Mormon pro-life? Hardly.

[hmm]

I find it very interesting how this discussion is playing out because the Catholics are playing the “big picture” card while the Mormons are playing the “statistics” card. Over and over again the Mormons quote numbers and make points like “the Mormon baby will live 3 times more often than the Catholic baby”…

If doing that makes you feel justified in saying Catholics aren’t as pro-life as Mormons, then fine. Feel justified. Take comfort in knowing that your church is more “pro-life” than the Catholic Church based on numbers here and now…

As for me, I’m sticking with the church that, for 2000 years, has proclaimed that abortion is murder. Complete and Full Truth for All Time is more important to me than a 3:1 ratio in 2009.

 

[ParkerD]

I find it very interesting how this discussion is playing out because the Catholics are playing the “big picture” card while the Mormons are playing the “statistics” card. Over and over again the Mormons quote numbers and make points like “the Mormon baby will live 3 times more often than the Catholic baby”…

If doing that makes you feel justified in saying Catholics aren’t as pro-life as Mormons, then fine. Feel justified. Take comfort in knowing that your church is more “pro-life” than the Catholic Church based on numbers here and now…

As for me, I’m sticking with the church that, for 2000 years, has proclaimed that abortion is murder. Complete and Full Truth for All Time is more important to me than a 3:1 ratio in 2009.

I have read these judgments, name-calling, and psychological stonings loud and clear. So then whom do you really follow ? (not Jesus, the perfect and compassionate healer)

Matthew 9:35 And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.
36 But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd.

Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

John 8:1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

Some Catholics seek peace and goodwill toward the people around them, and judge not, but point toward compassionate healing; in so doing, they follow Jesus. Others truly do not, and are as “sheep having no shepherd.”

 

[Stephen168]

I have read these judgments, name-calling, and psychological stonings loud and clear.

Some Catholics seek peace and goodwill toward the people around them, and judge not, but point toward compassionate healing; in so doing, they follow Jesus. Others truly do not, and are as “sheep having no shepherd.”

 

[Stephen168]

I have read these judgments, name-calling, and psychological stonings loud and clear.

Y’see, when a Mormon woman has an abortion, it is only after soul searching, prayer, consutation with her religious leaders who send her to medical authorities; it really IS a case of the death of the baby or the death of both, or something equally drastic. When it is done, the woman has the support of her family and her faith, and it is seen as the incredible tragedy that the loss of a child actually is. We know, in other words, exactly what we are doing, and that it IS the death of a child. It is, in almost all cases, a matter of the child dies now or both mother and child die soon.
I don’t think that the Catholic women who have abortions have that part figured out. At most, they see it–not as the death of a child, but as a ‘mortal sin’ that can be forgiven and then forgotten in the confession/absolution process.

 

[TheosisM]

wow, didn’t see that last post by dianaiad quoted by Stephen.

And she knows what the Catholic women are thinking…how? Speaking about judgments, ParkerD…

And of course if the woman was not truly repentant (and this goes for everyone), the “mortal sin” would not be forgiven. God does not forgive sins if we aren’t truly repentant. So, if a Catholic sees abortion (and any sin for that matter) in the way dianaiad portrayed it, they 1) may not be repentant, and 2) do not know how the Sacrament of Reconciliation works.

 

[Lehi]

I find it very interesting how this discussion is playing out because the Catholics are playing the “big picture” card while the Mormons are playing the “statistics” card. Over and over again the Mormons quote numbers and make points like “the Mormon baby will live 3 times more often than the Catholic baby”…

If doing that makes you feel justified in saying Catholics aren’t as pro-life as Mormons, then fine. Feel justified. Take comfort in knowing that your church is more “pro-life” than the Catholic Church based on numbers here and now…

As for me, I’m sticking with the church that, for 2000 years, has proclaimed that abortion is murder. Complete and Full Truth for All Time is more important to me than a 3:1 ratio in 2009.

Well, what is the ultimate desired outcome? Do we want to actively reduce abortions or just have a nice sounding platitude about it?

Which city would you rather live in, one which actually reduces the murder rate, or one that talks big about it but isn’t effective at reducing murder?

Common sense.

 

[hmm]

Well, what is the ultimate desired outcome? Do we want to actively reduce abortions or just have a nice sounding platitude about it?

Which city would you rather live in, one which actually reduces the murder rate, or one that talks big about it but isn’t effective at reducing murder?

Common sense.

That is a false analogy. The Catholic church does not function like a city in policy and implementation. What the Catholic Church defines dogmatically cannot ever be changed, and the success of the implementation of those dogmatic teachings is entirely dependent on the era, imho. I can see, however, how the Mormon church structure can resemble a city, so I understand where you’re coming from.

It might be better to ask: Which church would you rather be a part of, one that teaches it’s okay to murder babies sometimes and fortunately has a low(er) murder rate right now, or one that teaches it’s never okay to murder babies and, unfortunately, has a high(er) murder rate right now?

 

[ParkerD]

I have read these judgments, name-calling, and psychological stonings loud and clear. So then whom do you really follow ? (not Jesus, the perfect and compassionate healer)

Matthew 9:35 And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.
36 But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd.

Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

John 8:1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

Some Catholics seek peace and goodwill toward the people around them, and judge not, but point toward compassionate healing; in so doing, they follow Jesus. Others truly do not, and are as “sheep having no shepherd.”

The unfortunate result of the name-calling and public humiliation thus done in the interest of, to be sure, an innocent victim, is that that innocent victim’s life was not saved, the person who has been psychologically stoned turns a deaf ear to spiritual healing and may seek other forms of “self-help”, the statistical trend continues with others going down the same path, and those with an understanding that the Holy Spirit knows all things can also understand that the Holy Spirit did not guide the decision that resulted in more name-calling, more judging, more public or private humiliation and self-justification by people such as are exemplified in this thread, and little healing through the Savior’s loving and compassionate power to heal. He had a reason for not calling the woman who had been brought to Him by the same accusatory term that those who accused her of “the very act” had used. He knows how to heal people, every person on earth who has ever lived. He knows their need. It is through Him, and His atoning grace, that people can be healed, beginning with feeling loved and feeling that forgiveness is possible without public humiliation. Why does the lesson He taught fall on such deaf ears?

Isaiah wrote truly,

6:10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.
11 Then said I, Lord, how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate,
12 And the Lord have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land.
13 But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.

 

[Stephen168]

It is sad that the Mormon Church causes such public humiliation to its members by again declaring there is a class of humanity which does not deserve the equality and dignity of the rest of humanity. This new ‘revelation’ supports their murder and ends a brief 20 year period in which Mormonism taught all mankind was equal.

 

[Lehi]

That is a false analogy. The Catholic church does not function like a city in policy and implementation.

It doesn’t need to for the analogy to work. It is simple. Would you rather belong to an organization that effectively fights abortion, or to one that does not effectively fight abortion?

What the Catholic Church defines dogmatically cannot ever be changed, and the success of the implementation of those dogmatic teachings is entirely dependent on the era, imho.

Can not ever be changed? Nothing the Catholic Church has ever dogmatically defined has ever been changed? Let’s not go down that road.

I can see, however, how the Mormon church structure can resemble a city, so I understand where you’re coming from.

I don’t see how the LDS Church resembles a city any more than the Catholic Church does. Let’s move away from the city analogy, since squirming out of an analogy is easy for anyone (…“thats a false analogy”…)

It might be better to ask: Which church would you rather be a part of, one that teaches it’s okay to murder babies sometimes and fortunately has a low(er) murder rate right now, or one that teaches it’s never okay to murder babies and, unfortunately, has a high(er) murder rate right now?

I’d rather belong to the organization that is most effective at reducing the murder of babies. Which organization is that?

How about I pose this question. Why do you think that Mormons in general are far more likely to oppose abortion than Catholics? What is the reason for it? Coincidence?

 

[soren1]

It doesn’t need to for the analogy to work. It is simple. Would you rather belong to an organization that effectively fights abortion, or to one that does not effectively fight abortion?

I posted a couple times on this thread, and then dropped out of the conversation because my life got hectic this week. I have already dealt with this argument way back on an earlier page that you might not have seen, so for my first response I am simply reposting what I wrote then:

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).

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.

 

[twopekinguys]

“Not an abortion among them” – How do you know. Not everyone who has an abortion tells…

I guess you would have to know how close knit of a family we are, not to mention how strong our faiths are.

I stand by my statement.

 

[soren1]

It doesn’t need to for the analogy to work. It is simple. Would you rather belong to an organization that effectively fights abortion, or to one that does not effectively fight abortion?

and

How about I pose this question. Why do you think that Mormons in general are far more likely to oppose abortion than Catholics? What is the reason for it? Coincidence?

I do not grant that the Mormon Church is more effective in fighting abortion than the Catholic Church. If you limit your study to just the numbers on how many abortion happen in-house, I grant that it is. But what about the broader sphere of civil society? Does the Mormon Church have a message that can justify changing America into a pro-life society? I have engaged pro-choice activists in dialogue before, and knowing how they think and how they argue, I can’t imagine how I could ever persuade any of them if I presented LDS teaching as my position. They would eat me alive, fast. Because they play hard-ball. Here’s what a pro-choice person could say:

*During the last election season, a lot of us were surprised when Mitt Romney said he knew people in the leadership of the LDS Church who were pro-choice politically. I was glad to hear that, and when I learned more about your church, I stopped being surprised. Your church doesn’t tell you how to vote, and its moral teachings on abortion really respect personal discernment: ‘Don’t have an abortion lightly, but get together with your bishop, hear his advice, and pray.’ I think that’s great, and no doubt, the fact that LDS bishops counsel women against abortion helps keep the number of abortions low - and that’s just what we want here at Planned Parenthood. But what is even better is that your theology realizes that the ultimate decision still comes down to the woman’s judgment - as it should - based on her own conscience and her own relationship with God. So if you are a Mormon, you should agree, therefore, that the decision of whether to have an abortion is a matter of private morality rather than public morality. And that is the definition of ‘pro-choice.’

For this reason, if you want to live by your religious principles, you should support abortion politically. If LDS teaching is true, then Mormon women should have the freedom to exercise spiritual discernment in the cases where abortion is allowed. And since Mormonism wisely opposes religious preferentialism, that same right to discern extends to non-Mormon women, who also have the right to consult with God for themselves. Legally then, the exception clauses should be applicable throughout society.*

It only remains now to point out that the exception clauses are broad enough that they can apply to basically any pregnancy, and so if a Mormon were convinced by this disturbingly logical argument, it would lead him to vote for policies that amount to unrestricted abortions. While most Mormons vote pro-life, they do so only because they have not thought through their teachings to the point that my fictional pro-choice antagonist has. Perhaps those Mormon leaders Romney mentioned have thought it through as well.

 

[ParkerD]

I do not grant that the Mormon Church is more effective in fighting abortion than the Catholic Church. If you limit your study to just the numbers on how many abortion happen in-house, I grant that it is.

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.

 

[Stephen168]

Does the Mormon Church have a message that can justify changing America into a pro-life society?

I believe this is the worse part of the Mormon position. They have no message without looking hypocritical, because as you point out:

…………. the exception clauses are broad enough that they can apply to basically any pregnancy,…….

Once these exception are accepted it will be easy to add to them because moral reasoning is gone. There is one Mormon on this forum ready to add poverty to the list. ‘Babies can be too poor to deserve to live.’

 

[dianaiad]

wow, didn’t see that last post by dianaiad quoted by Stephen.

And she knows what the Catholic women are thinking…how? Speaking about judgments, ParkerD…

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

And of course if the woman was not truly repentant (and this goes for everyone), the “mortal sin” would not be forgiven. God does not forgive sins if we aren’t truly repentant. So, if a Catholic sees abortion (and any sin for that matter) in the way dianaiad portrayed it, they 1) may not be repentant, and 2) do not know how the Sacrament of Reconciliation works.

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?

 

[dianaiad]

That is a false analogy. The Catholic church does not function like a city in policy and implementation. What the Catholic Church defines dogmatically cannot ever be changed, and the success of the implementation of those dogmatic teachings is entirely dependent on the era, imho. I can see, however, how the Mormon church structure can resemble a city, so I understand where you’re coming from.

It might be better to ask: Which church would you rather be a part of, one that teaches it’s okay to murder babies sometimes and fortunately has a low(er) murder rate right now, or one that teaches it’s never okay to murder babies and, unfortunately, has a high(er) murder rate right now?

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

 

[dianaiad]

It is sad that the Mormon Church causes such public humiliation to its members by again declaring there is a class of humanity which does not deserve the equality and dignity of the rest of humanity. This new ‘revelation’ supports their murder and ends a brief 20 year period in which Mormonism taught all mankind was equal.

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.

For instance…if a Catholic firefighter is faced with the following situation (and it has happened…): if he has two victims in front of him; both alive but both trapped in a building collapse, and they are trapped in a way that ensures that he can rescue only one, and rescuing one will kill the other. As well, if he waits too long to do something, they will both die. The church will not condemn him for making that choice, will it?

…we all see this as a tragic choice that must be made; to save one, the other must die, and if one doesn’t die now, both die in a few minutes or hours. Is making that choice saying that the one who loses his life is not ‘equal,’ or ‘human?’ Far from it. the agony that goes into making that decision ensures that everybody knows exactly what’s happening.

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.

 

[dianaiad]

I believe this is the worse part of the Mormon position. They have no message without looking hypocritical, because as you point out:Once these exception are accepted it will be easy to add to them because moral reasoning is gone. There is one Mormon on this forum ready to add poverty to the list. ‘Babies can be too poor to deserve to live.’

…and what Mormon on this forum, or anywhere else, has said or written (you DID put this in quotes) "Babies can be too porr to deserve to live.’

Poverty is not a reason for abortion. It would not be seen as a reason for abortion by any Bishop, or by the church. If you are too poor to have a child, then we have church welfare services that work better than almost any other organization out there.

I strongly suggest that you either post the name of the person who wrote this, or revise your accusation.

 

[Stephen168]

Looks like we have a strawman on the field.