Mormon pro-life? Hardly.

[ParkerD]

If you want to talk numbers, fine.

My mother was 1 of 13 children. My father was 1 of 2. I have 3 siblings, I have 1 child, 1 grandchild, 8 nieces and nephews, cousins too numerous to mention, and the same for great nieces and nephews. I should also add here that due to the depression, my mother and many of her siblings were put in an orphanage, and ultimately adopted. That raises the number of Aunts, Uncles, and Cousins considerably. But I have limited my numbers to only blood relatives.

Yes, there have been congenital birth issues among the family, ranging from childhood arthritis, to the need for kidney and heart transplants. There have also been several adoptions,

Not an abortion among them, and only 1 divorce.

What’s your point?

What I am reminded of is a young couple in our area a few years ago. They hadn’t been married long, and were expecting their first child. All seemed to be going well, until one of the ultrasounds revealed that the child was anacephalic. (No brain, only a partial brain stem) Once the couple learned of this, they were given the option to terminate the pregnancy. They flat out refused. The mother carried the child to full term, delivered the baby, only to hold him for a few minutes until he passed away.

Does that cover your thoughts on talking the talk, and walking the walk? I think it does.

In case you are wondering, Yes, they were a Catholic family.

Twopekinguys,
Thanks for sharing your story about your family. I assure you also that many LDS parents have had the same kind of experience as the couple you noted at the end here, and many LDS parents have chosen to carry a baby when the doctor was telling them that the health of the mother was at great risk. I know of not a single abortion case for health reasons. The four abortion cases I have known of in my life have been by a single young woman who knew she had committed a doubly grievous sin and later sought repentance. Our country has led youth down a very wrong path on this issue–the blame rests squarely on the heads of justices and law-makers. It is a case where the sins of the children are on the heads of the “collective” fathers–those who made the laws that allow such poisoned behavior by youth.

But I’ve already written about my own feelings about this subject. I just wanted to read some of the real life experiences of the people who seemed so sure of how everyone else should act and feel. All the people I know have been so very grateful for the children they have been blessed with by God, even in the midst of acknowledging challenges of health (and of some fairly “difficult” spirits to raise as children who became rebellious but are still loved). I am very deeply grateful that my children have a great love for God and look forward to righteous and pure marriages themselves, with many children hoped for by each of them.

Them’s my thoughts. Bye, all. Peace to each and all.

 

[TheosisM]

But it goes like this: if an abortion occurs the spirit will inherit a different body. I believe that I am correct about this.

Is this doctrine, or speculation?

 

[why_me]

Is this doctrine, or speculation?

Common sense. If we were spririt children of god, waiting for a physical body, if someone aborts a fetus, this would have no effect on the spirit child waiting for a body.

It is an assumption.

 

[why_me]

But if the member decides against the Bishops counsel on such a matter they would be committing a sin.

No, they wouldn’t be commiting a sin for not following a bishop’s counsel.

 

[why_me]

Them’s my thoughts. Bye, all. Peace to each and all.

Parker, most people on this section of the forum are not really interested in changing their perpective about mormonism. You have given it a good try but…you will find that most will still keep repeating their familiar beliefs about mormonism. It is ingrained in their minds.

 

[Catholic20064]

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.

I am not a very good example of a Catholic husband. My six children and my wife are Mormon. I have only been a Catholic for 3 1/2 years. I pretty much lived the life of a faithful Mormon husband for most of my life. And since both my wife and I were converts to Mormonism we don’t have a large extended family except for my ex-Catholic wife’s seven brothers and sisters. Three of my children have already been on Mormon missions.

 

[Catholic20064]

No, they wouldn’t be commiting a sin for not following a bishop’s counsel.

If what you are saying is true then the Mormon position is even worse than I thought. But that was never my understanding as an active Mormon.

 

[ParkerD]

I am not a very good example of a Catholic husband. My six children and my wife are Mormon. I have only been a Catholic for 3 1/2 years. I pretty much lived the life of a faithful Mormon husband for most of my life. And since both my wife and I were converts to Mormonism we don’t have a large extended family except for my ex-Catholic wife’s seven brothers and sisters. Three of my children have already been on Mormon missions.

Catholic20064,
Wow–thanks! I hadn’t known these things about you. Congratulations to you and your wife on having six children, and their having enough commitment and discipline in their lives that three have served missions. I hope you can come to feel just as good about their choices in life as you do about you own. God bless you.

 

[Catholic20064]

Catholic20064,
Wow–thanks! I hadn’t known these things about you. Congratulations to you and your wife on having six children, and their having enough commitment and discipline in their lives that three have served missions. I hope you can come to feel just as good about their choices in life as you do about you own. God bless you.

The way Mormons live out their faith impresses me. I don’t have any trouble with Mormons and go to sacrament meeting every week with my family even though I’ve resigned from the Mormon Church. I believe Mormonism’s history disproves its claims to be true, but that doesn’t leave me with any ill will towards the Mormon people.

 

[ParkerD]

If what you are saying is true then the Mormon position is even worse than I thought. But that was never my understanding as an active Mormon.

Catholic20064,
An LDS bishop’s role in counseling a member is usually to help the member see the choices they have in front of them in light of what the scriptures and the prophets and apostles teach about those choices, and also to offer and encourage the help of LDS Social Services if that is desired by the member (which of course includes professional counseling and adoption services with much support given through that process). I don’t think a bishop would ever tell a member that he is speaking for God in giving counsel, so why would he say “you are sinning if you don’t do exactly as I say.” He would explain what the scriptures teach on questions of options, in a loving and supportive and listening and caring way, but make it very clear that the member has the responsibility to make their own personal choice and to receive the consequences of their own choice, including its impact on the lives of their loved ones.

His role is mostly to be a compassionate listener and to be a “common judge in Israel”. He would completely defer to professionals in cases of the mother’s health choices including her emotional/mental health, and would encourage professional counseling and guidance. So you really deep-down honestly should place the blame for any kind of case you have been aware of that seems to have bothered you, on the professionals who would have been involved in counseling in the case in question. In so doing, you should blame the universities where they were trained and the government that licenses their practice as a professional, if you’re going to carry around all these bad feelings about a societal ill and a social framework that entails far more issues than you have narrowly brought to the table.

You could also pray about it, and ask God to forgive them (especially if “they know not what they do”) if you know someone who has made a choice you disagreed with. I think God would respect you for the forgiving heart you would be demonstrating through your prayer. Have a good day, Catholic20064.

 

[Catholic20064]

Catholic20064,
An LDS bishop’s role in counseling a member is usually to help the member see the choices they have in front of them in light of what the scriptures and the prophets and apostles teach about those choices, and also to offer and encourage the help of LDS Social Services if that is desired by the member (which of course includes professional counseling and adoption services with much support given through that process). I don’t think a bishop would ever tell a member that he is speaking for God in giving counsel, so why would he say “you are sinning if you don’t do exactly as I say.” He would explain what the scriptures teach on questions of options, in a loving and supportive and listening and caring way, but make it very clear that the member has the responsibility to make their own personal choice and to receive the consequences of their own choice, including its impact on the lives of their loved ones.

His role is mostly to be a compassionate listener and to be a “common judge in Israel”. He would completely defer to professionals in cases of the mother’s health choices including her emotional/mental health, and would encourage professional counseling and guidance. So you really deep-down honestly should place the blame for any kind of case you have been aware of that seems to have bothered you, on the professionals who would have been involved in counseling in the case in question. In so doing, you should blame the universities where they were trained and the government that licenses their practice as a professional, if you’re going to carry around all these bad feelings about a societal ill and a social framework that entails far more issues than you have narrowly brought to the table.

You could also pray about it, and ask God to forgive them (especially if “they know not what they do”) if you know someone who has made a choice you disagreed with. I think God would respect you for the forgiving heart you would be demonstrating through your prayer. Have a good day, Catholic20064.

The LDS Church seems to teach that abortion is a horrible sin in most cases. Then it says before you have one go see your bishop for counsel if you think your case should be considered as one of the exceptions. It seems unlikely a Bishop would simply abandon his responsibility and simply say, “Go pray about it and if you feel good about it, no problem.” For one thing a person who is going over the emotional strain of an unintended pregnancy might be the last person who you would expect would be able to get an honest answer to prayer about the situation. If the LDS Church really takes their exceptions so lightly, I would be disappointed in them.

I have never personally known anyone who was in the position to desire an abortion because of rape, incest, etc. I have read about and listened to women who have decided to carry their pregnancies to term in spite of the circumstances.

 

[ParkerD]

The LDS Church seems to teach that abortion is a horrible sin in most cases. Then it says before you have one go see your bishop for counsel if you think your case should be considered as one of the exceptions. It seems unlikely a Bishop would simply abandon his responsibility and simply say, “Go pray about it and if you feel good about it, no problem.” For one thing a person who is going over the emotional strain of an unintended pregnancy might be the last person who you would expect would be able to get an honest answer to prayer about the situation. If the LDS Church really takes their exceptions so lightly, I would be disappointed in them.

I have never personally known anyone who was in the position to desire an abortion because of rape, incest, etc. I have read about and listened to women who have decided to carry their pregnancies to term in spite of the circumstances.

Catholic20064,
It doesn’t say anything about “before you have one”. That is a strange statement. Of course it doesn’t say “before you have one.” Of course a person is encouraged to speak with and seek counsel from their bishop if these kinds of issues have come up in their life. Your implication that the bishop just says to pray about the situation is completely wrong and unfounded.

The bishop will encourage the person to seek professional counseling, and to seek the supportive environment through LDS Social Services where the baby will be brought into the world with adoptive parents to become the loving parents of that child.

What I don’t understand is why joining the Catholic church has made you the world’s judge? I thought Christ had that role, even in the Catholic church?

 

[Catholic20064]

Catholic20064,
It doesn’t say anything about “before you have one”. That is a strange statement. Of course it doesn’t say “before you have one.” Of course a person is encouraged to speak with and seek counsel from their bishop if these kinds of issues have come up in their life. Your implication that the bishop just says to pray about the situation is completely wrong and unfounded.

The bishop will encourage the person to seek professional counseling, and to seek the supportive environment through LDS Social Services where the baby will be brought into the world with adoptive parents to become the loving parents of that child.

What I don’t understand is why joining the Catholic church has made you the world’s judge? I thought Christ had that role, even in the Catholic church?

I certainly have the right to make comments about the LDS policy on abortion when it amounts to allowing unborn children to be murdered. I am learning from this discussion the LDS policy is even more liberal than I thought it was since there is no need to get approval from a Bishop to excuse an abortion. I would expect many LDS women in this situation might simply say I’m covered by the exception so this baby can die.

 

[dianaiad]

This seems to me to be a major flaw in their theology. There is nothing in Mormon theology that would keep the spirit from uniting with the body at the time of conception. Mormons just refuse to take a stand on when life begins. They allow abortion in many cases, not just when the life of the mother is threatened. Rape, incest, health of the mother (including mental health) are all reasons for Mormons to approve an abortion. I really do wonder how many Mormons get permission from their bishops to have an abortion, but I am sure that is confidential information as it should be.

What, that we don’t know everything? Why should Catholics have Mysteries, and we cannot?

Believe me, Catholicism has not historically held that life began at conception. That’s a fairly new thing. As it happens, I tend to agree that it does.

However, WhyMe is right about this; since we do believe in the pre-existance, then for us an abortion done for the reasons we allow…like incest, rape or the health of the mother or baby…may not automatically mean that THIS particular spirit will cease to exist or lose his/her chance at mortality. It is a decision that must be made prayerfully and thoughtfully, knowing all the consequences.

Whyme is also right about this: you may rail against Mormons as not being ‘really’ pro-life, but the statistics show that in practice we are far more pro-life than Catholics.

While it is difficult to find statistics regarding abortion by religion, I have looked at several different studies that deal with the issue. All of them show that Catholic women have abortions at something like twice to three times the rate that Mormon women do. For instance, let’s look at two states; Utah (with an average Mormon population of 70%) and Rhode Island (with an average Catholic population of 67%) One can assume that, with the percentage of one religion that large, that the religion would have quite an influence upon the rates of things like abortion. If so, then you are in trouble. Rhode Island is #5 out of 47 states in abortion rate. Utah is #40.

In terms of numbers? According to their own statements, Catholic women are responsible for 369,900 abortions in the USA every year.

Let’s go back to the Rhode Island/Utah comparison. In Rhode Island, 25% of pregnancies result in induced abortion, and if you take into account the percentage of Catholic population, that means that there is an abortion for every 136 Catholics in the state. If you do the same thing for Utah, (with an abortion rate of 6% of induced abortions per pregnancy) you get one abortion for every 708 Mormons.

So go ahead and criticise the Mormons for allowing abortions in certain instances–that must be carefully thought about and prayed about–while sitting on your own smug convictions that Catholicism is so morally superior regarding this.

We will simply continue having three times fewer abortions than you do.

 

[hmm]

Your argument reminds me of a rebuttal published in FARMS Review of Books to Isaiah Bennett’s Inside Mormonism. Barry Bickmore, a prominent LDS scholar, addressed Bennett’s claims that the LDS Church is not pro-life by pointing to statistics showing the much lower rate of abortions in Utah than are to be found among Catholics. Bickmore claimed, “The proof is in the pudding.”

But it is? Is that really an argument at all, or is it not an example of the ad hominem fallacy, whereby a personal judgment substitutes for a reasoned response to a reasoned argument? Even if only one LDS woman had an abortion for every thousand Catholics, the criticism we have been making here would stand firm, for the single reason that the one LDS woman would be acting with the approval of her Church and none of the Catholic women would be.

Every single Catholic who is involved in an abortion knows that it separates him or her from communion with the Church. Each one of those people is called to repentance by the Church, and is confronted by the Church with their need as sinners to confess and repent. Not so in Mormonism. Every Mormon who is involved in an abortion can find shelter in one or more of the Church’s exception clauses, especially the all-embracing threat to a woman’s good health (which happens to include emotional health).

Dianaiad -

Soren1 already addressed the point you are bringing up. The number of Catholics who have had an abortion vs. the number of Mormons who have had an abortion is IRRELEVANT to the REAL issue here: What does each church teach dogmatically about abortion? I think the answers have been clear. The Catholic Church (as a Church, not as random people who affiliate themselves with the Church who make choices based on their own flawed conscience) says NO to abortion. every single time. in every single circumstance. According to the official Church position, it is never okay to kill a human being. The Mormon Church (again, not individuals acting on their own conscience), says “No… usually. Unless it’s a matter of A, B, or C…”

That’s the bottom line. Whether or not the people who call themselves Catholic or Mormon take the official position of their church is a completely different matter that doesn’t touch the direct issue. It’s not a question of numbers, it’s a question of the ethics each church holds.



hmm

 

[dianaiad]

First of all, it isn’t laughable. There are few barriers between Mormons and the gospel that are harder to overcome than their common impression that detractors of their church are bent on mocking them. Any time you talk that way, using words like “laughable” or “ridiculous” you will reinforce that impression among any Mormon who reads it. If we are to make a meaningful witness to them, me must distinguish ourselves from the many crass bullies who create this problem and (alas) are often their most vocal and visible critics. The best way to keep words like that out of our mouths is to keep them out of our minds, by having respectful thoughts towards the Mormons.

Interesting approach. Not often used. I like it.

Having said that, they have some replies to this argument. The reason Mormon bishops don’t decide for the mother’s is because of the LDS belief that all members of the Church have the right to receive revelation, including the mother. Yet only the Prophet receives revelation in behalf of other members in the church. For that reason, a revelation pertaining the whether to have the abortion is properly given to the mother rather than the bishop.

I doubt that sounds any more convincing to you than it does to me, but Mormonism places such an emphasis on experiential testimony, that it seems very reasonable, indeed obvious, to Mormons. In fact, Mormons easily interpret our disgust with this teaching as distrust of revelation on our part. They might ask, “Who are you to say that God can’t speak to an individual person?”

This makes it quite tricky, but I have found the best response to give them, in order to avoid such quagmires, is to note the plain and evident contradiction between Mormon teaching on abortion and on euthanasia. At their website, the LDS Church defines euthanasia as “deliberately putting to death a person who is suffering from an incurable condition or disease” and then condemns this as “a violation of the commandments of God.” This is a carpet condemnation with no loopholes. Nevertheless, one of their exception clauses for abortion is when:

A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.

As anyone can see, this type of abortion fits the definition of euthanasia that is condemned without qualification by the LDS Church elsewhere. In effect, their teaching condemns abortion and euthanasia except in cases where to commit an abortion constitutes euthanasia. I only reasonable responses I have ever encountered to this from Mormons have entailed some kind of denial that a fetus is person. Why then, I ask, does the LDS Church invoke “Thou shalt not kill” to justify its attempted pro-life teaching?

Interesting point.

However, the argument against it is the whole concept of a pre-existance. It may be argued that in the case of an abortion, the spirit will have a chance at another body; that is, he or she may yet be born, just not in this body or (perhaps) to that set of parents.

End of life euthanasia, however, doesn’t offer that possibility. There is no chance that the spirit may be reborn (we do not believe in reincarnation) and ‘try again.’ Therefore the two cases are not the same.

I will say that we do not automatically view suicide as a ‘mortal sin,’ though…that is, there is no thought of burying a suicide in unconsecrated ground or automatically thinking that they are damned. I think we figure that suicides, by the time they reach that decision, aren’t generally fully responsible for what they do; depression is a physical illness. They aren’t trying to kill themselves so much as they are simply trying to escape unbearable mental or emotional pain. Euthanasia, though…that’s pretty deliberate, and generally done by someone who is in full awareness of what’s happening. it is planned.

 

[dianaiad]

But if the member decides against the Bishops counsel on such a matter they would be committing a sin.

That…depends. Some might VIEW it as such…but whether it is or not is between the woman, her husband and God. If this decision is reached with prayer and an honest appeal for guidance, and that guidance is recieved and LISTENED TO, then of course it’s not a sin. No matter who else thinks so.

Which is probably why Mormons have fewer abortions than pretty much anybody else. It is seen as a very, very serious issue, and the decision is never made lightly.

 

[dianaiad]

For myself, I have been married three years and have two children already. A third is expected next year. I am broke because of those kids, and have no regrets about that fact. Because I believe that the sanctity of the family is the most important moral issue in modern times, and because I have been disappointed by Catholics who have not taken the stand that they should, I feel the emotional force of the argument you are making. But that emotional force has no bearing on what are objective moral principles.

Your argument reminds me of a rebuttal published in FARMS Review of Books to Isaiah Bennett’s Inside Mormonism. Barry Bickmore, a prominent LDS scholar, addressed Bennett’s claims that the LDS Church is not pro-life by pointing to statistics showing the much lower rate of abortions in Utah than are to be found among Catholics. Bickmore claimed, “The proof is in the pudding.”

But it is? Is that really an argument at all, or is it not an example of the ad hominem fallacy, whereby a personal judgment substitutes for a reasoned response to a reasoned argument? Even if only one LDS woman had an abortion for every thousand Catholics, the criticism we have been making here would stand firm, for the single reason that the one LDS woman would be acting with the approval of her Church and none of the Catholic women would be.

You have a point.

However, if the goal is to save lives and eliminate abortions (or at least reduce them significantly), then we have to look at which approach actually works. Ours does. Yours doesn’t.

So the question is: what is more important; a point of opinion, or the lives of the unborn?

If it is the point of doctrine, then fine—(except for the fact that we don’t automatically believe that an aborted child is then deprived of life in a different body) you win. If, however, the point is the saving of unborn lives, then—we do.

Every single Catholic who is involved in an abortion knows that it separates him or her from communion with the Church. Each one of those people is called to repentance by the Church, and is confronted by the Church with their need as sinners to confess and repent. Not so in Mormonism. Every Mormon who is involved in an abortion can find shelter in one or more of the Church’s exception clauses, especially the all-embracing threat to a woman’s good health (which happens to include emotional health).

Not quite. Such a decision is never lightly made. THAT point is proven by the numbers. If it is so easy for Mormons to get abortions and be excused for them, why don’t we have more of 'em?

Admittedly, there is talk in LDS teaching about repentance for abortion, as when Elder Russell M. Nelson writes:

Is there any hope for the person who has participated in the act of abortion? Is there any hope for those who have so sinned and who now suffer heartbreak? The answer is yes! “As far as has been revealed, a person may repent and be forgiven for the sin of abortion.” We know the Lord will help all who are truly repentant."

That sounds good, but to how many Mormons who have been involved in abortion is this statement actually directed? Only those who didn’t consult with their bishop. Those who did consult with their bishops have a pass. They are not informed by their church as to what judgment they have brought upon themselves, for that church itself has condoned their sin.

“A pass?” hardly. I only know one woman who had to make that decision. Had she not had an abortion, neither she nor the child would be alive today; her life was absolutely at stake. She didn’t want to have one; she HAD to have one.

Eventually her problem (her heart) was fixed and she now has three children. However, she will never know the fate of that first child; is one of her present children THAT child? Was that child given to other parents? 20 years later she will still cry about it, even knowing that she had no choice. There is no ‘free pass’ in abortion. For anybody.

 

[dianaiad]

Is this doctrine, or speculation?

Speculation…but it does make some logical sense given our belief in the pre-existance.

 

[dianaiad]

The LDS Church seems to teach that abortion is a horrible sin in most cases. Then it says before you have one go see your bishop for counsel if you think your case should be considered as one of the exceptions. It seems unlikely a Bishop would simply abandon his responsibility and simply say, “Go pray about it and if you feel good about it, no problem.” For one thing a person who is going over the emotional strain of an unintended pregnancy might be the last person who you would expect would be able to get an honest answer to prayer about the situation. If the LDS Church really takes their exceptions so lightly, I would be disappointed in them.

I have never personally known anyone who was in the position to desire an abortion because of rape, incest, etc. I have read about and listened to women who have decided to carry their pregnancies to term in spite of the circumstances.

As have I. The possibility is no longer a problem for me (well, I AM 60) but I made my own decision a very long time ago that if I were raped and became pregnant as a result, I would carry the baby. After all, it’s not the baby’s fault.

On the other hand, the situation never came up, so I can’t sit here and proclaim that 'I would never…" I don’t THINK I would have.