Non-Catholic religions and abortion

[notself]

In fact I guess your completely right notself, I am through with this thread, I don’t know as I care what he believes, he can sort that out with God as we all will. This has become redundant talking to people with 1960’s flower power mentality:shrug:

Hey now, I’m a sixties chil’. Not all ideas from the sixties were loopy. Civil Rights, ending a stupid war, much less materialism than there is today. Free love was confined to a few wild children in a few cities but optimism about the perfectibility of society was everywhere. Great music, interesting art. Bizarre fashion.

Boy you young’uns sure missed a great time. :extrahappy:

 

[fierysword1920]

Forgive my wide based comment. I mean that it seems to myself that decisions like Roe V. Wade are a product of the sixties and a perfectability of society to me means coming from the sixties would be a sort of loosness that connotates irresponsibility for ones own actions. Correc tme if I am wrong though because I know that all people are not the same and cannot be broadly labeled.

Hey now, I’m a sixties chil’. Not all ideas from the sixties were loopy. Civil Rights, ending a stupid war, much less materialism than there is today. Free love was confined to a few wild children in a few cities but optimism about the perfectibility of society was everywhere. Great music, interesting art. Bizarre fashion.

Boy you young’uns sure missed a great time. :extrahappy:

 

[notself]

Forgive my wide based comment. I mean that it seems to myself that decisions like Roe V. Wade are a product of the sixties and a perfectability of society to me means coming from the sixties would be a sort of loosness that connotates irresponsibility for ones own actions. Correc tme if I am wrong though because I know that all people are not the same and cannot be broadly labeled.

I understand your objection to Roe. However Roe did not start abortion. It just made abortion legal. Overturning Roe will not stop abortion, It will just force it into the back alleys again for the poor.

The middle class will always have access to abortion because they will be able to spend the money to find a doctor willing to do a D&C. I went to high school with two girls who had D&C’s for “female problems”.

What the 60’s and 70’s brought us besides Roe was “Head Start”, free school breakfasts and lunches for the poor, Medicare, Medicade, civil rights, equal rights for women.

Now some may find these horrible programs but I remember not being able to get a job without my husband’s permission in writing. I remember not being able to get credit on my own. I remember being told frequently that I was too pretty to study science because it will drive the boys away.

I remember the “whites only” signs. I remember the fire hoses and dogs turned on college students. I remember my husband and brother going to Viet Nam and coming home changed.

Many of these things are still with us or have returned to us due to the stupidity, vanity, and greed of our leaders. But at least in the 60’s we took to the streets to protest the stupidity, vanity and greed.

 

[estesbob]

I understand your objection to Roe. However Roe did not start abortion. It just made abortion legal. Overturning Roe will not stop abortion, It will just force it into the back alleys again for the poor.

A myth-Prior to Roe 95% + of illegal abortions were perfromed in sterile enviroments by a licensed physicians,. Since the advent of anti-biotocs deaths from illegal abortions in the USA were beteen 200 and 400 per year.

The middle class will always have access to abortion because they will be able to spend the money to find a doctor willing to do a D&C. I went to high school with two girls who had D&C’s for “female problems”.

The fact that people will break the law does not mean that no laws be made.

What the 60’s and 70’s brought us besides Roe was “Head Start”, free school breakfasts and lunches for the poor, Medicare, Medicade, civil rights, equal rights for women.

Which is no way atones for the deaths of 50 Million children.-50 million children that can never enjoy any of the benefits you enumerate above. And how demeaning to women that “equal rights” is construed to mean the right to kill our child.

Now some may find these horrible programs but I remember not being able to get a job without my husband’s permission in writing. I remember not being able to get credit on my own. I remember being told frequently that I was too pretty to study science because it will drive the boys away.

So we sacrifice 50 million children so you can get your own credit card?

I remember the “whites only” signs. I remember the fire hoses and dogs turned on college students. I remember my husband and brother going to Viet Nam and coming home changed.

And I can remeber a tme when we didnt slaughter 1.5 million children a year. I also have many frends who say what they are most proud of is serving their country in Viet-Nam

Many of these things are still with us or have returned to us due to the stupidity, vanity, and greed of our leaders. But at least in the 60’s we took to the streets to protest the stupidity, vanity and greed.

And many of us still take to the streets to try and end the most despicable , evil thing to ever afflict this county-legalized infanticide.

 

[notself]

A myth-Prior to Roe 95% + of illegal abortions were perfromed in sterile enviroments by a licensed physicians,. Since the advent of anti-biotocs deaths from illegal abortions in the USA were beteen 200 and 400 per year.

The fact that people will break the law does not mean that no laws be made.

Which is no way atones for the deaths of 50 Million children.-50 million children that can never enjoy any of the benefits you enumerate above. And how demeaning to women that “equal rights” is construed to mean the right to kill our child.

So we sacrifice 50 million children so you can get your own credit card?

And I can remeber a tme when we didnt slaughter 1.5 million children a year. I also have many frends who say what they are most proud of is serving their country in Viet-Nam

And many of us still take to the streets to try and end the most despicable , evil thing to ever afflict this county-legalized infanticide.

In each of your statements you are refuting things I never said. I explained that some good things came from this period as well as the negative court decission of Roe.

You show a lot of anger in your post and anger can really effect your health. Passion I can understand. But to blast me for sharing some of my experiences and the experiences of my bother and husband, is something I cannot understand. Suggesting that they were or are less than patriotic when they both served with honor is beyond the pale.

I hope you can get some help.

 

[estesbob]

In each of your statements you are refuting things I never said. I explained that some good things came from this period as well as the negative court decission of Roe.

You show a lot of anger in your post and anger can really effect your health. Passion I can understand. But to blast me for sharing some of my experiences and the experiences of my bother and husband, is something I cannot understand. Suggesting that they were or are less than patriotic when they both served with honor is beyond the pale.

I hope you can get some help.

I am angry at the death of 1.2 milloion people a year? Damn right I am. In fact I am also angry at people who are not angry about it. YOU are the one that attempted to tie Roe to all the “good” things that have happened since. I am glad you see the fallacy of that.

BTW-the fact that you took my remarks about men who were proud of serving in Viet Nam as questioning your patriotism speaks volumes.

 

[zearro]

The way I always understood it was that God the Father has given humanity stewardship over the earth and it’s contents. Animals are for food and thus must be killed, but in a humane manner whatever that is, it’s very relative and sticky in and of its ownself, that being the idea of humane killing. I don’t know if animals have souls or not, many dogs, cats and other animals all exhibit different personalities and individual to themselves even within their species. This would seem to be a human characteristic, but I have never researched what the church has to say about animals having souls, I am not opposed to this idea because many animals have risen far above their status and done great things in the service of humanity and seemingly out of a selfless love. The main characteristic that is objectionable to Catholics about abortion is that it is the killing of our unborn humans, and that it is done for the sake of convenience and the great lack of responsibility and or accountability.

 

[zearro]

zearro:
If you argue that it is OK to kill animals humanely then the same would apply for the killing of foetuses. They too could be killed humanely. Whatever that means. And if you say God the Father permits the killing of animals to nourish humans then you are saying that God is not much concerned with regard to their suffering. (and there is no benefit in their suffering because the church teaches that they do not go to heaven).

You can’t have it both ways. If suffering is a criteria that demonstrates that foetuses should not be killed then it also applies to animals and vegetarianism is the outcome.

If you want to still kill and eat animals then you need another reason to refrain from taking the life of a foetus (otherwise one is indulging in doublethink). That is that the human being is unique (by having a soul - animals according to catholicism do not).

As it is true that the Bible permits the killing of animals for food then we have to acknowledge that suffering is not a pure or over riding criteria in Christian morality. What is a criteria is elitism.

You got this attitude amongst slave owners. The black man was not truly human and could be treated like an animal. Their suffering was of no account and was not a moral matter.

The same is true with people who say that the foetus is not human therefore its suffering is of no account. It may not be person in the full sense of the word but it can experience suffering. It really does not matter if it is person or not from the point of view of suffering - it only matters from the point of view of elitism. So when catholics argue against abortion on the grounds that the foetus is a person they are taking an elitist stance.

If you use suffering as a basis for morality with regard to abortion then you must guard against the charge of hypocracy if you do not extend this to animals.

If you opt for the criteria of elitism to prove the immorality of abortion then you have to show in what way humans are elite. Now according to catholicism you cannot kill a human because his intelligence is lower than an animal as is sometimes the case. Hitler killed the so called subnormal on this criteria of elitist morality.

This is not the elitism of the catholic church. It’s elitism is that humans have souls and animals do not. Their elitism is that God has said humans are special and animals are not. (Think Arians and Jews)

To be consistent catholics have to protest against abortion on the grounds that humans are elite. If they want to use the suffering argument then they have to extend it to all suffering and become vegetarian (despite the allowances of the Bible).

VB

 

[marxlco]

I could have missed the information on the thread but here goes the question… Rudy Guiliani claims he will appoint conservative judges (supreme court). As Catholics can we vote for Rudy Guiliani since he is “pro-choice” (violating the 5 nonnegotiables) ?

 

[O.S.Luke]

Christians do not have a choice for president that can win. Some say pick the lesser of two evils. However - the lesser of two evils is still evil.

O+

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Two ways are set before you, O man, the way of life and the way of death. Therefore, choose life and live!

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Buddhists (real Buddhists, that is, not American libertine “Buddhists”) are not only pro-life, but completely with the Catholic Church on issues like contraception as well.

 

[jmcrae]

You can’t have it both ways. If suffering is a criteria that demonstrates that foetuses should not be killed then it also applies to animals and vegetarianism is the outcome.

The reason we forbid abortion is because the unborn child is a human being. The value of human beings is that they are created in the image and likeness of God - to harm or to kill a human being is to violate a living Icon of God.

The value of animals is that they are useful to human beings for food, for work, for companionship, and for their beauty.

 

[jediliz]

I could have missed the information on the thread but here goes the question… Rudy Guiliani claims he will appoint conservative judges (supreme court). As Catholics can we vote for Rudy Guiliani since he is “pro-choice” (violating the 5 nonnegotiables) ?

I thought political discussion was banned, but I can honestly say the answer is NO because…well, just because. For one, he’s divorced and remarried too many times.

 

[estesbob]

To be consistent catholics have to protest against abortion on the grounds that humans are elite. If they want to use the suffering argument then they have to extend it to all suffering and become vegetarian (despite the allowances of the Bible).

VB

Well of course Catholics believe humans are elite. That is why abortion is wrong at any stage of development-all human life deserves the full protection of the law.

 

[zearro]

Well of course Catholics believe humans are elite. That is why abortion is wrong at any stage of development-all human life deserves the full protection of the law.

Why should elitism provide a moral basis for who should live and who shouldn’t?. Hitler drew the line between the arian and non arian races. He drew line between the intelligent and the mentally sub normal as he called them. Elitism is an arbitary way of defining morality. You can draw the line anywhere. It doesn’t need to be upheld by any principles. Unless you care to name some principles?

Catholics should stop using the foetus suffers argument. It is hypocritical with all due respect. They are not concerned with relieving suffering (unless they think God commands it). The elitist and ‘suffering’ arguments are muddled together. Catholics are quite happy for beings to suffer if they believe God approves of it. If God approved of abortion believe me catholics would be doing it.

Let me demonstrate this point

In the Old Testament days God liked slaves to be sacrificed to him. So that is what people gave him. You weren’t allowed to pay the priest in lieu of slave sacrifice no matter how useful the slave was to you.

*"Note also that any one of his possessions which a man vows as doomed to the Lord, whether it is a human being or an animal, or a hereditary field, shall be neither sold nor ransomed; everything that is thus doomed becomes most sacred to the Lord. All human beings that are doomed lose the right to be redeemed; they must be put to death." *

Leviticus 27:28-29

VB

 

[zearro]

The reason we forbid abortion is because the unborn child is a human being. The value of human beings is that they are created in the image and likeness of God - to harm or to kill a human being is to violate a living Icon of God.

The value of animals is that they are useful to human beings for food, for work, for companionship, and for their beauty.

One of the objections to abortion is that people are aborting out of convenience (it is useful for them to get rid of the child) . Yet you deny the same reason when it applies to animals. They are just there for man’s convenience to be dealt with as he wishes.

Arguments against abortion include

The foetus suffers. But it is OK for animals to suffer.

It is wrong to dispose of a child for our convenience but not so an animal.

The foetus is human (elitism)

Your explanation (and thank you for your honesty) is humans are created in God’s likeness whilst animals are not. God sees an attack on human life as an attack on him but an attack on an animal is in no way insulting to him.

So the real reason behind the no abortion rule for catholics is not:

Suffering or people being selfish by putting their needs before the child’s life. The real reason is that God feels insulted. So it all comes down to God’s feelings not concern for the aborted child at all!

 

[jmcrae]

One of the objections to abortion is that people are aborting out of convenience (it is useful for them to get rid of the child) . Yet you deny the same reason when it applies to animals. They are just there for man’s convenience to be dealt with as he wishes.

Arguments against abortion include

The foetus suffers. But it is OK for animals to suffer.

We are stewards of Creation - we are not supposed to allow animals to suffer needlessly. It would be a sin not to take good care of your pets, for example.

It is wrong to dispose of a child for our convenience but not so an animal.

 

[elvisman]

The catholic church teaches that a baptised child that dies before the age of reason is guarnteed a place in paradise. If you allow a child to live beyond that age there is no guarantee it won’t go to hell. Sure you will go to hell if you kill it but you will have guaranteed the child’s eternal salvation. As we know St Paul espoused the idea of being eternally damned if it were possible to save others by doing so. i.e it is a good thing to sacrifice one’s own salvation for another. It is a shocking idea agreed but the logic is impeccable.

and again the souls of children who have been reborn by the same baptism of Christ or will be when baptism is conferred on them, if they die before attaining the use of free will: all these souls, immediately (mox) after death and, in the case of those in need of purification, after the purification mentioned above, since the ascension of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ into heaven, already before they take up their bodies again and before the general judgment, have been, are and will be with Christ in heaven, in the heavenly kingdom and paradise, joined to the company of the holy angels.

papalencyclicals.net/Ben12/B12bdeus.html

VB

I disagree that the logic is, as you say, “impeccable”. God wills that we all repent and believe. It is our free will that undermines this. We can CHOOSE to defy and deny him.
The logic that I should murder a child so he can go to heaven is as warped as murdering a doctor who performs abortions in order to save the lives of the children he has not yet murdered.

 

[zearro]

We are stewards of Creation - we are not supposed to allow animals to suffer needlessly. It would be a sin not to take good care of your pets, for example.

True.

Yes.

Again, it would be a sin to attack an animal for no good reason. But if we needed it for the necessities of life (food, clothing, tools, etc.) then it is good to kill the animal, without causing it unnecessary suffering.

True - even if there were some perceived need to kill the child, or even if the child were unable to suffer, it would still be a sin to kill the child.

Yes. Ultimately, God’s opinion is the only opinion that matters - everything else is dust and straw.

But how do you know whether the God you worship is divine or a demon? By what criteria do you differentiate?

For example

A being says put all the Jews in a concentration camp and exterminate them. His orders are obeyed because to his followers his opinion is the only one that matters. Divine or demonic?

A being instructs his followers to kill old and young, male and female and even little children and to show no mercy. (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT). Divine or demonic.

A being declares that a belief in an eternal creator is error. Teaches non violence. Divine or demonic.

A being teaches that one race is special above all others. Divine or demonic?

A being teaches that there is a hierarchy of humans the top ranking having more priveleges than the lower ranking. Divine or demonic?

This God teaches that all beings are reborn over and over again. Demonic or divine?

They say there is only one God and he had no son. Demonic or divine.

If your morality is based just on someone’s opinion what sort of moraliy is that? How do you know that person is good or bad? What is your criteria?

How can you be in position to decide on the morality of abortion if all you are doing is obeying orders?

VB