the goal. If the goal is to be on the record that abortion is wrong and a mortal sin no matter what or why it is done, then sure, you have that. However, if the goal is to eliminate abortion—or at least to drastically reducing it, then no, I wouldn’t call the Catholic position as successful as ours.

When the way you guys do things is as successful in reducing/eliminating abortion as our way is, THEN you may criticize us for being ‘pro-abortion,’ or not ‘pro-life.’ Not until then. Because we ARE pro-life. Very much so. We understand that in some tragic circumstances, being pro-life means that if it is a choice between two lives ending, and one life ending, then ‘pro-life’ goes with the action that saves one of those lives. Insisting that the mother die along with the baby isn’t being ‘pro-life.’ It’s just being anti-abortion. There is a difference, just as there is a difference between being ‘pro-choice’ and ‘pro-abortion.’ In fact, it is quite possible to be ‘pro-choice’ AND “pro-life.”

It is not possible, however, to really call oneself ‘pro-life’ and be so anti-abortion that you would advocate the death of the mother rather than allowing her to end the pregnancy that is killing her.

You seem to be positing causation when there is no reason to believe that the Catholic position on abortion causes abortions. That is a fundamental issue in this discussion. What seems to be more likely is the cafeteria Catholicism that is evidenced in various statistics related to the actual belief in and practice of the true principles of the Catholic faith, as I mentioned previously.

Also, you are misrepresenting the Catholic position. Catholics do not “insist” that the mother die along with the baby. Nor do we “advocate” the death of the mother. Instead, we see both as lives with the “right to life”, and both should be protected, and not one chosen over the other. As you said, we make this distinction all the time, and it is an important one.

Again, I personally am not criticizing Mormons for their generally pro-life stance, and their in-practice pro-life stance. The topic here is that the LDS church allows for the ending of a life in certain situations, including ones where the mother’s life is not in danger. While Mormons may not actually do this in general, it is allowable, which is what others were trying to discuss. Causation is important here.

Actually, this is a world wide phenomenon.

I see it as a mostly Western issue, especially in the USA and Western Europe.

Ok. You preach what you believe the truth to be. I have no problem with that. Go ahead.
The problem I have is this: that you, who have this zero tolerance policy towards abortion, are criticizing the Mormons.

It’s…the guy who never brushes his teeth criticizing the kid for only brushing three times a day.

It’s rank hypocrisy.

The problem is incredibly serious; lives are being lost every day. Real lives are ended every day, and here it really is 'By their fruits ye shall know them." The ‘fruits’ of the Catholic position on abortion result in three times more DEATHS than the Mormon position does.

…and that, m’friend, is fact. If your goal is to save the lives of the unborn, rather than to get brownie points for letters written upon parchment, then stop criticizing us–and start talking to Catholic women.

Again, see the causation issue. You are claiming that the Catholic position on abortion results in abortions. They are correlated, but there is no proof of causation. The Catholic position has always been to save the lives of the unborn, and it is explicitly one of valuing the life of the unborn as equal to that of the born. Catholic hospitals do not perform abortions, and that includes many of the hospitals in the world, talking about fruits. If individual Catholics are going against the explicit teaching of the Church, that is between them and God (and of course, reconciliation is always possible, even after excommunication). What they cannot say is that the Catholic position forced them to have abortions, since that makes absolutely no sense.

 

[TheosisM]

Actually, more Catholics actually attend church services regularly in the USA than in almost any other nation on earth except Rome.

Well, Rome isn’t a nation…

From statistics I’ve seen by the Georgetown University Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA), which researched a number of countries as far as weekly Mass attendance, there are a number of countries that have a higher Mass attendance than the USA, such as Brazil, Mexico, Poland, Italy, Peru, Colombia, Ireland, etc.