Mormon pro-life? Hardly.

[dianaiad]

Catholic teaching does not require a woman and a baby to die in an ectopic pregnancy. You are distorting our teaching, still.

I know Catholicism does not require this. That’s my POINT.

 

[TheosisM]

Yes…and the fact that the Mormon position results in far fewer abortions than does the Catholic position is an important part of that discussion…as inconvenient as that fact is to those who criticize the LDS doctrine about it.

And there we go again with causation. You are saying that the Mormon position is the cause of the fewer abortions, and the Catholic position is the cause of more abortions (or having no effect), when it is not logical to conclude so. They are obviously correlated, but there is no reason to believe that there is causation. The arguments I have heard trying to make causation valid (generally from the Mormon side) make it seem as if the Catholic Church doesn’t care about the situation of these women, or that they are ignored and alternatives are not presented if they speak with an authority on the issue.

And I don’t think that the Catholic results on abortion are “inconvenient” or ignored. They are just not relevant to discussing the Mormon position of allowing abortions in certain situations, unless one is arguing causation (which basically means that one is saying ‘yes, the LDS church allows abortions in certain situations, but the position actually results in few abortions, so we can just ignore it’), which has yet to be established.

No one can, or should criticize Mormons on how they have such low abortion statistics. On the other hand, no one can say that the Catholic position results in more abortions (and if they do, they must demonstrate causation), or ignore the actual fruits of the Catholic position, namely no abortions in the extensive worldwide Catholic hospital system, greatly restricted abortion laws in Catholic countries, lobbying efforts, etc.

 

[dianaiad]

Your first sentence is a mere counter-assertion. The end of your second sentence states the major premise of my argument. I am arguing by “reduction to the absurd,” that is to say, that if you follow through on the moral principles in Mormon teaching on abortion it leads to the preposterous conclusion that abortion should be legal across the board. If your premises lead to an absurdity, your premises are false. If your premises lead to an immoral conclusion, then your premises are immoral. The fact that you do not personally accept that conclusion has nothing to do with the fact that it is the conclusion that proceeds from your teachings. That is why I describe Mormon teaching as an “attempted” pro-life doctrine; Mormon leaders intend to condemn abortion, but the compromises in their teachings play directly into the hands of the pro-choice side. Note that my pro-choice interlocutor draws all of his arguments from Mormon teaching.

Here you are pounding on an open door. Respect for the body and role of the family in the ultimate purpose of human life is the cure. That cure can best be obtained though the recovery of the Catholic doctrine that man is an image of the Trinity. We are made to belong in a communion persons united by love. The human body serves this end, as it is designed to participate in interpersonal love. If we do so, our spiritual nature, which is also an image of the Trinity will take hold upon our lives. If God were not a Trinity, the family would be far less sacred.

But because you can’t finally separate the personal virtues that lead a person to reject abortion from their political implications, the political side matters a lot. Prior to Roe v. Wade, it was generally thought that no liberalization of abortion laws would be possible in America. Despite the growth of that movement in Europe and in Communist countries, the Catholic Church was thought to be too powerful for abortion to take hold in the U.S. That would have been true, were it not for the even greater power of judicial activism.

It should be noted that in those days the pro-choice side adopted a very modest apologetic: they didn’t espouse “abortion on demand” but assured the public that legalized abortion would be very rare indeed, and would only happen in cases of extreme need. It was the existence of such extreme cases that provided their core rationale. As of 1973, when the Mormon Church first framed its current abortion policy, the apparently modest exceptions in the LDS prohibition of abortion coincided with what was then the mainstay of the pro-choice platform. And look where that has got us. That abortion is indeed an all-or-nothing proposition is as evident from history as it is from reason.

You make your argument well.
Unfortunately, the ultimate decision for or against abortion is the woman’s to make. The only thing anyone else can do is to alter the consequences of that choice. Making it illegal will stop many women–and kill a very few. It won’t stop all of them. The only thing that WILL stop abortion for convenience is to get to the women BEFORE that action is taken. It doesn’t matter what the law says, y’know: a woman will do what she thinks is the best thing for her. If she understands that her child has the right to live, and that she is responsible for that life, and will be given the support she needs, then she won’t have an abortion even if there were abortion clinics on every corner and they passed out sales coupons.

If she doesn’t understand the abortion is the ending of a human life; if she doesn’t ‘get’ it, then if she is pregnant and doesn’t want to be she’ll get an abortion–if she has to hunt down a quack and risk major jail time.

In other words, it’s not laws that need changing, but minds. The proof of being pro-life is in what one DOES, not in what one proclaims.

 

[dianaiad]

And there we go again with causation. You are saying that the Mormon position is the cause of the fewer abortions,

]

It is. Because our position is that it is an incredibly serious decision, and if done for the wrong reason is a sin that WILL result in formal excommunication and a very long road back (that is, if it’s possible to COME back…) and is akin to murder. Not all killing is murder, but we understand very well that the ending of a pregnancy is the ending of a life. We know that to the very marrow of our bones. It’s serious with us. As a result, our position is absolutely the cause of fewer abortions.

and the Catholic position is the cause of more abortions (or having no effect), when it is not logical to conclude so.

Of course it is logical to assume that the Catholic position has no (well, at least minimum) effect upon the abortion rate of Catholic women, because…the abortion rate among Catholic woman is only slightly lower than that of pro-choice non-Catholic women. Ipso facto.

They are obviously correlated, but there is no reason to believe that there is causation. The arguments I have heard trying to make causation valid (generally from the Mormon side) make it seem as if the Catholic Church doesn’t care about the situation of these women, or that they are ignored and alternatives are not presented if they speak with an authority on the issue.

I have made no attempt to conclude these things from that fact, Theosis. If you have, then you have, but aquit me of saying so. My own position is that since it IS true that the Catholic position has not resulted in an abortion rate as low as ours, then it is illogical (and insulting and useless) for Catholics to criticize our position. It’s kinda like the surgeon who has lost 3/4 of his patients to childbed fever criticizing Semmelweiss for having chapped hands.

And I don’t think that the Catholic results on abortion are “inconvenient” or ignored. They are just not relevant to discussing the Mormon position of allowing abortions in certain situations, unless one is arguing causation (which basically means that one is saying ‘yes, the LDS church allows abortions in certain situations, but the position actually results in few abortions, so we can just ignore it’), which has yet to be established.

“Ignore it?” It’s not a matter of ‘ignoring it.’ But it is true that our position on abortion DOES result in the far lower rate of abortions among our members.

No one can, or should criticize Mormons on how they have such low abortion statistics. On the other hand, no one can say that the Catholic position results in more abortions (and if they do, they must demonstrate causation), or ignore the actual fruits of the Catholic position, namely no abortions in the extensive worldwide Catholic hospital system, greatly restricted abortion laws in Catholic countries, lobbying efforts, etc.

Catholic hospitals will not perform abortions–so Catholic women go elsewhere. Catholic women must go to non-legal sources for abortions in Catholic countries…and lobbying efforts to make abortion illegal are fine, as far as that goes.

I, however, believe that abortion should not be illegal–just unthinkable. It should be so rare a thing, and so tied to the health of the mother, that the law doesn’t need to enter into the matter.

And that isn’t a matter of changing laws or forcing our will upon others. It is a matter of changing minds and hearts. In order to do that, the person doing the persuading has to have some credibility.

No Catholic, representing himself as Catholic and citing for his position the Catholic doctrine on abortion, has sufficient reason to figure that he is morally superior to Mormons on this issue and has that credibility…and that is quite an understatement.

 

[Stephen168]

Catholic teaching does not require a woman and a baby to die in an ectopic pregnancy. You are distorting our teaching, still.

That is true and she knows it. The Mormon Church teaches the murder of an unborn baby can be OK in some situations. We know the Catholic Church teaches that murder is wrong in every situation. What she is trying to do is define accidents as murder and then claim the Catholic Church accepts murder in some situations, too. But then sometimes she wants to claim the mean old Catholic Church doesn’t accept accidents as morally neutral either. It just depends on what it takes to make her feel better about the new revelation that Mormons can now murder unborn babies and their church is OK with it.

I tried to demonstrate that in my post #133. Two situations; one is clearly an accident and one clearly murder as defined by Catholic teaching. Both use an automobile as the weapon. The Mormon Church teaches that a baby can be murdered if the father is a rapist, so situation #2 would be OK with the Mormon Church. Of course this is a horrible teaching, so she is trying to focus on the weapon and make it seem morally equal in both situations, so she can conclude the Catholic Church is just as bad as the Mormon Church. This is all she can do because there really is no logical defense for the new Mormon position on abortion; it simply allows for the murder of unborn babies. And they believes this authorization to murder comes from God.

 

[dianaiad]

That is true and she knows it.

That’s true. I do know that, and your pretense that I said anything else is misrepresenting me rather badly, Stephen.

The Mormon Church teaches the murder of an unborn baby can be OK in some situations. We know the Catholic Church teaches that murder is wrong in every situation.

“Murder” is defined as the willful and premeditated unlawful killing of a human being by another human being. Calling a killing ‘murder’ is making the judgment that it is wrong. It’s true; murder is wrong in every situation, because murder is always wrong, by definition. The question, however, is whether a killing is murder. Causing the death of another isn’t always murder, and the Catholic church is aware of that. After all, Catholics may go to war, become police officers and front line rescuers. By defining all abortions as murder is begging a very big question.

Of course, the Catholic church gets around it by saying that the ending of one human life in order to save another isn’t murder–or abortion–if the INTENT is to save the life of the mother, not to kill the baby, even if the procedure to save the mother’s life happens to be the removal of the baby–thus killing it.

I find this playing with words to be…equivocation and sophistry.

What she is trying to do is define accidents as murder…

…and where am I attempting to do that, Stephen?

…and then claim the Catholic Church accepts murder in some situations, too.

Actually, I claim that you are quite willing to cause the death of the unborn in some cases where the pregnancy has put the mother’s life is at stake, and weasel your way around that by ignoring the fact that there is a life being lost when you treat the mother.

But then sometimes she wants to claim the mean old Catholic Church doesn’t accept accidents as morally neutral either. It just depends on what it takes to make her feel better about the new revelation that Mormons can now murder unborn babies and their church is OK with it.

Your analogy is really weird, Stephen.

I tried to demonstrate that in my post #133.

You should, perhaps, have read my response to that before you wrote this post.

 

[Stephen168]

All I am saying is that the Catholic Church doesn’t take attendance at Mass (or any of our other services), and that the statistics that we all cite, including the Pew Forum, are by self-report. If the statistics are wrong because of lying, then it’s best that no one cites them, including those that think they are advantageous to their group. You are right, people lie to pollsters, even when the survey is anonymous, however we aren’t going to throw away all polls because of that. And back to the original point, the statistics show that USA Catholics do not have the highest activity level, and that members in a number of other countries do. Sure, people may be lying, however all of these “religious landscape” surveys are based on self-report, and that’s what we all cite (obviously they are not conclusive, since surveys are only one measure to be used in a study). That’s all.

A Mormon provided a link to Pew Research Center, so I read some the survey results. The first thing I noticed was the actual question. It was about how legal abortion should be; not have you had an abortion. The next thing I noticed was Church attendance affected how legal a person thought abortion should be. Self described Catholics completely changed from a strong legal to a strong illegal depending on church attendance. Church attendance is highest in the south and lowest by half in New England. And my own question for which I can not find an answer: How likely are non-practicing persons to continue to self identify with the religion they left?
I would conclude because self described Mormons says they believe abortion should be illegal, Utah has high church attendance, over 58% of the population of Utah is Mormon, and a Mormon on this thread made it seem as if few ex-Mormons would not self identify as Mormon: few Mormons have abortions.
I would also conclude because Church attendance greatly effects how Catholics believe abortion should be treated under the law, the high percentage of people who self identify as Catholics live in states with low church attendance, I personally know people who self identify as Catholic who have only been baptized (one not even baptized): there is no conclusion about the abortion rate among Catholics.
Of course none of this changes the teachings of the Catholic or Mormon Church.

 

[dianaiad]

All I am saying is that the Catholic Church doesn’t take attendance at Mass (or any of our other services), and that the statistics that we all cite, including the Pew Forum, are by self-report. If the statistics are wrong because of lying, then it’s best that no one cites them, including those that think they are advantageous to their group. You are right, people lie to pollsters, even when the survey is anonymous, however we aren’t going to throw away all polls because of that. And back to the original point, the statistics show that USA Catholics do not have the highest activity level, and that members in a number of other countries do. Sure, people may be lying, however all of these “religious landscape” surveys are based on self-report, and that’s what we all cite (obviously they are not conclusive, since surveys are only one measure to be used in a study). That’s all.

The reason I asked the question was curiousity only. The study I went to showed that the USA had a higher ‘go to church’ rate that pretty much everybody…but then I went back and realized that I had read it incorrectly. As you mentioned, South American nations generally have a higher ‘go to meeting’ rate.

 

[dianaiad]

A Mormon provided a link to Pew Research Center, so I read some the survey results. The first thing I noticed was the actual question. It was about how legal abortion should be; not have you had an abortion. The next thing I noticed was Church attendance affected how legal a person thought abortion should be. Self described Catholics completely changed from a strong legal to a strong illegal depending on church attendance. Church attendance is highest in the south and lowest by half in New England. And my own question for which I can not find an answer: How likely are non-practicing persons to continue to self identify with the religion they left?
I would conclude because self described Mormons says they believe abortion should be illegal, Utah has high church attendance, over 58% of the population of Utah is Mormon, and a Mormon on this thread made it seem as if few ex-Mormons would not self identify as Mormon: few Mormons have abortions.
I would also conclude because Church attendance greatly effects how Catholics believe abortion should be treated under the law, the high percentage of people who self identify as Catholics live in states with low church attendance, I personally know people who self identify as Catholic who have only been baptized (one not even baptized): there is no conclusion about the abortion rate among Catholics.
Of course none of this changes the teachings of the Catholic or Mormon Church.

Oh, go look at the abortion rate of Rhode Island, which has a Catholic population of 63%. It is #4 on the list of states as far as abortion rates go…something like 25% of all pregnancies result in abortion.

 

[RebeccaJ]

A Mormon provided a link to Pew Research Center, so I read some the survey results. The first thing I noticed was the actual question. It was about how legal abortion should be; not have you had an abortion. The next thing I noticed was Church attendance affected how legal a person thought abortion should be. Self described Catholics completely changed from a strong legal to a strong illegal depending on church attendance. Church attendance is highest in the south and lowest by half in New England. And my own question for which I can not find an answer: How likely are non-practicing persons to continue to self identify with the religion they left?
I would conclude because self described Mormons says they believe abortion should be illegal, Utah has high church attendance, over 58% of the population of Utah is Mormon, and a Mormon on this thread made it seem as if few ex-Mormons would not self identify as Mormon: few Mormons have abortions.
I would also conclude because Church attendance greatly effects how Catholics believe abortion should be treated under the law, the high percentage of people who self identify as Catholics live in states with low church attendance, I personally know people who self identify as Catholic who have only been baptized (one not even baptized): there is no conclusion about the abortion rate among Catholics.
Of course none of this changes the teachings of the Catholic or Mormon Church.

There are other facts to consider.

1- Utah has one of the strictest abortion laws in the country. It matches to mormon belief. So if a mormon who wants an abortion that doesn’t meet their church criteria, she must go out of state. This alone will lower the abortion rate in UT.

2- a mormon who has an abortion and confesses will in all likelihood be excommunicated. This is not the same action as it is for a Catholic. A excommunicated mormon is no longer a mormon. Their baptism, and other mormon “ordinances” are made invalid. A Catholic in a similar position is still Catholic.

3- Also, a mormon who had an abortion is not likely to tell anyone. On the other hand, the Catholic pro-life movement has women who had an abortion, regret it, and now are very active pro-life. Testimonials of how their decision effected their life and their health (physical and mental). Nothing like this exists in mormon circles.

 

[TheosisM]

I think this will be my last post in this thread, since I think I’m just repeating myself, which is okay, since that’s how forums work.

What I have come to realize in this thread is that people may not know the difference between correlation and causation. Throughout this thread, I have seen that causation is being presented as the relationship between the Catholic Church’s position on abortion and the “Catholic abortion rate” in the USA. As I have said before, there is no reason to believe that the “Catholic abortion rate” results from the Catholic position on abortion. There is no evidence for that, and instead what I see by some (not necessarily in this thread, but in my other discussions with Mormons on this topic) is an attempt to say that the Church in essence “forces” these women to have an abortion, since it seems intolerant and unwavering on its position, and other assumptions on how the Catholic Church operates and how Catholics interpret Church positions.

Instead, what I see as more logical is that there is a correlation between the Catholic position on abortion and the “Catholic abortion rate”, however there are many other factors involved in this, some of which seem more likely to be a cause then the actual Catholic position. As I mentioned before, the overall activity level of Western Catholics, which seems to show more of a “cultural Catholicism” or “cafeteria Catholicism” is much more likely to be the cause then the Catholic position on abortion.

As I mentioned, one cannot ignore the real fruits of the Catholic position on abortion, namely, that it is not performed in Catholic hospitals worldwide (an extensive system of healthcare), as well as heavily restricted abortion laws in Catholic countries. Sure, it is easy to quibble, “well, they’ll just go somewhere else, or do it on their own, etc”. But that misses the entire point! And that sort of argument can be used to explain away anything positive.

Yes, it is sad that a sizable percentage of Catholics are ignoring their Church’s teaching on abortion. However one can’t ignore that it is part of a larger issue, especially in the Western nations, where activity levels are down, not just in Catholicism, but in many churches and religions. So, the more I see people saying that it is the Catholic Church’s position on abortion that causes more abortions, or that the Catholic position has no/minimal effect, the more I see that they miss the larger issue, and are positing causation, usually based on assumptions on Catholic interpretation of Catholic policy, when it is not logical to conclude so.

So, as others have said, the Catholic Church is firmly against abortion, and one cannot ignore that Catholics that have abortions are going against the clear teaching of their Church. The LDS church allows abortion of pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, when the life or health of the mother is in danger, and when the physician determines that the fetus has defects that won’t allow it to survive beyond birth. The Mormon abortion rate is still low despite this, which is great, however what others were attempting to address in this thread was the official policy of their church.

Context is everything, and it is important not to take the “Catholic abortion rate” out of its context of the larger issue.

 

[dianaiad]

There are other facts to consider.

1- Utah has one of the strictest abortion laws in the country. It matches to mormon belief. So if a mormon who wants an abortion that doesn’t meet their church criteria, she must go out of state. This alone will lower the abortion rate in UT.

While it is true that the laws are fairly strict, they do NOT preclude abortion for birth control, when advised by a physician. By the way, Arizona’s abortion laws are far more strict. Hugely so. Not that it matters—I"m just saying. The stats show that very few, if any, residents of Utah leave the state to have an abortion elsewhere.

2- a mormon who has an abortion and confesses will in all likelihood be excommunicated. This is not the same action as it is for a Catholic. A excommunicated mormon is no longer a mormon. Their baptism, and other mormon “ordinances” are made invalid. A Catholic in a similar position is still Catholic.

this is true. However, it certainly does put a crimp in the 'no true Catholic would have an abortion" argument, doesn’t it? Yeah, when a Mormon woman has an unnecessary abortion, the consequences are, generally, as you describe. I think that’s another difference between Catholicism and Mormonism in terms of abortion; Catholics put the sin of abortion in the same class as absconding with communion wafers. It’s an ‘automatic excommunication’ that is lifted upon confession and absolution. Mormons–it’s an official excommunication with all the bells and whistles.

3- Also, a mormon who had an abortion is not likely to tell anyone.

They tell the people at the clinic where they get the abortions–which is where my stats come from.

On the other hand, the Catholic pro-life movement has women who had an abortion, regret it, and now are very active pro-life. Testimonials of how their decision effected their life and their health (physical and mental). Nothing like this exists in mormon circles.

Wanna bet? You haven’t been dealing with the LDS Family Services organization much, have you?

 

[dianaiad]

I think this will be my last post in this thread, since I think I’m just repeating myself, which is okay, since that’s how forums work.

What I have come to realize in this thread is that people may not know the difference between correlation and causation. Throughout this thread, I have seen that causation is being presented as the relationship between the Catholic Church’s position on abortion and the “Catholic abortion rate” in the USA.

Not from me, you haven’t. The most you have seen me do (and this was AFTER you came in with the ‘causation/correlation’ argument) is that the Catholic position might, as a back door sort of thing, contribute to it. What I have said, however, is that your written position on this issue does not PREVENT abortions. That is obvious, as is proven by the numbers. After all, if your position on abortion prevented abortions, then the abortion rate among Catholics would be down there with the Mormon rate. It’s not. It is only slightly lower than the abortion rate for non-Catholic women. On the other hand, it is equally obvious that the Mormon position on abortion IS what causes the low abortion rate among Mormons; we actually pay attention to our position on it, and live by it. Arizona has a far more strict abortion policy than Utah does (and Utah is pretty strict…) but Arizona still has an abortion rate a third higher than Utah. Therefore the law alone is not the cause…and laws reflect the make up of the society anyway. So the cause is the society and the thoughts of those who have this decision to make…and the society that has the lowest abortion rate is MORMONISM. And we have that lower rate BECAUSE we are Mormon, and believe what we do about abortion. That is not ‘correlation.’ It is ‘cause.’

The Catholic position on abortion doesn’t cause that far larger incidence of abortion, except in a back-door sort of way, and you’ve never seen me claim anything else. However, the Catholic position, OBVIOUSLY, does not PREVENT abortion among Catholics, except very slightly. Catholic women who face that choice don’t seem to care what their church has to say about it, as is evidenced by the abortion rate among Catholics.

My only point here in this thread is that since the Catholic position on abortion doesn’t prevent abortion, and since Catholics have abortions at three times the rate Mormons do, then for a Catholic to criticize Mormon doctrine in this regard is an amazingly hypocritical thing to do.

…and claiming that the issue is ‘doctrine,’ not results, that matter, is classic pharasitic argument; classic hypocrisy. Mote and beam, right out of the NT. I’m attempting to come up with the appropriate language for what this is, and I’m having problems with it. All analogies seem too weak, since this involves the lives and deaths of innocents. How about this one, though?

For a Catholic to dismiss Mormonism because of its stand on abortion and hold his own church’s stated position on the matter up as the 'way things should be" is rather like Isaac criticising the Duggar’s parenting skills.

As I have said before, there is no reason to believe that the “Catholic abortion rate” results from the Catholic position on abortion.

Straw man, Theosis…my protests haven’t been that the Catholic stand on abortion causes the high abortion rate for Catholics. My protests have been that since the Catholic official position on abortion hasn’t cut the Catholic abortion rate to nearly the level of the Mormon abortion rate, that Catholics have no business criticising the LDS stand on abortion. It’s like Theophilus Marziels criticising Hemingway’s writing. It is, quite frankly, not even up to the standard of insult. Its…the Vikings criticizing the Quakers for their violent tendencies.

If the Catholics actually PAID ATTENTION to their own stand on abortion, it would be very different. But they don’t.

There is no evidence for that, and instead what I see by some (not necessarily in this thread, but in my other discussions with Mormons on this topic) is an attempt to say that the Church in essence “forces” these women to have an abortion, since it seems intolerant and unwavering on its position, and other assumptions on how the Catholic Church operates and how Catholics interpret Church positions.

That may be part of it, actually–though I don’t believe it is a primary motivating factor. What may also be a factor is that a Catholic who has an abortion has what SHE may percieve (until she actually has one and has to deal with the consequences) as an easy way back in. Go to confession. Get forgiven–how good is that? You get forgiven and you STILL don’t have to deal with an unwanted pregnancy! Cool.

So she learns better after she has the abortion and has to deal with the fall out…it’s too late then, isn’t it? You can give back, or pay for, stolen things. You can pay for medical help for the physically injured. You can apologize to those you have insulted. You can make amends for almost anything—but you can’t unkill a child, can you?

Still, though both these may have a minor role, they are not the cause. The problem is that the Catholic position doesn’t prevent abortion. Y’all make this zero-tolerance announcement, but though you also do something else, like have the programs that Rebecca mentioned, that something else ISN"T WORKING. What the Mormons do, does…and what the Mormons do is directily bound up with our doctrine on abortion. It’s written, and we act on it.

 

[dianaiad]

Instead, what I see as more logical is that there is a correlation between the Catholic position on abortion and the “Catholic abortion rate”, however there are many other factors involved in this, some of which seem more likely to be a cause then the actual Catholic position. As I mentioned before, the overall activity level of Western Catholics, which seems to show more of a “cultural Catholicism” or “cafeteria Catholicism” is much more likely to be the cause then the Catholic position on abortion.

In other words, Catholics don’t pay attention to their own position on abortion…but feel free to criticise the Mormon doctrine on it because thiers is so much stricter. I think I said that, Theosis. Many times, actually. This is called ‘hypocrisy.’

It’s…OK, it’s like the Ducks and the Philadelphia Flyers getting into a brawl on the ice. The Ducks attacked the Flyers. The Ducks send nine Flyers to the hospital with broken bones and brain damage, and the Flyers, in return, act in strict self defense; only three Ducks end up in the hospital. All are arrested, and the Ducks claim that since THEIR rules for on-ice behavior are stricter than the Flyer’s set of rules, that the Ducks are better than the Flyers and should be aquitted. Not only that, they claim, but the Flyers should be fined and suspended BECAUSE their rules aren’t as strict as the Ducks’ rules.The injuries incurred in the fight, they claim, are irrelevant and should be ignored.

THAT is how much sense Catholics criticizing Mormons for their stand on abortion makes…at least to the Mormons on the recieving end.

Yes, it is sad that a sizable percentage of Catholics are ignoring their Church’s teaching on abortion. However one can’t ignore that it is part of a larger issue, especially in the Western nations, where activity levels are down, not just in Catholicism, but in many churches and religions. So, the more I see people saying that it is the Catholic Church’s position on abortion that causes more abortions, or that the Catholic position has no/minimal effect, the more I see that they miss the larger issue, and are positing causation, usually based on assumptions on Catholic interpretation of Catholic policy, when it is not logical to conclude so.

2 + 2 = 4, Theosis. While the Catholic doctrine on abortion may not cause the high abortion rate among Catholics (the cause is probably the same as the cause for the high abortion rate among non-Catholics), the fact is, this is truly a binary choice. If the Catholic position prevented abortion among Catholics, then there would BE fewer abortions among Catholics. Since the abortion rate for Catholics is only slightly less than the abortion rate for non-Catholics, then the Catholic position on abortion is of minimal aid in stopping abortion among Catholics. Ipso facto—unless of course you want to make the claim that without this stand, Catholics would have a HIGHER abortion rate than the general population. I think that claim would be a little difficult to support.

 

[dianaiad]

So, as others have said, the Catholic Church is firmly against abortion, and one cannot ignore that Catholics that have abortions are going against the clear teaching of their Church.

Ok…not that this was ever an issue, but OK.

The LDS church allows abortion of pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, when the life or health of the mother is in danger, and when the physician determines that the fetus has defects that won’t allow it to survive beyond birth. The Mormon abortion rate is still low despite this, which is great, however what others were attempting to address in this thread was the official policy of their church.

So? I have news; if you are going to criticize the safety rule book for someone else’s company, it is rather important that you actually obey your own. If you don’t, then your credibility as an expert on the matter is–problematic.

Context is everything, and it is important not to take the “Catholic abortion rate” out of its context of the larger issue.

You are quite right. It is very important to NOT take the Catholic abortion rate out of the context of the larger issue…and the larger issue is that of credibility. Catholics have none in this area. Rebecca dismisses the Mormon abortion rate as, partially, a product of the Utah abortion laws. Well, the laws are never the cause of societal behavior; they are the result of such behavior. Rhode Island has a far larger percentage of Catholics than Utah does Mormons, by a full 10%. Sixty three percent of Rhode Islanders are Catholic. And yet, abortion is legal in all cases there:legal and on-demand. The only restriction is that if the abortion is botched and the baby is born alive, then you can’t kill it. That’s it.

…and a majority Catholic state passed that law.

Is the official Catholic stand on abortion more strict than the Mormon stand? Sure. That’s fact. Are we then ‘pro-abortion’ and ‘baby killers’ as some posters here have called us? Not even close, as our relative stats on abortion prove. Does an individual Catholic who actually obeys his own church stand on the issue have the credibility to personally criticise the Mormon doctrine and say that it is not as strict as the Catholic one? Sure. Especially if he is an equal opportunity critic and lambasts his own Catholic brothers and sisters for their disobedience.

Does ANY Catholic, who claims to represent his belief system (“I’m a Catholic and we believe…” or “the church teaches that…” or “no true Catholic would”) and criticizes Mormon doctrine and actions using Catholicism and Catholic belief in general as his mark of superiority, have the right to criticize Mormons on this issue?

Not even a little bit.

That’s the larger issue. Catholics don’t have the high ground here. You don’t even hold equal ground. You are drowning in this issue yourselves. So–go pick up the beer cans off of your lawns before you complain that we planted the wrong color pansies, eh?

 

[vickimonica]

There are other facts to consider.

1- Utah has one of the strictest abortion laws in the country. It matches to mormon belief. So if a mormon who wants an abortion that doesn’t meet their church criteria, she must go out of state. This alone will lower the abortion rate in UT.

2- a mormon who has an abortion and confesses will in all likelihood be excommunicated. This is not the same action as it is for a Catholic. A excommunicated mormon is no longer a mormon. Their baptism, and other mormon “ordinances” are made invalid. A Catholic in a similar position is still Catholic.

3- Also, a mormon who had an abortion is not likely to tell anyone. On the other hand, the Catholic pro-life movement has women who had an abortion, regret it, and now are very active pro-life. Testimonials of how their decision effected their life and their health (physical and mental). Nothing like this exists in mormon circles.

 

[vickimonica]

You said a mouthful there Rebecca!!! All of it is true. I’m an XMORMON (Happy to say) of 22 years, and every point that you made Re: a Mormon having an abortion is 100% accurate!!!

 

[vickimonica]

Ok…not that this was ever an issue, but OK.

So? I have news; if you are going to criticize the safety rule book for someone else’s company, it is rather important that you actually obey your own. If you don’t, then your credibility as an expert on the matter is–problematic.

You are quite right. It is very important to NOT take the Catholic abortion rate out of the context of the larger issue…and the larger issue is that of credibility. Catholics have none in this area. Rebecca dismisses the Mormon abortion rate as, partially, a product of the Utah abortion laws. Well, the laws are never the cause of societal behavior; they are the result of such behavior. Rhode Island has a far larger percentage of Catholics than Utah does Mormons, by a full 10%. Sixty three percent of Rhode Islanders are Catholic. And yet, abortion is legal in all cases there:legal and on-demand. The only restriction is that if the abortion is botched and the baby is born alive, then you can’t kill it. That’s it.

…and a majority Catholic state passed that law.

Is the official Catholic stand on abortion more strict than the Mormon stand? Sure. That’s fact. Are we then ‘pro-abortion’ and ‘baby killers’ as some posters here have called us? Not even close, as our relative stats on abortion prove. Does an individual Catholic who actually obeys his own church stand on the issue have the credibility to personally criticise the Mormon doctrine and say that it is not as strict as the Catholic one? Sure. Especially if he is an equal opportunity critic and lambasts his own Catholic brothers and sisters for their disobedience.

Does ANY Catholic, who claims to represent his belief system (“I’m a Catholic and we believe…” or “the church teaches that…” or “no true Catholic would”) and criticizes Mormon doctrine and actions using Catholicism and Catholic belief in general as his mark of superiority, have the right to criticize Mormons on this issue?

Not even a little bit.

That’s the larger issue. Catholics don’t have the high ground here. You don’t even hold equal ground. You are drowning in this issue yourselves. So–go pick up the beer cans off of your lawns before you complain that we planted the wrong color pansies, eh?

 

[vickimonica]

I’ve been browsing through this thread, and I just have to say – Lady, you have way too much time on your hands…

 

[dianaiad]

I’ve been browsing through this thread, and I just have to say – Lady, you have way too much time on your hands…

…Perhaps I do. Perhaps I think this is time well spent. Consider, though, before you criticise me further; you chose to read those posts and to take even more time to comment on them.